2003 Judiciary, Rules, & Administration

Courts, prisons, attorneys, juvenile justice

[printfriendly]

January 9, 2003
January 13, 2003
January 15, 2003
January 15, 2003 – Subcommittee
January 21, 2003
January 21, 2003 – Subcommittee
January 23, 2003
January 27, 2003
January 29, 2003
January 29, 2003 – Subcommittee
January 31, 2003

February 3, 2003
February 5, 2003
February 7, 2003
February 11, 2003
February 13, 2003
February 17, 2003
February 19, 2003
February 25, 2003
February 27, 2003

March 3, 2003
March 5, 2003
March 11, 2003
March 13, 2003
March 17, 2003
March 19, 2003
March 21, 2003
March 27, 2003

DATE: January 9, 2003
TIME: 2:05 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/EXCUSED: None
GUESTS: Pamm Juker, Chief Clerk
MIINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and welcomed the new
members on the Committee. The Chairman asked all of the members to
introduce themselves and give a brief history, including what they did and
which district they represented.
RS 12232: The Chairman then introduced the Chief Clerk, Pamm Juker, to explain
the printing contract legislation. RS 12232 provides for the printing of
House and Senate bills, resolutions, memorials and amendments, and
fixing the price for printing the same. Ms. Juker gave a brief explanation
on why the printing contracts were renewed and presented to the
Legislature each year and how the printing contractors were selected.
The Bureau of Copy Services currently does the printing. Bids are taken
each year and the Bureau has been the lowest bidder.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to introduce RS 12232 and send the
legislation directly to the second reading calendar. Motion carried.
Representative Clark will carry the bill on the floor.
RS 12233: The next item presented by the Chief Clerk was RS 12233, which
provides for the printing of the House and Senate legislative daily journals
and fixes the price for printing the same.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to introduce RS 12233 and send the
legislation directly to the second reading calendar. Motion carried.
Representative Nielsen will carry the bill on the floor.
RS 12234: The Chief Clerk explained RS 12234 which provides for the printing of the
House and Senate legislative permanent journals and fixing the price for
printing the same. The cost for printing the journals has been cut from
last year because the number published was reduced by 20.
MOTION: Representative Sali moved to introduce RS 12234 and send the bill
directly to the second reading calendar. Motion carried. Representative
Ridinger will carry the bill on the floor.
RS 12235 The last item to be presented by the Chief Clerk was RS 12235 which
provides for the printing of the session laws, fixing the price for printing
the same and the price which the public shall be charged for copies.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to introduce RS 12235 and send the bill
directly to the second reading calendar. Motion carried. Representative
Shirley will carry the bill on the floor.
ADJOURN: Prior to adjournment, Chairman Field introduced Heather Riley from the
Prosecuting Attorney’s office. The Chairman also told the members that
the Committee would be meeting on the following Monday and the
meeting would include a presentation by Director Dan Charboneau of the
Idaho State Police and the meeting on Wednesday would include a
presentation by Director Brent Reinke with the Department of Juvenile
Corrections. In conclusion, the Chairman asked the members to let the
secretary know if they planned on going on a prison tour and/or attending
the Supreme Court dinner. There being no further business, the meeting
was adjourned at 3:15 p.m.






DATE: January 13, 2003
TIME: 1:30 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/EXCUSED: Representative Sali
GUESTS: Director Dan Charboneau, Idaho State Police; Jim Woods, Idaho
Department of Correction
MINUTES: The Chairman called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Ridinger moved to approve the
minutes of the meeting held on January 9, 2003, as written. Motion
carried. Chairman Field introduced Director Dan Charboneau who gave
the members a brief overview of the Idaho State Police Department.
ISP BRIEFING: Director Charboneau gave the members a handout describing the State
Police mission statement, its values and a vision statement (Exhibit A.)
The Department derives its statutory authority from multiple sections of
Idaho Code. One section creates the Department and the position of
Director, and provides for any divisions and units deemed necessary for
the administration of its duties. Patrol activity and associated duties are
authorized by another section. The Bureau of Criminal Identification is
mandated by Section 67-2911. Responsibilities for liquor, drug and
racketeering violations are also mandated. The Department provides a
wide spectrum of safety, enforcement and support services. ISP troopers
patrol Idaho’s roadways. They partner with detectives and other law
enforcement agencies in serving search warrants and responding to
crowd control and other public safety issues. One highly publicized area
of state police detective work, whether assisting local agencies or
pursuing cases of the Department, is that of clandestine meth laboratory
seizure. Employees of the Department operate Idaho’s forensic
laboratories, analyzing evidence submitted by every law enforcement
agency in Idaho. They maintain a number of criminal registries through
the Bureau of Criminal Identification. In conclusion, the Director said the
most important item was in the last sentence of the handout which
suggested interested people contact Ann Thompson, Assistant to the
Director to obtain more information or to schedule a tour of the Meridian
facility. Chairman Field thanked the Director for his remarks and for
taking the time to appear before the Committee.
RS 12333: The Chairman recognized Jim Woods with the Department of Correction
to explain the proposed legislation. Mr. Woods said the Department is
seeking to increase the allowable maximum cost of supervision fee to fifty
($50.00) dollars. That fee is currently thirty-five ($35.00) dollars. In
addition to the monthly cost of supervision, there are other offender paid
costs for rehabilitation services, urinalysis testing and electronic
monitoring. If the fee is increased, the Department can include some of
these programs with no additional costs to the offender. It will also allow
better drug and alcohol programs and better electronic surveillance.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to introduce RS 12333. Motion carried.
RS 12414C1 The Chairman recognized Representative Leon Smith to explain the
proposed legislation. Representative Smith said the legislation provides
clarification and amendments concerning the Small Lawsuit Resolution
Act to make the Act function in different court settings and in conformance
with existing law and Supreme Court rules. The Act was approved by
both the House and Senate last year. After the legislation was passed,
many groups with competing interest in the bill met several times and
reached compromises which resulted in the current proposed legislation.
Representative Smith asked that RS 12414C1 be introduced to print. The
Committee will then have the opportunity to hear testimony in more detail.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to introduce RS 12414C1. Motion carried.
HB 51: Chairman Field said the sponsor of HB 51 requested that the bill be held
in Committee.
MOTION: Representative Ellsworth moved to hold HB 51 in Committee. Motion
carried.
ADJOURN: Prior to adjournment. Representative Clark appointed a Subcommittee
consisting of Chairman Clark and Representatives Edmunson, Wills, Ring
and Boe to consider the Rules of the Idaho Division of Veterans Services.
That meeting will immediately follow the adjournment of the full
Committee meeting on Wednesday, January 15, 2003. There being no
further business, the Committee was adjourned at 2:10 p.m.






DATE: January 15, 2003
TIME: 1:40 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/EXCUSED: Representatives Nielsen, Bieter
GUESTS: Brent Reinke, Department of Juvenile Corrections
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes of the meeting held on January 13, 2003.
Representative Ridinger moved to accept the minutes as written. Motion
carried.
DEPT.
JUVENILE
CORRECTIONS:
The Chairman introduced Director Brent Reinke who gave a brief
overview of the Department of Juvenile Corrections. The Director gave
each member a pamphlet which they could refer back to (Exhibit A.) The
Director said Idaho is a rehabilitation state and the Department’s mission
is to prevent and reduce juvenile crimes. The Department has developed
numerous partnerships with agencies, courts, counties, and others to
prevent and reduce juvenile crime. There are 170,631 ten to seventeen
year-old juveniles in Idaho. 6,500 juveniles are currently on probation.
There are 44 probation departments and 11 detention centers. 828
juveniles are served by the Department.



Average statistics of juveniles in custody are: age 16.4, 82.6% are male
and the majority are white. The Director said for every 10 juveniles
committed to the Department, 5 will commit no further acts of crime (as a
24-month follow-up), 2 will be adjudicated of a new misdemeanor, 2 will
descend to the Department of Correction and 1 will be recommitted. The
Department tries to place the juveniles closer to homes and families. It
provides functional family therapy which takes place in the home. This
can reduce recidivism between 25% and 60%. Using this pilot project,
110 juveniles were served, 25 of which were released from custody. Of
the total figure, 3 were re-arrested and 1 was recommitted. In conclusion,
the Director said the Department’s future needs are: mental health
services/substance abuse services, additional regional programs, better
system data collection and aftercare programs for juvenile offenders
returning from state custody.



The Chairman thanked the Director and his staff for appearing before the
Committee. The Director offered to take interested members to Nampa to
visit the facilities and have lunch.

ADJOURN: The Chairman said there would be no meeting on Friday. There being no
further business, the meeting was adjourned at 2:25 p.m.






DATE: January 15, 2003
TIME: 2:30 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Clark, Representatives Edmunson, Ring, Wills and Boe
ABSENT/EXCUSED: None
GUESTS: Richard Jones, Administrator, Div. of Veterans Services
MINUTES: Chairman Clark called the meeting to order and recognized Richard
Jones to explain the pending rules submitted by the Idaho Division of
Veterans Services to the House Judiciary, Rules and Administration
Committee. The Chairman asked if there had been any controversy over
any of the rules and the Administrator indicated there had not. The
Administrator said three of the following dockets provide clarification to
existing rules and the last two dockets were new chapters which deal with
the new State Veterans Cemetery and wheelchair confined veterans.
21-0101-0201: This pending rule clarifies nursing care eligibility requirements for
admission to Idaho State Veterans Homes and changes the requirement
that residents pay a $100 security deposit.
21-0102-0201: This pending rule clarifies eligibility to receive emergency grants; change
certain requirements; improve fiscal management and clarifies who may
make requests for reimbursement for service officer training.
21-0103-0201: This pending rule changes the requirement that all veterans homes must
charge the same and provides a means for veterans homes to write off
uncollectible debts.
21-0104-0201 This pending rule deals with a new chapter in the rules which provides for
the operation and maintenance of Idaho’s new State Veterans Cemetery.
Mr. Jones said the cemetery is scheduled to open in the year 2004.
These rules follow national guidelines for all veterans cemeteries.
21-0105-0201 The last pending rule discussed by the Administrator is also a new
chapter which provides for a wheelchair confined veteran’s transportation
payment pilot project. This will supplement the VA van program. These
vans are not able to transport wheelchair confined veterans.
MOTION: Representative Boe moved to recommend to the full committee that the
Idaho Division of Veterans Services pending rules be accepted. Motion
carried.
ADJOURN: There being no further business to come before the Committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 3:15 p.m.






DATE: January 21, 2003
TIME: 1:30 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk,
Nielsen, Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: Randy Tilley, Department of Financial Management; Greg Sali,
Research Analyst, Bd. Of Corr.; Director Tom Beauclair, Dept.
of Corr.; Ken McClure, Idaho Liability Reform Coalition
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the
members to review the minutes. Representative Kulczyk moved
to approve the minutes of the meeting held on January 15,
2003, as written. Motion carried. The Chairman recognized
Randy Tilley to present a review of parole eligibility to the
members.
PAROLE

ELIGIBILITY:

Mr. Tilley passed a handout to each member which was a
review of parole eligibility dates of incarcerated offenders
(exhibit A.) Mr. Tilley said paroles are granted by the
Department of Pardons and Parole, whereas probations are
granted by the courts. Of all offenders who are past their parole
eligibility dates, sixteen have tentative parole dates, ninety have
disciplinary reports in the last 90 days, twenty-nine are in
residential substance abuse treatment, 240 were passed to full-term release date and the balance were continued to another
hearing date. The average parole cost per day is $3.80. The
recommended caseload per parole officer is 60 offenders. The
annual salary for a senior parole officer is $50,000, including
benefits. Challenges being faced are deciding acceptable levels
of risk, who assumes the responsibility for the risk and how to
assure that those released will not commit new crimes.
Chairman Field thanked Mr. Tilley for the information and
recognized Director Tom Beauclair to discuss the Idaho
Department of Correction.
DEPT. OF
CORRECTION:
Director Beauclair gave each member a handout (exhibit B)
explaining the Departments mission statement, vision and
values. The Director said the Department has merged five
divisions to two, created efficiencies and deleted funding for
several positions. The reorganization of the Department saved
$660,000. There have been budget cuts, but the impact of those
costs has resulted in a reduction in security and supervision of
offenders, a reduction in programs and education for offenders,
an increased risk to staff and offenders and anticipated
increases in length of stay. The incarcerated growth rate is
projected at 6% for 2003. Probation and parole growth is
projected at 5.8% for 2003 and there will be significant growth in
the next five years. In conclusion, the Director said the
Department needs to be more streamlined. Balance is the key.
New options need to be explored.
Chairman Field thanked the Director for taking the time to
appear before the Committee.
RS12581 The last item on the agenda was RS12581 and the Chairman
recognized Ken McClure to explain the proposed legislation. Mr.
McClure said this legislation would modify rules for the
determination and imposition of tort liability in Idaho. It would
modify three provisions of tort reform enacted in 1987, but not
revisited since. It would clean up the repeal of joint and several
liability by repealing exceptions for environmental damages and
damages associated with medical devices and pharmaceutical
products. It would reduce the cap on non-economic damages to
$250,000. It would impose limits on punitive damages. It would
modify the appeal bond requirements to enable defendants to
appeal large awards for punitive damages by posting a bond for
compensatory damages and the first million dollars of punitive
damages. The bill would have no negative fiscal impact. Mr.
McClure gave the members an Idaho Liability Reform Coalition
Board list (exhibit C.) In conclusion, Mr. McClure said this issue
is controversial. The proposed legislation needs to be
introduced and returned to the Committee in bill form, so that all
interested parties may have a chance to testify.
MOTION: Representative Ellsworth moved to introduce RS12581. Motion
carried.
ADJOURN: Chairman Field said several meeting agendas are in the
planning stages. The Committee needs to plan on meeting on
Friday, January 31. There being no further business, the
meeting was adjourned at 2:35 p.m.






DATE: January 21, 2003
TIME: 2:40 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Jim Clark; Representatives Edmunson, Ring, Wills and Boe
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: Director Brent Reinke, Dept. of Juvenile Corrections
MINUTES: Chairman Clark called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review their minutes. Representative Ring moved to accept the minutes
of the meeting held on January 15, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
RULES REVIEW: Chairman Clark called upon Director Brent Reinke to explain the pending
rules of the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections which created the
Custody Review Board. Director Reinke said Chapter 05.01.03 is a new
chapter providing rules for the Review Board. The Board is made up of
citizens. Juveniles who are within 6 months of their 19th birthday may
apply to have the Custody Review Board hear their cases. This new
chapter is modeled after a similar chapter of the Commission of Pardons
and Parole. The rules are established to ensure that the Juvenile
Corrections system in Idaho and the Custody Review Board will be
consistently based on the principles of accountability, community
protection and competency development. Victims are kept informed of the
entire process. It is good for the victims, good for the offender and for the
family of the offender.
MOTION: Representative Boe moved to recommend to the full Committee that the
pending Rules of the Custody Review Board be accepted. Motion carried.
ADJOURN: There being no further business to come before the subcommittee, the
meeting was adjourned at 3:05 p.m.






DATE: January 23, 2003
TIME: 2:00 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Rep. Ellsworth
GUESTS: Mike Kane, Idaho Sheriffs Assn., Patti Tobias, Adm. Director of the Courts
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Ridinger moved to accept the
minutes of the meeting held on January 21, 2003, as written. Motion
carried.
RS12564: The Chairman recognized Mike Kane to explain the proposed legislation.
Mr. Kane said this legislation would close a loophole currently existing in
Idaho law regarding sexual contact between a jailor or correctional officer
and a prisoner.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to introduce RS12564. Motion carried.
RS12565: The next item on the agenda was RS12565 and Mr. Kane was recognized
to explain. This legislation clarifies the existing law regarding who may be
liable for deliberately ignoring signs, barricades or other devices, entering
closed areas and becoming lost, thereby causing the need for a search
and rescue. The legislation makes it clear that persons who are
authorized to be on the land and who become lost cannot be held liable.
MOTION: Representative Boe moved to introduce RS12565. Motion carried.
H 72: Representative Leon Smith was recognized to explain the bill. The
legislation provides clarification and amendments concerning: notice
provisions; scheduling order; case removal; evaluation designation and
appointment or removal; evaluator compensation; procedural process;
award of costs and fees; evidence admissibility; determination for
judgement and trial de novo; and other technical corrections to make the
Small Lawsuit Resolution Act function in different courts and in
conformance with existing law and Supreme Court rules. Representative
Smith said the act, as amended, is already in effect. All interested parties
agreed to the language changes. The Supreme Court has promulgated
rules to put the Act into effect. Therefore, time is of the essence in
passing this bill.
MOTION: Representative Wills moved to send H 72 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Smith will carry the
bill on the floor.
DRUG COURT: Chairman Field recognized Patti Tobias to explain the drug and family
courts to the Committee. Ms. Tobias gave each member a handout which
explained in detail the Idaho Drug Court Act and the Idaho Family Court.
As of December 2002, thirty drug courts are operating in all seven judicial
districts. Thirteen drug courts have been added in just the last twelve
months and the number of offenders supervised was 627 participants,
which represents an increase of 62 percent from a year ago. Drug Courts
in each county determine the eligibility of offenders who may be admitted
into drug courts following a substance abuse assessment and a
criminogenic risk assessment. Violent offenders and sex offenders are
excluded from eligibility. 97% of drug court participants become
employed and 89% of drug court graduates are not convicted of any
further crimes.
FAMILY COURT: Ms. Tobias said five of the seven judicial districts now have a Family
Court Services Coordinator. The Coordinator either provides services
directly or maintains a list of qualified service providers to assist the
family. Offices are located in 26 counties. In 2002, Family Court Services
Coordinators either arranged or directly provided mediation services to
nearly 400 families. State appropriations paid for indigent families that
the court determined would benefit from mediation. It is estimated that
over a thousand additional families in Idaho benefitted from mediation last
year. Pharis Stanger with the Department of Health and Welfare was
recognized to answer some funding questions from the members.
Possible Medicaid coverage will be looked into and a report given.
ADJOURN: The Chairman thanked Patti Tobias for her presentation and told the
Committee members that there would be a meeting held at approximately
1:00 p.m. next Friday, January 31, to hear testimony on S 1001 regarding
the death penalty. There being no further business, the meeting was
adjourned at 2:40 p.m.






DATE: January 27, 2003
TIME: 2:45 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: Representative Campbell; Dianne Cromwell, Court Reporters; Director
Tom Beauclair, Department of Correction
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Ring moved to approve the minutes
of the meeting held on January 23, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
RS12547: Chairman Field recognized Representative Campbell to explain the
proposed legislation. The purpose of the bill is to direct a portion of the
proceeds and monies obtained through seizures of property and monies
of those convicted of drug related crimes be used to aid in the funding of
drug courts. Representative Clark questioned the following language on
page 2 of the legislation in lines 46, 47 and 48: “If the county does not
have a drug court, then to the drug court fund of the nearest county that
has a drug court.”
MOTION: Representative Ring moved to introduce RS12547.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Boe moved to introduce RS12547 with a language
correction
.
UNANIMOUS
CONSENT
Representative Sali requested unanimous consent to move RS12547 to
the end of the agenda in order to resolve the problems with the language.
There being no objection, further hearing on RS12547 was postponed
and the proposed legislation was moved to the bottom of the agenda.
RS12580 Chairman Field recognized Representative Andersen to explain.
Representative Andersen said the purpose of the bill is to change the
maximum possible prison sentence for the crime of incest from 10 years
to 25 years.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to introduce RS12580. Motion carried.
H 34 The Chairman recognized Dianne Cromwell to explain the bill. Ms.
Cromwell said the court reporters need more money and this bill would
increase the cap on renewal fees to a maximum cap of $200 and
increases the cap rate for the total amount that may be charged on
delayed renewals from $100 to $400 dollars. Representative Clark
questioned the fiscal impact on the statement of purpose. Ms. Cromwell
said there would be no fiscal impact on the general fund.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to send H 34 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Sali moved to send H 34 to General Orders with
committee amendments attached as follows: on line 13, change $200
to $80 and on line 25, change $400 to $160.
AMENDED
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Clark moved to hold H 34 in committee. In support of his
motion, Representative Clark said this bill would cause too large of an
increase, even at the $80 level when our current economy is considered.
Motion carried.
H 50 Chairman Field recognized Director Beauclair to explain the bill. The
Director said current practice allows probationers and parolees to leave
the state on the Interstate Compact Agreement and it costs approximately
$50 to $100 to process the application. All the cost of the transfer is
borne by the Idaho Department of Correction. The bill would allow the
Department to charge offenders up to a maximum of $100 for an
interstate compact application fee.
MOTION: Representative Boe moved to send H 50, with a corrected Fiscal
Impact, to the floor with a Do Pass recommendation. Motion
carried.
Representative Boe will carry the bill on the floor.
H 71 Chairman Field recognized Director Beauclair to explain the legislation.
The Director said the Department is seeking to increase the allowable
maximum Cost of Supervision fee from the current $35.00 to $50.00. In
addition to the monthly Cost of Supervision, there are other offender paid
costs for rehabilitation services, urinalysis testing and electronic
monitoring. Each one of these requires separate bookkeeping actions. If
the Department is allowed to increase the fee to $50.00, some of these
programs can be included with no additional costs to the offender.
MOTION: Representative Wills moved to send H 71 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Wills will carry the
bill on the floor.
H 86 Chairman Field recognized Caralee Lambert to explain. Ms. Lambert said
the purpose of this legislation is to provide notice to the Director of
Legislative Services of temporary rules adopted by agencies. The
legislation requires that copies of temporary rules be sent to the Director
at the same time an agency sends such rules to the Office of the
Administrative Rules Coordinator for publication in the Administrative
Bulletin.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to send H 86 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Ridinger will carry
the bill on the floor.
RS12547
AMENDED
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION
Representative Sali moved to return RS12547 to the Sponsor in order
that a new RS may be drafted correcting the problems with the language.
Motion carried.
ADJOURN: Prior to adjournment, Representative Smith suggested that all members
interested in learning more regarding the Tort Reform bill meet after the
regular Committee meeting on Wednesday. There being no further
business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at
3:45 p.m.






DATE: January 29, 2003
TIME: 1:45 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: Sarah Scott, Commission on Aging; Kathy Baird, Dept. of Correction;
Marty Durand, ACLU; Bill Douglas, Kootenai County Prosecuting Attorney
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Smith moved to approve the minutes
of the meeting held on January 27, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
H 52: The Chairman recognized Sarah Scott to explain the bill. Ms. Scott said
the bill is necessary to set a threshold at which the Idaho Commission on
Aging is required to report to law enforcement complaints of abuse,
neglect or exploitation. In the past, the Commission has been required to
report all complaints where such abuse, neglect or exploitation has
caused any injury. This requirement has caused reports to be made to
law enforcement that never reach the level of sustaining a criminal action.
The Commission has received requests from law enforcement agencies
that only complaints involving serious injury be reported. This bill would
give the Commission the necessary discretion to screen cases that are
reported to law enforcement. Questions were raised by the members as
to how to define serious injury compared to not serious. It might be best
to err on the side of caution in these cases.
MOTION: Representative Sali moved to send H 52, with a spelling correction in
the Statement of Purpose, to the floor with a Do Pass
Recommendation.
In support of his motion, Representative Sali said the
Commission is pretty aggressive in searching out the truth in these cases.
This bill adds a layer of process that is needed. Motion carried.
H 3 Representative Clark was recognized to explain the bill. Representative
Clark said there is a certain small group of people whose whereabouts
should be known to ensure public safety. The legislation applies only to
the worst sexual offenders who are deemed sexual predators by the State
Offenders Classification Board, or by a similar board in another state.
There are currently 21 individuals in Idaho who would be affected by the
bill. These individuals include offenders convicted of rape or first-degree
murder during rape. Representative Clark said this bill was prefiled to
provide all interested parties with an opportunity to study the language.
The concerns that were voiced have been addressed by amendments to
the bill which delete “cause to be disseminated by widest possible means”
and insert “publish in a newspaper in general circulation within the county
once a week for three consecutive weeks.” The time frame of 7 days in
the last sentence of the bill was changed to 30 days of registration. After
that last sentence, the following language was added: “The sheriff shall
charge a fee of fifty dollars ($50.00) in addition to any other fees
authorized by this chapter to be paid by the sex offender to offset the cost
of publication.” Kathy Baird was recognized to answer some questions
from the members on the list of crimes which would classify an offender
as a sexual predator and the $50 fee charged to the offender. Ms. Baird
said there is currently a list of heinous crimes in the Idaho Code and if an
offender fails to register, this is a felony punishable by up to 5 years in
prison.
PRO: Marty Durand with the ACLU was recognized to give testimony. Ms.
Durand said the ACLU is not opposed to this legislation. However, there
is a concern that if this bill is passed, there should also be a step required
to make sure that the information is absolutely accurate.
PRO: Bill Douglas, Kootenai County prosecutor, was recognized to testify in
support of the bill. Mr. Douglas said he was also a Director of the Idaho
Prosecuting Attorneys Association. Mr. Douglas told the members about
a case where Dave Merritt was sentenced to life without parole. He raped
a 14-year old girl and brutally murdered her after befriending her and her
mother. Dave Merritt was a registered sexual offender who had moved
from Washington state. The girl’s mother had no way of knowing a sexual
predator was living next door to her. This legislation only applies to a
small number of individuals. It allows the sheriffs to do their jobs more
efficiently and it would provide needed protection for the public by
publication of these sexual predators in the newspaper.
MOTION: Representative Harwood moved to send the bill to general orders with
committee amendments attached.
Representative Smith registered
some concerns regarding the funding and Representative Clark said this
would just be another step in publishing a list of the worst of the worst.
This law should be passed and be given a year in order to see what the
costs are. Representative Bieter voiced concerns regarding the accuracy
of the list of sexual predators. Representative Wills spoke in favor of the
bill. Motion passed. Representative Bieter asked to be recorded as
voting “No” on the motion. Representative Clark will carry the bill on the
floor.
ADJOURN: Prior to adjournment, Chairman Field said the Committee will meet on
Friday, January 31, 2003, to hear testimony on the death penalty bill.
There being no further business to come before the Committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 3:10 p.m.






DATE: January 29, 2003
TIME: 3:15 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Clark; Representatives Edmunson, Wills, Ring and Boe
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: Peggy White, Deputy Attorney General; Michael Becar, Executive
Director, POST
MINUTES: Chairman Clark called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Wills moved to approve the minutes
of the meeting held on January 23, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
RULES REVIEW
OF IDAHO
STATE POLICE
AND POST:
Peggy White was recognized to explain the rules. Chairman Clark asked
Ms. White if there had been any controversy over the rules and Ms. White
said the pending, temporary and proposed rules of the Idaho State Police,
Docket Nos. 11.05.01 governing alcohol beverage control, 11.07.01
governing motor vehicle rules, 11.07.02 governing safety glazing material,
11.07.03 governing emergency vehicles, 11.10.03 governing the Sex
Offender Registry , 11.11.02, rules of the Idaho POST Academy and
11.12.01, rules governing record checks for transfers of handguns,
contained no changes of real substance. Some mandatory language has
been added, there is a change on the sex offender registry so that
updates may be done digitally. There is clarification about letting people
know electronically. Mandatory language has been added on the POST
rules. Ms. White went over these changes with the members.



Ms. White then directed the members attention to the POST Academy fee
rules, Docket No. 11.11.01. The rules have been updated and made
grammatically correct. The only fee rule is on page 50 which directs that
an entity making application shall be charged a course evaluation fee at
the time of application. The rest of the changes cause the language to be
more effective. The last change allows the executive director to make
some decisions.

MOTION: Representative Edmunson moved to recommend to the full Committee
that the pending, temporary and proposed rules and the POST fee rules
be approved. Motion carried.



ADJOURN: There being no further business to come before the subcommittee, the
meeting was adjourned at 3:30 p.m.






DATE: January 31, 2003
TIME: 1:04 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Representative Ellsworth, Representative Smith
GUESTS: See attached sign-in sheets
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Harwood moved to approve the
minutes of the meeting held on January 29, 2003, as written. Motion
carried.
REPORT ON
RULES REVIEW:
Representative Boe, a member of the subcommittee delegated to review
the rules, said the Clark Subcommittee reviewed the pending rules of the
Department of Juvenile Corrections, the pending rules of the Idaho State
Police, the fee rules of the POST academy, the pending rules of the
Division of Veterans Services and the pending rules for the Commission
for Pardons and Parole. The subcommittee also reviewed the Notice of
Proclamation of Rulemaking of the State Board of Correction. The
subcommittee recommends that all rules be approved by the full
committee. A copy of the report is attached.
MOTION: Representative Boe moved to accept the subcommittee’s report on the
rules. Motion carried.
S 1001 Chairman Field said S 1001 dealing with the death penalty was not an
easy fix to the law. The taking of a human life is serious. So is the
protection of an innocent life. Chairman Field thanked all those who
spent literally hours of their time to help sort through the Supreme Court
decision and draft this legislation to bring Idaho in compliance with the
recent United States Supreme Court decision in Ring v. Arizona.
Chairman Field recognized Caralee Lambert to explain the bill.



Ms. Lambert said the Supreme Court decision effectively cancelled the
Idaho death penalty law. This bill was drafted in an effort to bring Idaho’s
law in line with that decision which said juries, not judges, should decide
whether to end the life of a murderer. In accordance with this bill a jury, or
the court if a jury is waived, shall determine whether statutory aggravating
circumstances are found beyond a reasonable doubt and, if such
circumstances are found, whether the death penalty should be imposed.
The legislation also sets forth a mandatory minimum of life imprisonment
if any statutory aggravating factor is found, and would require judges to
inform potential jurors at the outset of jury selection if the death penalty is
not a sentencing option. This law, if passed, would be effective
immediately.

PRO Greg Bower, Ada County prosecuting attorney, was recognized. Mr.
Bower said a group met over several months to draft the bill. The state
prosecutors support the bill and urge the Committee to send it to the floor
with a Do Pass recommendation.
CON Marty Durand with the ACLU was recognized. Ms. Durand said the ACLU
opposes the bill because there is a possibility of executing innocent
people. Idaho has exonerated more people than it has executed. Death
penalty trials are very expensive. The ACLU would like to know the fiscal
impact. Life in prison is a better solution.
PRO Roger Bourne, Ada County prosecuting attorney, was recognized. Mr.
Bourne was involved in the process of working on the legislation together
with a great number of other people in order to bring Idaho’s law in
compliance with the decision of the Supreme Court. This gives the jurors
the ability to determine who the worst of the worst are. If the jury decides
there are no aggravating circumstances, the jury can turn the case back
over to the judge. This bill brings Idaho into the mainstream with other
states.
CON Anne Pasley-Stuart with the Association of Social Workers spoke in
opposition to the bill. It is the Association’s belief that taking a life is never
justified. Retaliation is not a sign of a civilized society. In August of 2001,
a man was exonerated on death row after being incarcerated for 17 years.
The Association does not wish to discount the pain that the families of the
victims feel. It currently costs approximately twice as much to execute
someone as it does to keep someone in prison for life. In conclusion, Ms.
Paslely-Stuart asked that the bill not be passed.
PRO Paul and Shirley Blomberg were recognized to give their testimony. Mr.
Blomberg said on July 6, 2000, their daughter, Samantha Blomberg
Maher was randomly abducted and murdered. Darrell Payne did this
crime. He was sentenced to death, but since the Supreme Court
decision, that sentence has been in appeal. Mr. Blomberg asked the
members to support the bill to reinstate the death penalty. Mrs. Blomberg
said she was not a lawyer or a politician, but just a mom. The Blombergs
has spend the last 2 ½ years going through the trial processes during
which Mr. Payne was finally sentenced to death. His guilt has been
proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. These murderers should be denied
20 appeals. No one seems to be talking about guilt or innocence.
Samantha’s body was found in a septic tank with a hole in her head.
Anyone who could do this is an animal. These murderers are a waste of
time and a waste of space. They are a waste of life. They deserve death
and they deserve it quickly. Do not put a dollar amount of Samantha’s
life. Let the punishment fit the crime.
CON Dennis Benjamin, a criminal defense lawyer, was recognized. Mr.
Benjamin said the bill goes beyond what is required by the Supreme
Court. It is fiscally irresponsible to reinstate the death penalty without
knowing its true cost. The death penally has been a failure in Idaho.
Three times as many death row inmates have been released from prison
as have been executed.
PRO LaMont Anderson, chief of litigation for the Attorney General’s office, was
recognized. Mr. Anderson said he was involved with the drafting of the
bill. With all due respect to death penalty opponents, no one in this state
has been completely exonerated. Idaho does not have a time limit on
death cases. There has been a controversy on deterrents. It has been
concluded that the death penalty is a deterrent. Additional protections for
a defendant have been included in the bill.

CON Mia Crosthwaite, representing the Roman Catholic Diocese of Boise, was
recognized. The Catholic Church supports an abolition to the death
penalty because it feels the punishment is “cruel and unnecessary.”
Today society has the ability to enforce a fixed life sentence without
chance of parole. The Church urges the Legislature to take this
opportunity to put a moratorium on the death penalty while its
effectiveness and justice are studied.
PRO Erin Bransom, a college student at St. Mary’s, did some research
regarding the death penalty. It would cost the state almost a million
dollars to incarcerate a person for 50 years. Murderers should reap what
they sew. Perhaps someday the death penalty will no longer be needed.
PRO Appellate Public Defender Molly Huskey was recognized. Ms. Huskey
said it the job of the public defenders to advocate for their clients. The
opportunity to participate on the committee which drafted the legislation
allowed the defenders to get some protections included that might not
have been in the bill. Because of this, Ms. Huskey supports the bill.
PRO Brian Whitlock with the Governor’s office was recognized. Mr. Whitlock
reaffirmed to the members that if the bill is passed, the Governor will sign
it. He thanked everyone who has worked on the language. From the
Governor’s standpoint, we would encourage the members to pass the
legislation.
PRO Mike Woslager was recognized to speak in favor of the bill. Mr. Woslager
said he believes in the jury system and that the jury will do a good job.
Offenders who commit heinous crimes need to pay a debt to society. The
framers of the United States Constitution did not consider the death
penalty to be excessive punishment. The death penalty represents justice
in these cases.
MOTION: Representative Wills moved to send S 1001 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
Representative Bieter and Representative Boe spoke
in opposition to the motion. In support of the motion, Representative Wills
said this is a tough bill to consider. This is not retaliation. The expense or
cost factor should not be a consideration here. These issues were not
taken lightly and this legislation represents the best of the best. Roll call
vote was called for.
ROLL CALL
VOTE:
Voting AYE­Representatives Field, Clark, Sali, Ridinger, Harwood,
Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen, Ring, Shirley, Wills and Andersen. Voting
Nay-Representatives Boe and Bieter. MOTION PASSED 12-2-2.
Representative Field will carry the bill on the floor.
ADJOURN: There being no further business to come before the committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 2:40 p.m.






DATE: February 3, 2003
TIME: 1:35 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: Michael Kane, Ada County Sheriffs; Ann Thompson, Assistant to the
Director of the State Police; Major Ralph Powell, Forensic Services
Commander; Carolee Kelly, Dept. of Correction, Marty Durand, ACLU;
Dennis Benjamin, Attorney
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Ridinger moved to approve the
minutes of the meeting held on January 31, 2003, as written. Motion
carried.
RS 12681: Michael Kane was recognized to explain the proposed legislation. Mr.
Kane said the purpose of this bill is to allow the counties to set sheriff’s
service of process fees in an amount reasonable related to the actual cost
of such service, but not to exceed such actual cost. Idaho Code currently
allows counties to set fees based upon actual cost, but the current version
of the sheriff’s fees statute does not allow this flexibility.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to introduce RS 12681. Motion carried.
RS 12684: Chairman Field recognized Michael Kane. Mr. Kane said currently the
sheriff’s revolving fund allows the sheriff to obtain money from the county
clerk for travel and hotel expenses in a more streamlined fashion than
through the normal county claims process. The money ultimately comes
from the sheriff’s budget and must be replenished from the sheriff’s
budget which is set by county commissioners. The purpose of this
legislation is to expand the amount of money held in the sheriff’s revolving
fund from $5,000 to $10,000 and to allow the sheriff to use the revolving
fund for training purposes and for other duties such as transportation of
prisoners. Because the revolving fund is replenished from the sheriff’s
budget, it will not affect local property taxes in any way.
MOTION: Representative Boe moved to introduce RS 12684. Motion carried.
H 47 Ann Thompson was recognized to explain the bill. Ms. Thompson said
this bill is known as the video voyeurism bill. Ms. Thompson asked the
members to hold the bill in committee. There are many horror stories
about people being videotaped without their knowledge. The police tried
to state the places where this might happen. However, after this bill was
printed, quite a few problems were discovered. This law, if passed, might
affect innocent people. The idea is a good one, but the language needs
to be worked on and re-drafted. Chairman Field said, if there were no
objections, H 47 would be held. No objections were voiced, so H 47 will
be held in committee.
H 48 Chairman Field recognized Major Ralph Powell to explain the bill. Major
Powell said the purpose of this bill is to amend the Idaho DNA Act of 1996
by adding “burglaries” to the list of crimes for which individuals convicted
or pleading guilty to must provide DNA samples for addition to the Idaho
DNA Database. Nearly 80% of felony offenders have burglary offenses in
their past. Crimes enumerated on the first page of the bill are crimes that
have been committed. The crimes enumerated on the second page of the
bill represent attempts to commit the crime. In answer to a question
concerning the costs to do a more DNA testing, Major Powell said the
police have already purchased kits and employees are already in place.
The Major said amendments have been drafted adding subsection (f) the
language that assault or battery upon certain personnel constituting a
felony and (g) domestic violence constituting a felony. Ms. Kelly was
recognized to speak to the bill. Ms. Kelly said there are currently 192
offenders incarcerated for aggravated battery and domestic violence. The
addition of these offenders would cost approximately $6.00 per offender.
There is a large quantity of the kits for taking DNA data stored for use.
The cost of replacement kits is already in the budget. Also federal grants
have helped cover the cost of employees and kits and the funding through
grants will be continued.
CON: Marty Durand with ACLU was recognized. Ms. Durand said DNA reveals
more than fingerprints. It identifies your past and future. The bill comes
with a large potential for abuse. Burglary is not necessarily a violent
crime. If a person goes into a convenience store and takes a package of
gum, this is not a violent crime. The bill goes beyond the scope of the
DNA Database Act. Non violent offenders could be included. Part of the
problem is Idaho’s definition of burglary. In conclusion, Ms. Durand asked
the members to oppose the bill.
CON: Dennis Benjamin was recognized to give his testimony. Mr. Benjamin
said he supports the DNA Database concept. However, he opposes this
bill as it is currently drafted because the language is too broad. Many
other states do not define burglary as broadly as Idaho does. Perhaps if
the language was limited to residential burglary only, this would limit the
scope and catch the offenders it is designed to catch. Also the language,
as written in this bill, is mandatory. A balance needs to be drawn between
privacy and the investigative rights of government. The balance in this
case swings too far.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to send H 48 to general orders with
committee amendments attached.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Sali moved to send H 48 to general orders with
committee amendments attached and with a language change on
line 21, page 1, inserting “where the structure is a residence.”
AMENDED
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Clark moved to hold H 48 in committee. In support of
his motion, Representative Clark said this is a prefiled bill. It should have
come before the committee as proposed legislation so the language could
be amended to satisfy all concerns. The current language in the bill is too
broad and far reaching. After some discussion on the Amended
Substitute Motion, Motion carried. H 48 will be held in committee.
ADJOURN: Prior to adjourning, Chairman Field said because of the volume of RS’s
currently in committee, there would most likely be meetings on both
Wednesday and Friday. There being no further business to come before
the committee, the meeting was adjourned at 2:45 p.m.






DATE: February 5, 2003
TIME: 1:30 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: Representative Trail; Representative Campbell; Caralee Lambert and
Director Beauclair
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Kulczyk moved to approve the
minutes of the meeting held on January 3, 2003, with the correction of a
misspelled name, changing “Durance” to “Durand.”
RS 12913C1: Caralee Lambert was recognized to explain. Ms. Lambert said the
purpose of the proposed legislation is to exempt from the death penalty
eligible persons who are mentally retarded, as dictated by the United
States Supreme Court in the 2002 Atkins v. Virginia decision. Pursuant to
this legislation, the issue of mental retardation would be raised and
determined by the court prior to trial. This legislation would also set forth
a fixed life sentence if the jury unanimously finds beyond a reasonable
doubt any statutory aggravating circumstances. It is not anticipated that
there will be any additional costs with this legislation.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to introduce RS 12913C1 Motion carried.
RS 12427C1 and
RS 12665:
These two pieces of proposed legislation were sponsored by
Representative Trail. Chairman Field said there were apparently some
concerns raised regarding the two RS’s and asked for unanimous consent
to put RS 12427C1 and RS 12665 on Friday’s Agenda. There being
no objection, the legislation was moved to Friday, February 7, 2003.
RS 12666: Representative Trail was recognized to explain. Representative Trail said
this legislation amends Idaho Code 18-1601 regarding rape by clarifying
the act of rape, particularly in instances where the act is perpetrated on
females who are limited in their ability to make reasonable consent. Law
enforcement and prosecution officers have found it difficult to build
effective prosecution cases under the existing code. Consequently many
incidents are not prosecuted.
MOTION: Representative Ellsworth moved to introduce RS 12666. Motion
carried.
RS 12764: Representative Campbell was recognized to explain. The purpose of this
legislation is to provide funding for drug court purposes from asset
forfeitures in drug cases. The legislation would provide fifty percent of the
proceeds from the sale of personal or real property used in illegal drug
activities to the district court fund in the judicial district where the real or
personal property was seized.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to introduce RS 12764. Motion carried.
H 71: The last item on the agenda was H 71 and Director Beauclair was
recognized. The Chairman explained that this is the bill which was pulled
back from the floor because there were concerns regarding the fiscal
impact. Director Beauclair said work was progressing on drafting
amendments to clarify the fiscal impact. Chairman Field said it was the
intention to send the bill back to the General Orders with committee
amendments attached once those amendments are drafted. The
Committee would entertain a motion to hold the bill for a time certain.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to hold H 71 in Committee for a time
certain of Tuesday, February 11, 2003.
Cathy Holland-Smith and
Randy Tilley were recognized to answer some questions regarding the
fiscal impact on the bill. They explained that there is the General Fund,
but there are also a myriad of dedicated funds. JFAC authorizes the
additional spending authority. This is a timely issue and it is a way to put
money back on the books and allow the Department of Correction
flexibility on how the money is spent. Motion carried.
ADJOURN: There being no further business to come before the Committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 2:10 p.m.






DATE: February 7, 2003
TIME: 1:05 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Representative Leon Smith
GUESTS: Bob Aldridge; Jim Jones; Senator Bart Davis; Jim Hansen;
Representative Wendy Jaquet; Director Brent Reinke; Heather Reilly; Dar
Olberding
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Nielsen moved to accept the minutes
of the meeting held on February 5, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
RS 12794: The Chairman recognized Bob Aldridge to explain. This proposed
legislation revises the definitions of “separate property” and “community
property” and clarifies that income includes the rents, issues and profits
from various property. In order to make all the definitions consistent with
each other and with case law, the bill first amends the two definition
sections in the Probate Code to simply cross reference to sections 32-903
and 32-906 and then adds the “rents, issues and profits” language to
section 32-906.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to introduce RS 12794. Motion carried.
RS 12821 Chairman Field recognized Jim Jones to explain. Mr. Jones said this
legislation requires that a state licensing board furnish information when
a prospective employee has a controlled substance problem and a hiring
decision is being made. The employer is required to request the
information and the prospective employee’s licensing board is required to
supply it. This requirement only applies to an employee who will be
handling or dispensing controlled substances and is intended to prevent
drug tampering and drug theft.
MOTION: Representative Ring moved to introduce RS 12821. Motion carried.
RS 12827 Representative Shirley was recognized to explain. A short time ago, a
prefiled bill was brought before the Committee dealing with renewal fees
for shorthand reporters. That bill was not approved and was held in
Committee. With the approval of the Committee and the shorthand
reporters, this proposed legislation was drafted. In order to permit the
Board of Certified Shorthand Reporters to continue to fulfill its statutory
mandate, it is necessary to increase the previously established cap on the
amount that the board can charge for renewal fees. Increasing the cap
rate on renewals from forty dollars to seventy-five dollars will provide the
board with the flexibility to adopt, by rule, renewal fees that exceed the
currently established amounts. In addition, the legislation increases the
cap rate for the total amount that may be charged in the event of a
delayed renewal.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to introduce RS 12827 with the following
correction: add a period after “delinquent” on line 24 and delete the
rest of the sentence on lines 24 and 25. Motion carried.
RS 12427C2 Representative Bieter was recognized to explain. This legislation adds a
new chapter to the Idaho Code to be known as the Idaho Judicial
Independence Act. This Act provides a voluntary system of public
financing for Idaho Supreme Court and Court of Appeals candidates who
run for election. To qualify, candidates must demonstrate a base of
support by collecting 2000 contributions of $5 each. Those $5
contributions can only come from registered voters and are deposited with
the Idaho Judicial Independence Act Trust Fund. The Act sets up a
Commission on Judicial Election Practices within the Secretary of State’s
office to oversee the functioning of the system. Representative Clark said
Idaho Code has a single subject rule. This legislation appears to amend
a tax code within an elections bill. Reference to that section of the code
needs to be removed. Jim Hansen with Idahoans for Fair Elections was
recognized. Mr. Hansen said this section is common where opportunity is
provided for a tax credit. It is not a separate subject. However, if there is
concern, that verbiage may be deleted.
MOTION: Representative Nielsen moved to introduce RS 12427C2.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Sali moved to return RS 12427C2 to sponsor.
AMENDED
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Boe moved to introduce RS 12427C2 with the deletion
of the language regarding tax credit.
ROLL CALL
VOTE:
Voting AYE: Representatives Field(18), Ellsworth, Edmunson, Nielsen,
Shirley, Boe, Bieter, Andersen. Voting NAY: Representatives Clark, Sali,
Ridinger, Harwood, Kulczyk, Ring, Wills. Motion passed 8-7-1.
RS 12665 Senator Bart Davis was recognized to testify. The Senator said this
resolution calls on the Legislature to authorize the Legislative Council to
appoint a committee to undertake and complete a study of all relevant
issues relating to selection/election of judges, including the financing of
judicial elections.
MOTION: Representative Ellsworth moved to introduce RS 12665. Motion
carried.
RS 12864 Representative Jaquet was recognized to explain. Representative Jaquet
said this bill will remove statutory restrictions placed on the Department of
Corrections regarding the imposition of solitary confinement and other
conditions of confinement on death row. Removing the restrictions will
give the Department the ability to better manage the behavior of death-sentenced inmates by giving it the discretion to grant and withdraw
ordinary privileges afforded to other high-security inmates, while still
requiring the Department to house such inmates in the highest security
level.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to introduce RS 12864. Motion carried.
RS 12839 Dar Olberding was recognized to explain. This legislation makes it clear
that activities conducted under the express authority of statutes cannot be
public or private nuisances. This amendment should avoid any further
misinterpretation in the future.
MOTION: Representative Sali moved to introduce RS 12839. Motion carried.
RS 12900 Director Reinke was recognized to explain. This legislation amends the
Juvenile Corrections Act, Section 20-504(14) to strike the language
“criteria and operating procedures.”
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to introduce RS 12900 and send it directly
to 2nd reading calendar. Motion carried.
RS 12902 Heather Reilly was recognized to explain. Ms. Reilly said this is a
housekeeping bill to make the code consistent with two other sections.
MOTION: Representative Ellsworth moved to introduced RS 12902. Motion
carried.
RS 12934 The last item on the agenda was RS 12934 and Chairman Field
recognized Heather Reilly to explain. This legislation would create a new
statute criminalizing the use of the Internet to entice, solicit, seduce, lure
or persuade a child to engage in a sexual act. Currently, Idaho law does
not have a statute to address this dangerous type of communication. This
legislation would bring Idaho up to date and prepare for advanced
communications in the future.
MOTION: Representative Ridinger moved to introduce RS 12934. Motion carried.
ADJOURN: There being no further business to come before the Committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 2:05 p.m.






DATE: February 11, 2003
TIME: 1:30 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Representative Ellsworth
GUESTS: Director Tom Beauclair; Mike Kane, Ada County Sheriffs; Vicky Beall,
Boise County Sheriffs; Wayne Tousley, Twin Falls County Sheriff
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Ring moved to accept the minutes of
the meeting held on February 7, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
H 71: Chairman Field explained that the amendments to the bill, as previously
discussed, were before the Committee. A motion would be entertained.
MOTION: Representative Boe moved to send H 71 to General Orders with
committee amendments attached. Motion carried.
Representative
Wills will carry the bill on the floor.
H 115: The Chairman recognized Mike Kane to explain. Mr. Kane said this bill
adds a couple of words to the law pertaining to sexual contact. The
Sheriffs are asking that this language be included so that manual
manipulation can also be criminalized.
MOTION: Representative Ring moved to send H 115 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Ring will carry the
bill on the floor.
H 116: Mike Kane was recognized to explain the bill. Mr. Kane said the bill
provides that liability for search and rescue costs shall not apply to any
person who is authorized to be in a closed area and becomes lost.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to send H 116 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Edmunson will carry
the bill on the floor.
H 145 The Chairman recognized Mike Kane. Mr. Kane gave each member a
handout (Exhibit A) and said this is a law that is already in place. The
purpose of this bill is to allow the counties to set sheriff’s service of
process fees in an amount reasonably related to the actual cost of such
service, but not to exceed such actual cost. Mr. Kane asked to yield to
Vicky Beall with the Boise County sheriff’s office. Ms. Beall said this bill
will allow government to set fees to accurately reflect their cost. A
handout (Exhibit B) shows Boise County sheriff’s office estimated costs
for civil process service. Representative Wills asked what happens to the
costs when the sheriff’s office is unable to serve someone and has to go
back several times. Ms. Beall said there was a flat fee no matter how
many times service was tried.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to send H 145 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
Representative Sali spoke against the motion saying
the language does not have enough sideboards on it. Counties might
perceive this as a way to charge more than the actual costs are.
Representative Nielsen also spoke against the motion. Motion carried.
Representatives Sali, Nielsen and Shirley asked to be recorded as voting
“No” on the motion. Representative Smith will carry the bill on the floor.
H 146 Mike Kane was recognized to explain the last bill on the agenda. Mr.
Kane said this bill in no way, shape or form will affect property taxes. It
just gives the sheriffs a little more flexibility. Mr. Kane asked to yield to
Sheriff Tousley of Twin Falls County. The sheriff said his clerk prefers
this system. It allows the sheriff to go to the clerk and draw monies to pay
for expenses. This amount of money comes out of the sheriff’s budget
and must be balanced out each year. It allows the sheriffs the flexibility to
travel. The expansion will cover many other expenses such as training. It
is a very good system. Mr. Kane said this bill does not ask for new
monies. It is a revolving fund and simply allows the sheriffs more
flexibility.
MOTION: Representative Nielsen moved to send H 146 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation.
In support of the motion, Representative Wills
said the County Commissioners can turn a request for sheriff’s fees down.
This is a revolving fund only. Representative Smith said County
Commissioners have the ultimate say. The County Commissioners are
the sideboards in this bill. Representative Clark spoke in opposition to the
motion. Motion carried. Representative Smith will carry the bill on the
floor.
ADJOURN: Chairman Field explained how the testimony would be taken on Thursday,
February 13, 2003, regarding the Tort Reform legislation. The members
should expect the meeting to be a long one, during which questions will
be welcome. There being no further business to come before the
Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 2:30 p.m.






DATE: February 13, 2003
TIME: 1:30 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: See attached sign-in sheets.
MOTION: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Ridinger moved to accept the
minutes of the meeting held on February 11, 2003, as written. Motion
carried.
H 92: The Chairman recognized Ken McClure to explain the bill. Mr. McClure
said he is an attorney representing the Idaho Liability Reform Coalition.
Mr. McClure gave the members a current list of the Coalition membership
(Exhibit A.) He said the list is growing daily. It has been the goal
throughout the time that the tort reform has been worked on to make the
law fair and predictable. This bill would modify the rules for the
determination and imposition of tort liability in Idaho. It would modify three
provisions of tort reform enacted in 1987 by the Legislature. It cleans up
the repeal of joint and several liability by repealing exceptions for
environmental damages and damages associated with medical devices
and pharmaceutical products. It would reduce the cap on non-economic
damages such as pain and suffering to $250,000 instead of the 1987 cap
of $400,000, with calculated annual increases by the Idaho Industrial
Commission.



The bill would impose limits on punitive damages and it would modify the
appeal bond requirements to enable defendants to appeal large awards
for punitive damages by posting a bond for compensatory damages and
the first million dollars of punitive damages. In conclusion, Mr. McClure
said this is a fair, moderate and appropriate public policy. Without a cap
on damages, you have no way of knowing what the jury award will be.
Without a cap, people are encouraged to litigate. With the current law,
some courts have said they are not sure what the requirement is.
Because of this type of confusion, the statute hasn’t served its function as
well as the coalition would like. It is difficult to understand when non-economic damages are not objectively verifiable. Punitive damages are
designed to punish the wrongdoer. In any action seeking recovery of
punitive damages, the claimant must prove by clear and convincing
evidence, oppressive, fraudulent, malicious or outrageous conduct.

CON: Dave Kerrick, legislative affairs counsel for the Idaho Trial Lawyers
Association, was recognized to present the opposition’s side. Mr. Kerrick
said the bill protects out of state interests. Doctors are requesting this bill,
although it does not deal with doctors. There never has been a punitive
damage awarded against a doctor in the state of Idaho. The $250,000
cap limits everyone. There is no data showing that a problem exists.
Opinions and conjecture have been voiced. This would create a greater
work load for the courts. There is no discussion about additional social
costs and the bill would seem to shift deterrents away. Tort reform will not
cut insurance prices. Mr. Kerrick gave the members a report entitled
“Premium Deceit,” a comprehensive review of the impact of tort law
changes on insurance and loss cost to date. The study finds that states
with little or no tort law restrictions have experienced the same level of
insurance rates as those states that enacted severe restrictions on
victim’s rights. In conclusion, Mr. Kerrick asked what the consideration
was for passing this kind of legislation when insurance rates are a
function of business and investment cycles in the insurance industry and
not a function of Idaho claims. Idaho currently has a very comprehensive
tort reform bill.
PRO: Steve Millard, president of the Idaho Hospital Association, was
recognized. Mr. Millard said he represents hospitals throughout the state.
Some of the cost drivers for health care are wages, salaries,
pharmaceutical costs and malpractice insurance. A small hospital in the
state had an increase of 54% in its insurance premiums. This cost of
insurance already impacts under-served areas of the state. The hospitals
are angry about the large premium increases which are caused because
of the growth and severity of the claims. The cap will possibly, in the long
run, mitigate against higher premiums.
CON: Kurt Holzer, attorney in private practice, was recognized. Mr. Holzer said
data indicates that punitive damage awards in Idaho are very uncommon.
Responses to a survey question indicated in all the cases presided over
by judges in 235 years of combined experience, there were a total of 20
cases in which punitive damages were awarded. Over the past two years
punitive damages were awarded in less than one case in a thousand.
Idaho juries are smart and will do the right thing. Insurance reform and
arbitration could be the answers to the problems. In conclusion, Mr.
Holzer asked the members to hold the bill in committee and allow all
interested parties to work on drafting new legislation.
PRO: Greg Nelson, representing the 57,400 members of the Idaho Farm
Bureau Federation was recognized. Dr. Nelson said the Federation
represents over half of the farmers in the state of Idaho and the
Federation supports H 92. Rural Idaho has trouble keeping medical
professionals because of the high insurance rates to protect doctors from
malpractice. Also, farmers in general use burnings that create dust and
noise. This bill puts some parameters on what is happening in this state.
CON: Wayne Soward, Idaho Trial Lawyers Association. Mr. Soward said
significant factors affecting Idaho insurance rates are financial markets,
reinsuirance payments, dividends, claims against insured, governmental
rate regulation and state minimum surplus requirements. Insurance
companies in the 1990’s were guilty of underpricing. When the market
turned around, they needed to increase their premiums. Some
companies have gone out of business because of lack of reinsurance
payments. H 92 will not stabilize insurance rates and will not cause rates
to go down.
PRO: Frank Vander Sloot, president and CEO of Melaleuca was recognized.
Mr. Vander Sloot said he also serves on the board of the Chamber of
Commerce. Tort reform is the United States Chamber of Commerce’s
highest priority. The United States Chamber did a survey of businesses.
Close to 80% of large businesses look at the environment of potential
litigation before they locate. Please make Idaho a better place to do
business. The current system invites attorneys to sue. Idaho needs tort
reform.
CON: John Keenan, attorney, was recognized to testify. Mr. Keenan said the
nature of freedom is the ability to choose. Idaho needs a responsible
independent jury system to make these types of decisions. The question
is, do we trust our people to do well. The right of the jury is most
important. In a free society, the jury is an essential check. This bill does
not address all the concerns.
PRO: Dan Chadwick, executive director of the Idaho Association of Counties,
was recognized. Mr. Chadwick asked the members to support the bill.
County government has the same concerns and problems. Counties get
sued just because of the job they do. Mr. Chadwick expressed concern
about the stability of the court system. This will not solve the insurance
crisis, but it lets us keep dollars in the tort area in check.
CON: Breck Barton of Rexburg was recognized. Mr. Barton said he has close
ties with the medical profession. There is concern about liability rates. A
whole myriad drive the rates up. There are already two forms of caps on
damages. There is a double check and balance system. If the data can
be accessed on what is really driving insurance rates up, perhaps a
handle can be obtained on the problem. Ask yourselves what lives are
worth. Our system of justice through the jury is a good system. The limit
of $250,000 is too small in certain serious cases.
PRO: Pete Skamser, state director of the National Federation of Independent
Business, was recognized. Mr. Skamser said NFIB/Idaho represents
7,000 small and medium sized businesses. Members have been
reporting the cost of liability insurance has been increasing significantly.
The structure of our laws relating to tort or liability law is something that
needs to be addressed and modified by the Legislature. The refining of
the law on joint and several liability, caps on non-economic damages and
punitive damages is important. Please pass H 92.
CON: Bryan Smith, attorney from Idaho Falls, was recognized. Mr. Smith said
no one has mentioned that losing a leg, for example, might be worth more
than $250,000. This will cost the state money. Health policies provided
to employers are provided by government law. This bill isn’t going to
affect any employer’s health insurance rates. When the risk is reduced, it
makes it harder to settle cases.
PRO: Ken Harwood, executive director of the Association of Idaho Cities was
recognized. Mr. Harwood spoke in support of H 92, saying the Cities
have had a long-standing interest in liability reform. H 92 could have a
positive influence on the Idaho business community. It provides for
fairness, balance and predictability.
CON: Lee James, attorney and farmer, was recognized. Mr. James said he has
represented individuals in this state who have been involved in litigation.
No facts have been presented that support a rational relationship through
the perceived need for this type of cap. With a damage cap in place,
insurance premiums have been increased. Insurance reform works.
Damage caps don’t work. Please hold this bill in Committee and see if
concerned parties can come up with a bill that will address the whole
problem.
PRO: Steve Ahrens, president of the Idaho Association of Commerce & Industry
was recognized. IACI represents about 300 member companies of all
kinds and all sizes. The members are aware of the problems that are run
into routinely in the business world that have caused support of H 92.
When people are hurt, they should be compensated for their tangible,
verifiable losses. H 92 does not change that in any way, Victims will still
be fully compensated for their economic losses. There must be some
reasonable limitations on those non-economic claims. H 92 will still allow
substantial awards for even these kinds of losses. The bill offers our best
chance to improve fairness, lower costs and prevent abuses in the legal
system that Idaho businesses face.
CON: Michael Jorgensen was recognized to testify. Mr. Jorgensen said he
appreciated the opportunity to appear before the Committee. As an
attorney, Mr. Jorgensen said there has to be accountability on both sides.
If the checks and balances are removed, the system cannot work
Punitive damages are absolutely necessary.
PRO: Alex LaBeau, government affairs director for the Idaho Association of
Realtors, was recognized. The Idaho Association of Realtors is a
member of the Idaho Liability Reform Coalition and has been for over a
decade. The Association supports the changes proposed in H 92. It is
believed that the proposed amendments will help control the insurance
rates over the long term. H 92 is designed to reduce the incentive to file
claims that have little merit. The real estate industry is being ravaged by
mold claims. Mold is the current issue for trial lawyers seeking
settlements from the real estate industry. This change to Idaho’s law will
be a significant disincentive to lawyers and plaintiffs. Tort reform is
designed to provide a realistic, reasonable and responsible change to tort
that will begin to stem the causes of increasing insurance rates.
CON: Andrew Chason, president of the Idaho Trial Lawyers Association, was
recognized. Mr. Chason asked the members to hold this bill in
Committee. The real problem is not runaway jury awards. The doctors of
this state have been gouged by insurance companies. The trial lawyers
want to be part of drafting legislation to resolve the problem. Tort reform
does not change the system. There can be real solutions such as
insurance regulation and arbitration. Give both sides a chance to get
together to provide a mutually agreeable solution.
PRO: Julie Taylor, director of governmental affairs for Blue Cross, was
recognized. Ms. Taylor said Blue Cross is a member of the Idaho Liability
Reform Coalition which has focused its efforts on tort reform since the late
1980s. Blue Cross is interested in the issue due to the impact it will have
on the healthcare industry. The cost of malpractice insurance is also
causing physicians to practice defensive medicine and some patients are
experiencing reduced access to care as physicians retire early or refuse
to perform certain high-risk procedures. This bill will help the insurance
industry immensely.
CON: Jeff Roper, businessman and school teacher, was recognized. From
1996 until 2001, Mr. Roper and his wife were plaintiffs in a medical
malpractice lawsuit which was very expensive. This bill would cap all
non-economic damages in civil cases at $250,000. No pain and suffering
award can exceed that amount. Mr. Roper said his wife’s life is worth
much more than $250,000. Capping awards is not a solution to the
problems.
PRO: Bob Seehusen, CEO of the Idaho Medical Association was recognized.
Mr. Seehusen said the in Idaho insurance rates are based on specific
Idaho data. Rates will not go down because of this legislation, but they
will stabilize. This bill will always pay 100% of economic damages and
those costs will always keep going up.
CON: Jay Friedly, attorney from Mountain Home, was recognized. Mr. Friedly
said he has always tried to help people. Under this legislation, people will
not be fairly compensated.
PRO: Jeff Martin, CEO of the Medical Center in Moscow, was recognized. Mr.
Martin said H 92 provides a solution to a problem. Frivolous law suits
would be prevented by this bill.
CON: Karleen Savage was recognized. Ms. Savage stated that juries should be
allowed to make decisions on damages. The judicial system should be
trusted. This is not a good bill.
PRO: John Eaton, representing the Idaho Building Contractors Association, was
recognized. Mr. Eaton asked that the members support the legislation.
There is a crisis in insurance premiums. This bill will help solve the
problem.
CON: Ken Kavanaugh was recognized. Mr. Kavanaugh said he respects our
current system. There is extreme difficulty in obtaining an award where
there isn’t a good case.
PRO: Ray Stark, representing the Boise Chamber of Commerce and its 1700
members, was recognized. Mr. Stark said this is an economic
development issue. Passage of this bill will improve the economic outlook
in the state of Idaho.
CON: Sonja Clyne was recognized. Ms. Clyne said H 92 is a bad law. Please
vote against it. Non-economic damages are real and victims should be
compensated accordingly.
PRO: Skip Smyser, representing the Idaho Liability Reform Coalition, spoke in
support of H 92.
CON: Ed Wuelfing was recognized. Mr. Wuelfing said he owns a small heating
and air conditioning company. The $250,000 cap is too arbitrary.
PRO: Jerry Davis, representing the Idaho State Dental Association, was
recognized. Mr. Davis said the State Dental Association supports H 92.
CON: Pam Dowd, breast cancer survivor, was recognized. Ms. Dowd said she
has been victimized by the system. The $250,000 settlement will be used
up in approximately 6.8 years. When the settlement is gone, who takes
care of the injured person. The taxpayer ends up paying the tab for
medical and living expenses.
PRO: Pam Eaton, Idaho Retailers Association, was recognized. Ms. Eaton said
this is an important issue to the retailers. It is extremely important to the
small business owners. Ms. Eaton asked that the bill be passed.
CON: David Ripley, Idaho Chooses Life, was recognized. Mr. Ripley asked that
H 92 be rejected. He said the legislation was especially unfair to women.
PRO: Jack Lyman, Idaho Manufactured Housing and Idaho Mining, spoke in
support of the legislation.
CON: Ken Howard, attorney, Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, said the law providing for
several liability and punitive damages was able to stop the violence by the
Aryan Nations in north Idaho. Accountability and deterrence are major
issues. The punitive damage is to punish the wrongdoer directly. With
this limit on damages, the violence in north Idaho would not have been
deterred.
PRO: Jane Gorsuch, Associated Logging Contractors, was recognized. Ms.
Gorsuch stood in support of H 92. ALC represents over 400 independent
logging contractors from every part of Idaho. The members constantly
face increasing costs of liability insurance. This bill could be the
difference between bankruptcy and solvency in many small business
situations. Please pass the bill.
PRO: Lyn Darrington, Idaho Association of Health Plans and Regence Blue
Shield of Idaho, stood in support of H 92.
CLOSING: Ken McClure was recognized to give closing remarks. Mr. McClure said
drawing the line on the amount of punitive damages was not an easy
issue. A copy of Tort Reform was given to the trial lawyers before it was
finally drafted. No one has asked to talk about a compromise with this
legislation. Mr. McClure said he couldn’t promise that insurance rates will
do down, but the cost of covering a risk should go down. This legislation
does not affect medical bills and prescriptions. It affects only non-economic damages. This is not going to fix the big problem, but it is a
positive step forward. The goal was to provide a ceiling on the extent of
liability. This is an important piece of legislation. Please support it.
MOTION: Representative Ellsworth moved to send H 92 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Sali moved to send H 92 to General Orders with
committee amendments attached.
Representative Sali gave each
member a copy of the proposed amendments (attached).
AMENDED
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Smith moved to hold H 92 in Committee with the
request that a task force be formed to study the matter and bring it
back next year.
In support of the motion, Representative Smith said
physicians seem to think insurance rates will go down, but this bill doesn’t
cause that to happen. The language needs to be worked on by all
concerned parties. Representative Ellsworth spoke against the amended
substitute motion. This issue has been studied and worked on. It
presents a reasonable solution. This is a start to solve the problems.
These costs need to be under control. Representative Ring spoke in
favor of sending the bill to the floor. Representative Clark spoke in favor
of the amended substitute motion saying the same voters who elected the
representatives sit on juries. If this type of cap goes into place, it says we
don’t trust the jurors. This is not good policy. Representative Bieter
spoke in favor of the amended substitute motion. Representative Kulczyk
spoke in favor of the amended substitute motion.



Chairman Field turned the gavel over to Vice Chairman Clark in order to
speak to the bill. Representative Field asked “when is enough enough?”
You can’t pay a person enough money to get rid of their pain and
suffering. Under this bill, damages would be paid. Representative Field
cited personal experiences with the medical system and said never once
did the thought come up to sue anyone for malpractice. This is a good
start in public policy. Enough is enough. Representative Edmunson said
the bill is the right step in the right direction. This is a difficult issue. It
should be sent to the floor of the House.



Representative Clark called for the question. This is a non-debatable
motion. This requires a 2/3 majority vote. It was voted unanimously.
Debate on the Amended Substitute Motion was closed.

ROLL CALL
VOTE:
Voting AYE-Representatives Clark, Sali, Smith, Kulczyk, Bieter and
Andersen. Voting NAY-Representatives Field, Ellsworth, Ridinger,
Harwood, Edmunson, Nielsen, Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe. 6-10. Motion
failed.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Chairman Field said roll call vote was requested.
ROLL CALL
VOTE:
Voting AYE-Representatives Clark, Sali, Smith, Kulczyk, Boe, Bieter,
Andersen. Voting NAY-Representatives Field, Ellsworth, Ridinger,
Harwood, Edmunson, Nielsen, Ring, Shirley, Wills. 7-9. Motion failed.
ORIGINAL
MOTION:
Chairman Field said the Original Motion was to send H 92 to the floor
with a Do Pass recommendation.
Roll call vote was requested.
ROLL CALL
VOTE:
Voting AYE-Representatives Field, Ellsworth, Ridinger, Harwood,
Edmunson, Neilsen, Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe. Voting NAY-Representatives Clark. Sali, Smith, Kulczyk, Bieter, Andersen. 10-6.
Motion carried.
Representative Field will carry the bill on the floor.
ADJOURN: There being no further business to come before the Committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m.






DATE: February 17, 2003
TIME: 1:30 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Representative Edmunson
GUESTS: See attached sign-in sheet.
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Wills moved to accept the minutes of
the meeting held on February 13, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
Chairman Field said three bills were referred to our Committee that rightly
belonged in the Health and Welfare Committee. Those bills were H 160
pertaining to the termination of parental rights, H 167 pertaining to child
protection/parents with disability and H 213 pertaining to sterilization. If
there were no objections, those bills would be transferred. There were no
objections, so the bills were so transferred.
H 123: Representative Andersen was recognized to explain the bill.
Representative Andersen said the purpose of the bill is to change the
maximum possible prison sentence for the crime of incest from 10 years
to 25 years. The legislation does not establish a minimum sentence.
Under current Idaho law, the crime of rape is treated more seriously than
incest. There is as much or more trauma caused with incest and the law
needs to indicate that. This increase is important. Please send the bill to
the floor with a Do Pass recommendation. Representative Andersen
asked to yield to the co-sponsor of the bill, Representative Elaine Smith.
Representative Smith said when this issue was brought forward,
Representatives Andersen and Smith met with a victim of incest. This is a
very straightforward bill. It increases the possible prison sentence to a
maximum of 25 years. Judges feel that this bill will allow them more
flexibility.
PRO: Gloria Myler was recognized to give her testimony. Ms. Myler said no one
knows the impact a child goes through when their father rapes them. This
kills a person inside. If you are raped by your father, you must spend
every day seeing that person. The damage that is done by a family
member most often tortures the victims throughout their life. I have finally
reached a place where I am a survivor. Even as an adult, I was raped
again and again. She asked what sort of heritage her children would
have. She has three children by her father. One of the children is slightly
mentally retarded. There are many women who suffer from incest. The
current 10 year maximum sentence is hardly a deterrent. Rape is rape
and sentencing should be consistent, whether it is called rape or incest.
Perhaps incest should be punished more severely.
MOTION: Representative Bieter moved to send H 123 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
Representative Bieter said the higher maximum
sentence is good policy. Representative Wills said the real issue is what
the courts are doing in these cases. The judges are not giving the
maximum sentence. Perhaps the bill should have mandatory time.
Representative Ring said the punishment is way too light.
PRO: Sue Follmer was recognized. Ms. Follmer said she supports the bill. Ms.
Follmer is the mother of two daughters that were victims of incest. The
suffering of the victim is in no way lessened when rape is done by a family
member. Due to threats, shame and fear, the victim often remains silent.
Rape is rape regardless of whether the victim is a family member or not.
Please send H 123 to the House floor.
PRO: Lisa Mecham was recognized. Ms. Mecham said she comes before the
Committee to ask the members to vote yes on H 123. Ms. Mecham said
she is a survivor of incest. She was molested by her brother when she
was she was 15, a person she should have been able to trust. She was
told that she deserved it. Her brother threatened to kill her if she told
anyone. She didn’t tell her parents or anyone else. After a particularly
brutal rape, she finally told her parents. The brother left home, but has
never received any kind of punishment for what he did. The scars from
this will always be there and will always run deep. Many of these abusers
are never punished. Please increase the penalty so it will become some
type of deterrent.
PRO: Tom Myler, husband of Gloria Myler, was recognized to testify. Mr. Myler
said he is very proud of his wife. He is very disgusted with prosecutors’
failure to prosecute these cases. There have been hundreds of cases of
rape, but only three were tried. These people must be deterred. This is a
bad crime and the victims need some sort of closure. The punishment
needs to be increased even more, but in the meantime, please pass this
legislation.
PRO: Melissa Bean was recognized. Ms. Bean said she works with victims of
child abuse and victims of rape. These people are terrorized and they are
damaged. People who terrorize family members need to be punished.
This bill is a good place to start.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Ring moved to send H 123 to General Orders with the
following committee amendments: add a comma after the “years” on
line 11 and add “not to exceed life in prison when the defendant was
an adult at the time of the offense.”



Heather Reilly was recognized to answer a question regarding the
difference in the punishment of a juvenile and the punishment of an adult.
Ms. Reilly said a juvenile would receive a maximum penalty of 180 days
detention unless that juvenile is waived into adult court. Representative
Sali spoke against the substitute motion and in favor of the original
motion. It is the job of the Legislature to give tools to the prosecutors to
enable them to do their job. Representative Clark spoke in favor of the
original motion.

QUESTION: Representative Shirley called for the question, a non-debatable motion
requiring a 2/3 majority. Motion passed.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Chairman Field said the substitute motion was to send H 123 to General
Orders with committee amendments attached. Motion failed.
ORIGINAL
MOTION:
Chairman Field said the original motion was to send H 123 to the floor
with a Do Pass recommendation. Motion carried. Representatives
Andersen and Smith will carry the bill on the floor.
H 169 Representative Tom Trail and Representative Gary Young were
recognized to explain the bill. This bill amends Idaho Code 18-1601
regarding rape by clarifying the act of rape, particularly in instances where
the act is perpetrated on females who are limited in their ability to make
reasonable consent. It is believed that these proposed changes will
improve the ability to prosecute, as well as increase the level of
deterrence to individuals to commit rape on women whose will to resist
may be impaired. Representative Young said he started working on this
legislation last October. Representative Young is a volunteer chaplain
and works with victims and people who advocate for victims. Many of
these perpetrators will never be prosecuted.
PRO: Angie Fisch was recognized. Ms. Fisch said she is a senior at the
University of Idaho. She is in favor of the bill because she is a victim of
rape and has gone through all of the court proceedings in an attempt to
convict the offender. She was let down by the system, specifically the
way the rape laws are worded and defined. During her freshman year,
she was date raped after being handed a drink which had a substance
added to it which caused the rest of the evening to be a blur. She has
recollections of coming in and out of consciousness while being raped.
She decided to report the incident at the urging of her friends. That was
the beginning of a long, drawn out and emotionally draining experience.
The perpetrator admitted his guilt. The evidence seemed overwhelming
but she was warned that anything is possible in rape cases. The jury
could not convict the perpetrator without a reasonable doubt. Ms. Fisch
said she could not stress enough that Idaho’s rape laws need to be
amended. Something must be done to help deter the crime of rape and
protect the victims.
PRO: Heather Reilly with the Idaho Prosecuting Attorneys Association was
recognized. Ms. Reilly said the prosecutors support the amendment to
the rape statute. There have been difficulties prosecuting these cases in
the past due to the existing statute. This amendment would assist
prosecutors to prosecute these cases successfully.
PRO: Sgt. Dan Bruce with the Moscow Police Department was recognized. In
Moscow, there are a considerable number of date or acquaintance type
rape cases. The current statute works well for attacks by strangers, but is
ineffective in the majority of date rape cases. Sgt. Bruce was involved in
the prosecution of the Angie Fisch case. He searched the suspect’s
home and found a substance which induces a deep sleep. Later research
showed the substance metabolizes inside the human body to GBL, a
common date rape drug. The case went to trial and the judge ruled that
the substance seized from the suspect, which metabolizes into GBL, was
inadmissible. The judge ruled that allowing the jury to hear about the
substance was too prejudicial to the defendant. The jury found the
suspect not guilty. The jury felt Ms. Fisch was raped, but could not find
the suspect guilty under Idaho law. Approximately 7 to 10 girls come to
the police each year with similar incidents. Prosecutors are very reluctant
to take these cases to trial, knowing most people will question whether
the victim was unconscious of the nature of the act and whether the
perpetrator know it at the time. Sgt. Bruce said he strongly supports the
proposed changes to the statute. These changes are needed to protect
women and hold men accountable.
PRO: Don Lazzarini, retired criminal investigator, was recognized. Mr. Lazzarini
said he has been assisting at the University of Idaho as a resource
specialist. Date rape has many of the same dynamics as incest. The
Idaho law is resistance based. In 1985 a national research was done
which showed that approximately 1/4 of all college-age women have
experienced sexual assault on campus. 95% of these cases are not
reported. Mr. Lazzarini asked for a yes vote on the bill. There have been
loopholes in the law in the past and this legislation corrects those
problems.
PRO: Valerie Russo was recognized. Ms. Russo said she works with survivors
of sexual abuse. She is here to support H 169. It will help the few women
who come forward to report the crime.
MOTION: Representative Ring moved to send H 169 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Sali moved to send H 169 to General Orders with
committee amendments attached as follows: adding to the list on
page 2, lines 13 and 20, subsections 8 and 9.
Representative Sali said
there should not be a statute of limitations on those acts set out in
subsections 8 and 9. Representative Clark felt there was too much
duplication in the bill. Representative Nielsen and Representative
Ridinger spoke in support of the motion.
ROLL CALL
VOTE:
Voting AYE-Representatives Field, Sali, Ridinger, Harwood, Kulczyk,
Nielsen, Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Andersen. Voting NAY-Representatives Clark, Smith, Bieter. 11-3-2. Motion carried.
Representative Trail will carry the bill and Representative Sali will carry
the amendments on the floor.
H 216: Representative Shirley was recognized to explain. Representative Shirley
said it is necessary to increase the previously established cap on the
amount that the Board of Certified Shorthand Reporters can charge for
renewal fees. Increasing the fee will provide the board with the flexibility
to adopt, by rule, renewal fees that exceed the currently established
amounts.
MOTION: Representative Sali moved to send H 216 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
H 217: Dar Olberding was recognized to explain. Mr. Olberding said a farmer
who has fields he wants to burn has to go through all kinds of training
before he can do this. Also, bailing of hay takes place late at night, which
is a normal practice. This bill only addresses people who have done
everything in accordance with the law.
PRO: Dr. Greg Nelson was recognized. Dr. Nelson represents the Idaho Farm
Bureau Federation. He said this bill simply clarifies the language of the
statute. Section 52-108 says nothing which is done or maintained under
the express authority of a statute can be deemed a nuisance. This
amendment only adds the term “public or private.”
CON: Della Johnson was recognized. Ms. Johnson said we are still bound by
the laws of the United States of America, including the Clean Air Act. The
Farm Bureau’s attempt to amend this bill to remove the constitutional right
of Idaho citizens to seek redress in the courts when they have been
physically damaged is beneath contempt. It is immoral to protect, under
guise of state law, behavior that can bring permanent physical damage to
one’s neighbor. Ms. Johnson asked that the bill be killed.
PRO: Glenda Talbot, attorney, was recognized. Ms. Talbot said the whole point
of the amendment is simply to make clearer what was already in the
statute. It more clearly defines what a nuisance is.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to hold H 217 in committee.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Ridinger moved to send H 217 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation.
AMENDED
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION;
Representative Sali moved to hold H 217 in committee for a time
certain being Tuesday, February 25, 2003, to allow the proponents a
chance to correct the language and bring the bill back with an
amendment to solve the problem. Motion carried.
H 247: Larry Benton was recognized to explain the bill. Mr. Benton said it is a
pleasure to come before this Committee for the first time in 15 years. He
gave the members a handout regarding Amber Alert of Idaho. Mr. Benton
said the purpose of this legislation is to give immunity to broadcasters
when voluntarily using the “Amber Alert” system for the purpose of finding
kidnaped and abducted children. The bill will also create an Amber Alert
communications system; establish voluntary minimum standards for
coordination between various Amber Plans, provide $20 million for a

matching grant program in the Department of Transportation and provide
$5 million for a matching grant program in the Department of Justice,
which would assist in the costs for education, training and related
equipment for Amber Plans.

MOTION: Representative Wills moved to send H 247 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Wills will carry the
bill on the floor.
ADJOURN: Prior to adjournment, Chairman Field said the Committee will hear one bill
on Wednesday on the issue of capital punishment of the mentally
retarded. There being no further business to come before the Committee,
the meeting was adjourned at 4:15 p.m.






DATE: February 19, 2003
TIME: 1:30 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Vice Chairman Clark
GUESTS: Caralee Lambert; LaMont Anderson; Rolf Kehne, Idaho Assoc. of Criminal
Defense Lawyers; Heather Reilly, IPAA; Roger Bourne, IPAA; Molly
Huskeyi, Appellate Public Defender; Mike Keithly, Idaho State
Independent Living Council, Marty Durand, ACLU
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Ridinger moved to accept the
minutes of the meeting held on February 17, as written. Motion carried.
H 171: Chairman Field recognized Caralee Lambert to go through the bill and
explain. Ms. Lambert said under the new section of the bill, imposition of
the death penalty upon mentally retarded persons is prohibited. Sections
(1)(a) and (b) define mental retardation. Section (2) provides that the
defendant who claims mental retardation shall give notice to the court at
least 90 days in advance of trial. Section (3) requires that the jury not be
informed of the mental retardation hearing or the court’s findings. Section
(4) sets out provisions for a special sentencing proceeding. An
emergency clause is included in the bill.
PRO: LaMont Anderson, deputy attorney general, was recognized. Mr.
Anderson said a year ago he was before the Committee testifying against
a similar bill. That was before the United States Supreme Court decision
in the Atkins case. The attorney general’s office is now in favor of this
legislation. Pursuant to this legislation, the issue of mental retardation
would be raised and determined by the court, pretrial. Mental retardation
means significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning
accompanied by significant limitations in day-to-day living skills. The
onset of significant subaverage general intelligence must occur before the
age of 18 years. Significant subaverage intelligence means an
intelligence quotient of 70 or below. The legislation would also set forth a
fixed life term if the jury finds beyond a reasonable doubt any statutory
aggravating circumstances.
CON: Rolf Kehne, criminal defense lawyer, was recognized. Mr. Kehne said he
has been in practice for 25 years. He is in favor of this movement
generally, but has concerns. This finding should be established through a
jury. The definition of mental retardation seems to emphasize the IQ
results. Mild retardation is in the range of 55 to 70, which is not
necessarily right. A person with an IQ of 73 might not be able to live
alone. If the judge cannot decide that the defendant is mentally retarded,
then the jury should be allowed to make that decision.
PRO: Heather Reilly, representing the Idaho Prosecuting Attorneys Association,
stood in support of the bill. The prosecuting attorneys were one of the
members at the table during the discussion held by the attorney general.
PRO: Roger Bourne, Ada County prosecuting attorney, was recognized. Even
though the United States Supreme Court ruled that mentally retarded
people could not be executed, the Court did not give guidelines on
defining mental retardation, so the committee studying the issue drafted
this legislation to establish guidelines and definitions. Those involved
worked diligently on the language. An IQ of 70 was chosen in order to
have a hard number to enable the court to make its decision.
PRO: Mike Keithly was recognized. Mr. Keithly said the Idaho State
Independent Living Council supports the bill.
CON: Marty Durand with the ACLU was recognized. Ms. Durand said the ACLU
opposes the death penalty under all circumstances. The Atkins and the
Ring decisions complicate the issue. This legislation could possibly be
declared unconstitutional. A bifurcated approach would make sense. Ms.
Durand questioned whether the bill would be applied retroactively for the
people currently on death row.
PRO: Molly Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender, was recognized. Ms.
Huskey said she sat on the committee that drafted this legislation. A
survey was done of all 50 states. The committee then compiled all the
information. Ms. Huskey said she is in favor of this bill for several
reasons. The reason there is a pretrial determination is that is how the
competency of a person to stand trial is judged. The issue of mental
retardation is not an issue for a jury to decide. It is a legal determination
to be made by a judge. This legislation could apply in post convictions.
This will have to be determined by the Supreme Court. Several
definitions of mental retardation were looked at and Senator Darrington
and Representative Field made the final decision. A mentally retarded
person will still stand trial to receive a sentence.
MOTION: Representative Ring moved to send H 171 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
Representative Bieter expressed his appreciation for
the work that had been done in drafting the legislation. However, he
expressed concern over the jury component and the mandatory minimum
sentence. Representative Wills spoke in favor of the bill. Representative
Sali said he would support the bill, but he was disappointed that after
working to level the playing field for people with disabilities, they are now
advocating to be treated differently. Motion carried. Representative
Bieter asked to be recorded as voting “no.” Representative Field will carry
the bill on the floor.

ADJOURN: There being no further business to come before the Committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 2:30 p.m.






DATE: February 25, 2003
TIME: 2:04 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Representative Nielsen
GUESTS: Heather Reilly, Prosecuting Attorneys Assoc.; Shelley Armstrong, Deputy
Ada County Prosecutor; Detective Ken Smith; Sandy Evans, Board of
Nursing; Brenda Field; John Southworth; Nancy Kerr, Idaho Board of
Medicine; Steve Millard, Idaho Hospital Assoc.; Jim Jones
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Ring moved to accept the minutes of
the meeting held on February 19, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
H 217: The Chairman reminded the members that this bill was held for a time
certain until February 25. Because there are other similar bills in another
Committee, there will be a meeting held on all of the bills in the Gold
Room on March 6, 2003, at 1:30 p.m. Chairman Field asked that H 217
be held at the discretion of the Chairman to be heard in the Gold
Room on March 6, 2003.
There being no objection, H 217 was so held.
H 221: The Chairman said the sponsor asked that H 221 be held in Committee.
H 266 has been drafted and takes the place of H 221. There being no
objection, H 221 was held in Committee.
H 215: Jim Jones was recognized to explain the bill. Mr. Jones said last year the
Legislature approved legislation to make drug tampering a felony offense.
The legislation was proposed by the Attorney General’s office, following
the death of Kaleb Marr. A licensed registered nurse employed by St.
Alphonsus tampered with drugs that were administered to Kaleb,
contributing to his death. The nurse had substance abuse problems for
about five years and had lost a previous job. This should have been
reported to the Board of Nursing. The hospital claimed it conducted a
background check and received no information on her abuse.



This bill was drafted to remedy this problem. It adds a new section to the
code requiring the prospective employer of designated categories of
health care providers to request information from the state licensing board
about a prospective employee’s past history of abuse of controlled
substances. The employer would make the request only when the
prospective employee is expected to handle or dispense any controlled
substance during employment. The licensing board would be obligated to
furnish any information it had in its files about the licensee’s abuse of a
controlled substance. This obligation would supersede any existing
confidentiality provision contained in various licensing acts or regulations.
The employer would be obligated to keep the information confidential.

PRO: Mr. Jones asked to yield to Brenda Field. Ms. Field said her son Kaleb
died because of drug tampering. Please pass this bill so that this won’t
happen to others.
MOTION: Representative Wills moved to send H 215 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
CON: Sandy Evans, executive director of the Board of Nursing, was recognized.
Ms. Evans said the bill does not define what constitutes information about
substance abuse. It requires that any prospective employer can make
inquiry of the board for information about substance abuse. Ms. Evans
asked about the determination of who is a prospective employer and the
liability for disclosure of information. Premature disclosure could result in
a disadvantage to the board in completing the investigative process and
bringing the matter to its appropriate resolution. The board’s concern is
not necessarily with those nurses enrolled in a recovery program. It is
with those nurses who have a problem that the board is unaware of. This
bill may force nurses suffering from chemical addiction to resort to denial
and secrecy. The bill will not prevent drug tampering and drug theft. It
will most likely result in confusion about prospective employees,
increased risk of liability for licensing boards and decreased effectiveness
of the Board’s Program for Recovering Nurses.
CON: John Southworth was recognized. Mr. Southworth owns Southworth
Association which monitors drug abuse cases for the Idaho Medical
Association, the Board of Nursing, dentists and attorneys. Mr. Southworth
just celebrated 20 years of sobriety. He opposes the bill because Idaho’s
current statutes work. A federal regulation of confidentiality was passed
in 1993. The cases are monitored on a regular basis for a minimum of 5
years. Forty percent of abusers come into the program voluntarily.
CON: Nancy Kerr, executive director of the Idaho Board of Medicine, was
recognized. Ms. Kerr said the Board of Medicine is concerned about the
bill and its effect on the physician recovery programs available. One of
the benefits of licensure in this state is the ability to seek voluntary
treatment for abuse/addiction problems and to continue to practice in a
monitored system that insures public safety. This bill might send those
with drug abuse problems back into the shadows. The programs required
by the legislation of 1993 have worked well and will continue to work well.
CON: Steve Millard, president of the Idaho Hospital Association, was
recognized. Mr. Millard said the hospitals are concerned that this bill
does not really reach the people who should be reached. The Board of
Nursing has monitoring in place. The worry should be about a new nurse
and there is nothing that can be done about this except good employee
screening. When a nurse enters a voluntary program, she has no license.
The program must be completed in order to get the license back. This bill
will not prevent tragic accidents. The bill doesn’t appear to solve any
problem. There are already protections in place.
PRO: Mr. Jones was recognized to give concluding remarks. Mr. Jones said the
bill gives the public a little more protection while keeping as much
confidentiality as is possible. This bill is a good solution to an existing
problem.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Bieter moved to hold H 215 for a time certain until
Thursday, February 27, 2003
to allow concerns to be addressed.
Division was called. Motion failed.
ORIGINAL
MOTION:
The original motion was to send H 215 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representatives Bieter, Ellsworth,
Smith, Boe and Andersen asked to be recorded as voting ‘No” on the
motion. Representative Wills will carry the bill on the floor.
H 220: Heather Reilly was recognized to testify. Ms. Reilly said this is a
housekeeping bill making Idaho Code Section 19-1601 consistent with
Idaho Code Section 19-1114 and 19-1115. In 2000, the Legislature
amended Sections 19-1114 and 19-1115, removing “transactional
immunity” language. However, at that time Section 19-1601(5) was
overlooked. This bill deletes the language in this section to make the law
consistent with the other two sections.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to send H 220 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Clark will carry the
bill on the floor.
H 266: Heather Reilly was recognized. Ms. Reilly said the purpose of this
legislation is to create a new statute criminalizing the use of the Internet to
entice, solicit, seduce, lure or persuade a child to engage in a sexual act.
Currently, Idaho law does not have a statute to address this common and
dangerous type of communication that targets children for sexual
purposes. This is a prevention measure. It is modeled after current
statutes, as well as Utah’s laws. The maximum penalty is 15 years. This
crime is a felony. Ms. Reilly asked to yield to Shelley Armstrong, deputy
prosecuting attorney.



Ms. Armstrong walked the members through the various ways that a
sexual solicitor has available to entice children through the internet via e-mail, instant messaging, chat rooms and bulletin boards. According to a
poll taken in 1999, 82% of teenagers, ages 13-17, used the internet for e-mail, chat rooms or visiting websites. Also, in 1999, 24 million children,
ages 10-17, went on line regularly. Of 1,501 children, 1 in 17 were
threatened, 1 in 4 were exposed to unwanted pornography, 1 in 5 were
exposed to a sexual solicitation and 1 in 33 received an aggressive
sexual solicitation. Parents and police are not aware of these
solicitations. Ms. Armstrong went on to point out how personal
information can be obtained on children through teachers’ homepages,
even though the teachers create these homepages in order to help
students. Sexual solicitors can even obtain driving directions through the
internet to find children’s homes. The internet allows predators to openly
discuss their sexual desires, to share ideas about ways to lure victims,
ready access to teen chat rooms and the means to identify and track
down home contact information. It also grants them anonymity and safety
from capture while grooming victims. Currently, attempted lewd conduct
is extremely difficult to prove. This bill will provide Idaho with a needed
tool for law enforcement.

MOTION: Representative Ring moved to send H 266 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
PRO: Detective Ken Smith was recognized to speak in support of the bill.
Detective Smith said he goes on line to try to spot these sexual solicitors.
Law enforcement has gone to great lengths to educate the public. This
type of education is not working. The bill needs to be passed.
MOTION: Motion carried. Representative Bieter will carry the bill on the floor.
ADJOURN: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:55 p.m.






DATE: February 27, 2003
TIME: 2:00 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: Representative Barrett; Representative Ringo; Dale Kleinert, Moscow
School District; Casey Green, Moscow Police; Phil Homer, IASA; Bob
Aldridge
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Ridinger moved to accept the
minutes of the meeting held on February 25, 2003, as written. Motion
carried.
HJM 4: Chairman Field recognized Representative Barrett to explain the
legislation. Representative Barrett said this House Joint Memorial urges
the Idaho delegation in the United States Congress to sponsor and
support legislation to create a new circuit of the United States Court of
Appeals for better regional representation, and to place Idaho in this new
circuit.
MOTION: Representative Harwood moved to send HJM 20 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Boe moved to send HJM 20 to General Orders with
committee amendments attached as follows: deleting lines 15
through 29 and lines 39 through 41.
In support of her motion,
Representative Boe said the resolution would be stronger without those
lines.
AMENDED
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Smith moved to hold HJM 20 in Committee.
Representative Edmunson spoke in favor of the original motion saying
putting the state in a new circuit would benefit Idaho. Representative
Harwood spoke in favor of the original motion saying Idaho needs to send
a message that it does not want to be in the 9th Circuit Court.
Representative Kulczyk and Representative Ring spoke in favor of the
original motion. Amended Substitute Motion failed.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
The substitute motion was to send HJM 20 to General Orders with
committee amendments attached. Motion failed.
ORIGINAL
MOTION:
The original motion was to send HJM 20 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representatives Andersen, Boe,
Bieter and Smith asked to be recorded as voting “No” on the motion.
Representative Barrett will carry the resolution on the floor.
H 269: Chairman Field recognized Representative Ringo to explain the bill.
Representative Ringo said there was a time when it didn’t even occur to
us that our children would not be safe in our schools. That is no longer
the case. Representative Ringo said the purpose of this legislation is to
create a new chapter of Idaho Code to provide defamation immunity for
individuals who report threats of school violence to appropriate
authorities. The legislation defines terms, procedures, and requirements
to afford defamation immunity.
PRO: Dale Kleinert with the Moscow School District was recognized. Mr.
Kleinert said he is an assistant principal and works hard to provide a
positive learning environment. This bill will help provide a safer place for
children. His school of 600 students is a community made up of students
and their families. That community must be able to feel protected enough
to furnish information on threats of school violence in good faith. A vote
for this bill is a vote for safer schools in Idaho.
PRO: Casey Green with the Moscow Police Department was recognized.
Officer Green said he works closely with school administrators. Safety of
the children is paramount, both inside and outside the schools. The
police use a reporting system where students can report incidents and
remain anonymous. This legislation would allow the police to obtain
information and the source of that information. It would allow people to
come forth and report without fear of reprisal. It would supply the police
with an excellent tool to help prevent school violence.
PRO: Phil Homer, representing the Idaho Association of School Administrators,
was recognized. Mr. Homer said the number one priority of our schools is
to provide the very best learning environment for all children. A very close
second to that responsibility is the safety of those children. Many
incidents in our schools have been played out across America in recent
years which are a constant reminder of that responsibility. This bill could
help establish an atmosphere in our schools where students who have
knowledge of potential school violence would be able to report it without
fear of reprisal. Please send the bill to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
MOTION: Representative Boe moved to send H 269 to General Orders with the
following committee amendments attached: change “principal” to
“school official or designee” and adding an emergency clause.
Motion carried.
Representatives Ringo and Boe will carry the bill on the
floor. Representative Clark asked to be recorded as voting “No” on the
motion.
H 214: Chairman Field recognized Bob Aldridge to explain the bill. Mr. Aldridge
said this bill revises the definitions of “separate property” and “community
property”, makes a technical correction and clarifies that income includes
the rents, issues and profits from various property.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to send H 214 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Clark will carry the
bill on the floor.
S 1029 Mr. Aldridge was recognized to explain. Section 6-1605, Idaho Code,
provides for limitations on civil liability of officers, directors, and volunteers
who serve without compensation for a nonprofit corporation. Part 1(f) of
the section cross references two Idaho Code Sections in the old Idaho
Nonprofit Corporations Act. However, that Act was repealed in 1993 and
a new Idaho Nonprofit Corporation Act was adopted. The cross reference
sections are now incorrect and this bill corrects those to the proper new
cross reference.
MOTION: Representative Ellsworth moved to send S 1029 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Ellsworth will
carry the bill on the floor.
S 1030 Mr. Aldridge was recognized to explain. This bill provides that when a
surviving spouse is the sole beneficiary, the petitioner or the surviving
spouse or both, need not appear in person at a hearing, but may appear
telephonically, or submit an affidavit in advance of the hearing certifying
that notice of hearing was given as required by law and no objection to
the entering of the decree was received.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to send S 1030 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Clark voted
“No” on the motion. Representative Smith will carry the bill on the floor.
S 1031 Bob Aldridge was recognized. Mr. Aldridge said this legislation adds a
new section to the Idaho Code, 15-6-107, to provide the liability of
nonprobate transferees for creditor claims and statutory allowances, to
define “nonprobate transfer,” and to provide the limits of liability of the
nonprobate transferee. It provides the order of liability of such
transferees, allows apportionment of liability in various instruments, and
provides time limits within which an action must be brought and conditions
precedent for such an action. It also provides for release of liability for
certain third party holders of interests and provides for proportionate
liability of transferees in certain situations. This bill is part of an ongoing
review and revision of this complex area to reflect modern estate planning
methods while preserving basic protections for the family of the deceased.
MOTION: Representative Nielsen moved to send S 1031 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Nielsen will
carry the bill on the floor.
S 1032 Bob Aldridge was recognized to explain. Mr. Aldridge said this bill,
relating to the death or disqualification of a sole shareholder, provides a
proper statutory citation to sections of the Idaho Nonprofit Corporation
Act, so that the Parallel References Table does not have to be consulted
to find the appropriate current sections.
MOTION: Representative Ridinger moved to send S 1032 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Ridinger will
carry the bill on the floor.
S 1033 Bob Aldridge was recognized. Mr. Aldridge said this bill provides that in a
decedent’s estate when there is no surviving spouse, the decedent’s
children are entitled jointly to the same value of exempt property unless
the decedent’s will provides otherwise.
MOTION: Representative Boe moved to send S 1033 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Boe will carry the bill
on the floor.
S 1034 Bob Aldridge was recognized. Mr. Aldridge said this bill provides that
when a parent or guardian of a minor or ward delegates to another person
powers regarding the care, custody or property of the minor or ward, the
delegation may include powers for medical care and educational care. It
also provides that if the delegation is to a grandparent or sibling of the
minor, that the delegation stays in effect until the time period or date or
condition for automatic expiration of the power, and provides that if the
power does not contain any time period, it is in effect for three years. If
the power is revoked in writing, it does not need to be notarized or
recorded to be valid, but if the power is recorded, the revocation must also
be recorded to be effective.
PRO: Diana Zacharias was recognized to testify. Ms. Zacharias spoke in favor
of the bill and asked that it be passed.
MOTION: Representative Edmunson moved to send S 1034 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Edmunson
and Representative Harwood will carry the bill on the floor.
ADJOURN: Prior to adjourning, Chairman Field said bills on judicial elections will be
heard on Monday. The sponsors of the bills will have 5 minutes to explain
and there will then be discussion and testimony on all of the bills. There
being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was
adjourned at 3:35 p.m.






DATE: March 3, 2003
TIME: 2:15 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: See attached sign-in sheets.
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Wills moved to accept the minutes of
the meeting held on February 27, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
HJR 3: Chairman Field recognized Representative Jaquet and Speaker
Newcomb to explain HJR 3 and HCR 27 to the Committee.
Representative Jaquet said HJR 3 relates to the election process for
Supreme Court justices, Court of Appeals judges, and district judges. It
establishes a constitutional judicial council which will nominate qualified
candidates for the Governor’s appointment followed by a retention
election where the electorate decides whether to retain the justice or
judge for another term of office.



The Speaker was recognized to speak to the legislation. The Speaker
said it is really important that judges maintain their ability to protect the
constitution. It is important to develop a system where the judiciary will be
untainted by the political system. The Speaker said he wasn’t sure this
bill would solve the problem, but a task force should be appointed to
decide how to hold the judiciary system harmless from political
campaigns.

HCR 27: Chairman Field recognized the Speaker to explain. The Speaker said this
resolution authorizes the legislative council to appoint a committee to
undertake and complete a study of judicial elections, including methods of
financing and methods of selection. Other issues cannot be looked at
without this issue being studied and recommendations made.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to send HCR 27 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Kulczyk moved to put HCR 27 at the bottom of the
agenda while the other bills before the Committee were heard
.
ROLL CALL
VOTE:
Voting AYE-Representative Sali, Ellsworth, Harwood, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Wills, Bieter, Andersen. Voting NAY-Representatives Field, Clark, Smith,
Ridinger, Edmunson, Ring, Shirley, Boe. 8-8-0. Motion failed.
ORIGINAL
MOTION:
The original motion was to send HCR 27 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Speaker Newcomb and
Representative Jaquet will carry the bill on the floor.
HJR 3 CON: The Chair recognized Connie Vietz with the Idaho Prosecuting Attorneys
Association. Ms. Vietz said currently our district, appellate and supreme
court judges are accountable for their decisions and for their conduct in
our state. These powerful judicial positions should be accountable for
their decisions and not insulated from the people they serve. Idaho
judiciary has had good results. The Missouri plan is hopelessly broke.
The state has a good system and this legislation is trying to fix something
that isn’t broken. In conclusion, Ms. Vietz asked that HJR 3 be held.
CON: Bill vonTagen with the Attorney General’s office, was recognized. Mr.
vonTagen said this resolution is a major and radical change in the way
judges are elected. There are dangers with a more insulated system.
There are almost no checks and balances in this proposed process.
CON: Molly Cox with MADD was recognized. Ms. Cox said judicial
independence and accountability are imperative to the success of our
judicial system. Changing the current system to a merit selection system
will obscure the judicial selection process from public scrutiny and debate.
In contested elections, voters learn about the candidates and make
informed choices. In retention elections, there is no choice. Judges
serve the citizens of Idaho and should be held to the same standards as
elected officials in the legislative and executive branches of government.
PRO: Elinor Chehey with the League of Women Voters of Idaho was
recognized. Ms. Chehey said the League of Women Voters supports the
resolution. Merit selection of judges is a subject which has been
discussed at some length. This constitutional amendment would provide
a vehicle for thorough public discussion before the 2004 elections.
Judges are able to protect the basic rights of individuals and decide cases
fairly only when they are free to make decisions according to the law
without regard to political or public pressure. The judiciary can preserve
separation of powers only when it is able to resist overreaching by
political branches.
CON: Scott Kidd was recognized. Mr. Kidd said he is preparing for his Masters
Degree and has studied the judicial system for many years. There is a
trend nationwide concerning the funding issue. The judiciary is a very
powerful body. A final check should rest with the voters. There are
serious issues that need to be addressed before this type of resolution is
adopted.
Judge Randy Smith was recognized. Judge Smith said there is no one in
the judiciary who is going to tell people what the judiciary thinks. The
judiciary can only serve to explain the issues. The resolution before the
Committee is a matter of what is the perception of the people and what
should be done given that perception. The issue of judicial elections has
to do with freedom of speech. Elections of judges cannot be regulated by
ads that say ” vote for, elect, support or defeat.” However, candidates
may say what their views are on an issue. There are no restrictions on
third party involvement. The judge concluded his remarks by thanking
the Committee for taking up this complicated issue.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to hold HJR 3 in Committee and asked
that the minutes reflect that this concept be part of the consideration
of the task force. Motion carried.
Representative Boe asked to be
recorded as voting “No” on the motion.
HCR 20 Representative Trail was recognized. Representative Trail asked that
HCR 20 be held in Committee. There being no objection, HCR 20 was
so held.
H 251: Chairman Field recognized Representative Bieter to explain the bill.
Representative Bieter said this is an important piece of legislation which
deserves serious consideration. The bill concerns the election of officials.
The bill would call for public financing. It would allow the people to make
a decision and would allow for a much fairer process.
CON: Senator Bart Davis was recognized to give his testimony. Senator Davis
said Representative Trail and he co-chaired a task force, along with
Representative Ellsworth and Representative Boe. That task force heard
several days of testimony both for and against this issue. This legislation
discourages qualified lawyers from pursuing a position on the bench.
This bill economically incentifies a person to run for election again and
again until name recognition is gained and that person is elected. This is
a very dangerous way for judiciary to be elected. The task force
encouraged further discussion on this issue before legislation is passed.
PRO: Jim Hansen with United Vision for Idaho was recognized. Mr. Hansen
said he attended the meetings of the task force. This issue is a long
journey started by the forming of our constitution. This is a fundamental
struggle of values. This bill would allow an evaluation of the system as
impartially as possible.
PRO: A. J. Balukoff, Idahoans for Fair Elections, was recognized. Mr. Balukoff
said he has served on a jury twice. In both cases, the attorneys and
judge asked questions of the jurors as to whether they were unbiased and
could give a fair decision in the cases. Independence in fact and
appearance is important to maintain public trust and confidence in the
system. The judges must be independent. This bill provides an
opportunity to improve our current system.
PRO: Reverend Betty Luginbill was recognized. The Reverend said she
supports the bill. It seems to be a better way to go. She served on a jury
and was totally impressed by the judge. Money can corrupt the electoral
system. The more money that is spent on campaigns, the more alert the
public must be.
PRO: Fred Hoopes with the Idaho State Bar was recognized. Mr. Hoopes said
Courts must be independent and neutral. This issue may be the most
important in the judicial branch. Judges should have no constituency but
the issue of truth.
PRO: Harry Tumanjan was recognized to testify. Mr. Tumanjan said he
supports the bill. It is an effort to strengthen honesty and trust in the
judiciary. This bill will provide a system to enhance the independence
and eliminate private funding.
PRO: Tom Miller stood in support of the bill.
PRO: Allyn Dingel was recognized. Mr. Dingel said the American Bar
Association has endorsed in principal the public funding issue. This bill
would allow the independence of the judiciary. It would help attract our
most qualified people to positions on the bench. This might not be a
perfect bill, but it is a step in the right direction.
PRO: Elinor Chehey was recognized. Ms. Chehey said the League of Women
Voters supports the bill. Methods of financing any electoral campaign
should ensure the public’s right to know, combat corruption and undue
influence, and enable citizens to compete more equitably for public office.
Judges should not be subject to the influence of politically motivated
campaign contributions.
MOTION: Representative Kulczyk moved to hold H 251 in Committee. In support
of his motion, he said this is a poorly conceived bill.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Boe moved to send H 251 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
AMENDED
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Sali moved to adjourn. Motion failed.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
The substitute motion was to send the bill to the floor. Representative
Clark spoke in opposition saying this legislation needs a lot of work.
Representative Harwood spoke against the motion saying the legislature
should not try to fix something that isn’t broken. Motion failed.
ORIGINAL
MOTION:
The original motion was to hold the bill in Committee. Motion passed.
Representative Bieter asked to be recorded as voting “No” on the motion.
ADJOURN: There being no further business to come before the Committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 5:10 p.m.






DATE: March 5, 2003
TIME: 1:50 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: Representative Campbell; Representative Jaquet; Director Dan
Charboneau; Rich Schnebly, Boise Police Dept.; Heather Reilly,
Prosecuting Attorneys; Jim Dickinson, Ada County Prosecutors; Julia
Crossland, Idaho State Bar, Mia Crosthwaite; Steve Rutherford, City of
Boise; Director Tom Beauclair, Dept. of Correction
MINUTES: Representative Wills moved to accept the minutes of the meeting held on
March 3, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
S 1019: Julia Crossland was recognized to speak to the bill. Ms. Crossland said
the bill makes two changes concerning what is known as the Idaho State
Bar’s “Client Security Fund. The Fund is a trust fund, collected from Idaho
State Bar members on an annual basis for the purpose of reimbursing
claimants for losses caused by the dishonest conduct of lawyers. This bill
would increase the amount that can be assessed to $20 per year. The bill
also changes the name of the Fund to the “Clients’ Assistance Fund.”
The bill also deletes obsolete language about license fee amounts. It
does not change the level of license fees, but contains housekeeping
language changes stemming from an increase passed in the 2002
session. There is no fiscal impact.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to send S 1019 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Smith will
carry the bill on the floor.
H 170: Representative Campbell was recognized. The purpose of the bill is to
provide funding for drug court purposes from asset forfeitures in drug
cases. The legislation would provide fifty percent of the proceeds from
the sale of personal or real property used in illegal drug activities to the
district court fund in the judicial district where the real or personal property
was seized.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to hold H 170 in Committee.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Kulczyk moved to send H 170 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation.
CON: Director Charboneau was recognized. The Director said he is not against
drug courts, but he is against H 170. This bill would have an immediate
negative impact on drug enforcement. Most task forces rely on these
funds. This money is used to replenish supplies and equipment and to
destroy evidence samples. Large scale investigations would suffer from
lack of funds. A methamphetamine initiative for the state is currently
underway and needs funding. Also, these forfeitures can take up to two
years before they come through the system. The funds are a significant
tool to assist the Idaho State Police in providing drug enforcement. The
Idaho State Police received $122,485.85 last year from drug forfeitures.
Idaho is a transfer state which sends methamphetamine to other states.
CON: Lieutenant Schnebly, Boise Police Department, was recognized. Lt.
Schnebly said he represents a task force made up of various police
departments. That task force sees a direct benefit from drug forfeiture
funds. The task force relies upon the funding from city governments and
the funds awarded from the state. He supports drug courts, but there are
other funding sources for the drug courts. On average, the amount of
money received from drug forfeitures is only $2700 from any one case
and that money must be split four ways. The money is very sporadic and
is not something that can be depended on at any given time.
CON: Jim Dickinson, Ada County Prosecuting Attorney’s office, was recognized.
The Ada County Prosecutors are involved with seizure and forfeiture and
are opposed to this legislation. In drug trafficking, proceeds are used to
facilitate a transaction. Drug courts are neededl institutions, but forfeiture
funds should not be used to support them. The Ada County Prosecutors
keep 15% of the forfeiture funds.
PRO: Representative Campbell was recognized to give closing remarks.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
The Substitute Motion was to send H 170 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
Representatives Clark, Smith and Edmunson spoke
in opposition to the motion. Representatives Sali, Kulczyk and Harwood
spoke in favor of the motion. Chairman Field turned the gavel over to the
Vice Chairman in order to speak to the bill. Representative Field said she
has worked with these issues for a long time and she applauded
Representative Campbell for his commitment to drug courts. The
Committee is solidly supportive of finding a permanent funding source.
Two bills have been drafted which would consistently fund these courts.
ROLL CALL
VOTE:
Voting AYE-Representatives Sali, Harwood, Kulczyk. Voting NAY-Representatives Field, Clark, Smith, Ridinger, Edmunson, Nielsen, Ring,
Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen. 3-12-1. Motion failed.
ORIGINAL
MOTION:
The original motion was to hold H 170 in Committee. Motion carried.
H 218: Representative Jaquet was recognized. This bill removes statutory
restrictions placed on the Department of Correction regarding the
imposition of solitary confinement and other conditions of confinement on
death row. Removing these restrictions will give the Department the
ability to better manage the behavior of death-sentenced inmates by
giving it the discretion to grant and withdraw ordinary privileges afforded
to other high-security inmates, while still requiring that those inmates be
housed in the highest security level.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to send H 218 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
PRO: Director Beauclair was recognized. The Director said the Department
tries to incarcerate in the least restrictive environment while still providing
the highest security and safety. Some of these inmates can be taken off
of death row. This bill allows the Department to operate the correctional
system in a better manner.
PRO: Mia Crosthwaite was recognized. Ms. Crosthwaite, representing the
Catholic Church, spoke in support of H 218. The bill creates a climate
where it is easier for inmates to be good.
CON: Heather Reilly, Idaho Prosecuting Attorney’s Association, was recognized.
Ms. Reilly said the Association is concerned about this bill. Death row
inmates are the worst of the worst. These individuals need maximum
segregation on death row. Crimes do occur during incarceration.
Although the current Director would probably make good decisions, this
legislation would change the law forever. Death row inmates need to be
treated differently than other inmates.
ORIGINAL
MOTION:
The original motion was to send H 218 to the floor with a Do Pass. The
Director said out of the 18 individuals on death row, approximately 4 to 5
might qualify to be moved. Motion carried. Representative Jaquet will
carry the bill on the floor. Representatives Kulczyk and Harwood asked to
be recorded as voting “No” on the motion.
S 1004, S 1005,
S 1006, S 1007,
S 1008
Chairman Field recognized Tom Frost with the Courts to explain. Mr.
Frost said these are a series of bills that the Supreme Court has
recommended in its annual report to the Governor concerning defects or
omissions in the laws.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to send S l004, S 1005, S 1006, S 1007
and S 1008 to the floor with a Do Pass recommendation. Motion
carried.
S 1004 and S 1005 will be carried on the floor by Representative
Clark. Representative Sali will carry S 1006, Representative Bieter will
carry S 1007 and Representative Boe will carry S 1008.
ADJOURN: There being no further business to come before the Committee, the
meeting was adjourned at 3:35 p.m.






DATE: March 11, 2003
TIME: 2:30 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: Dr. Greg Nelson; Director Brent Reinke; Heather Reilly, Prosecuting
Attorney’s Assn; Roy Eiguren, Idaho Daily Newspapers
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Wills moved to accept the minutes of
the meeting held on March 5, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
H 215: Chairman Field said this bill was brought back from the House floor. It
concerns a nurse abusing a controlled substance. Jim Jones, the
sponsor of the bill, is here to explain the bill in more detail and answer
questions.
MOTION: Representative Wills moved to hold H 215 in Committee for a time
certain until Wednesday, March 19, 2003. Motion carried.
H 217: Chairman Field said this bill was one of the bills considered in the Gold
Room on the burning of fields by farmers.
MOTION: Representative Shirley moved to hold H 217 in Committee.
Representative Smith spoke in favor of the motion.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Harwood moved to hear the bill.
AMENDED
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Kulczyk moved to transfer H 217 to the Agricultural
Committee.
In opposition to the motion, Representative Smith said this is
a statewide issue and not an agriculture issue. After extensive debate,
Representative Clark called for the question.
ROLL CALL
VOTE:
Voting AYE-Representatives Field, Clark, Smith, Ridinger, Edmunson,
Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter. Voting NAY-Representatives Sali, Ellsworth,
Harwood, Kulczyk, Nielsen, Ring. 9-6-1. Motion carried.
AMENDED
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
The amended substitute motion was to transfer H 217 to the
Agricultural Committee.
ROLL CALL
VOTE:
Voting AYE-Representatives Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk,
Ring. Voting NAY-Representatives Field, Clark, Ellsworth, Smith,
Nielsen, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter. 5-9-2. Motion failed.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
The substitute motion was to hear the bill in Committee.
ROLL CALL
VOTE:
Voting AYE-Representatives Ellsworth, Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson,
Nielsen, Ring. Voting NAY-Representatives Field, Clark, Smith, Kulczyk,
Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter. 6-8-2. Motion failed.
ORIGINAL
MOTION:
The original motion was to hold H 217 in Committee.
ROLL CALL
VOTE:
Voting AYE-Representatives Field, Clark, Sali, Ellsworth, Smith, Kulczyk,
Nielsen, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter. Voting NAY-Representatives
Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Ring. 11-4-2. Motion carried.
S 1094: Director Reinke was recognized to explain the bill. The bill clarifies the
department’s ability and methods to collect funds from parents of juveniles
in Juvenile Corrections custody. A subsection was also added that gives
counties the same remedies and abilities to collect funds due from
parents for charges incurred at the county level. The legislative intent is
that parents pay, in whole or in part, the state’s cost for the care and
treatment of juvenile offenders. An amendment to the bill clarifies what
the department can do in collections. It would insure that amounts
assessed families are fairly calculated for each family.



Representative Smith spoke against the bill saying that many of these
families are struggling financially. Perhaps the judge should be given the
discretion to make decisions instead of saying that the department shall
have all remedies at law to enforce collection. Representative Wills
spoke in opposition saying this bill throws “cold water” in the faces of
families trying to assist juveniles in reshaping their lives.

MOTION: Representative Clark moved to hold S 1094 in Committee. Motion
carried.
S 1095: Director Reinke was recognized. The Director asked that S 1095 be held
in Committee. There being no objection, the bill was so held.
S 1096: Director Reinke was recognized. The Director said this bill will allow the
custody review board of the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections to
conduct an executive session, when authorized by law. It would exempt
from disclosure certain records of the custody review board and it adds a
new section stating the duties of the custody review board to comply with
open meeting laws, to hold executive sessions and to retain confidential
reports of proceedings to be available to certain parties. The Director
said since the review board is new, these changes are necessary.
PRO: Roy Eiguren, representing the Idaho Allied Daily Newspapers, was
recognized. Mr. Eiguren said he has represented the newspapers for
almost six years on the issues of open public meetings. The language in
the bill is patterned after the law of the Commission of Pardons and
Parole. The newspapers are very comfortable with the language of the
bill.
MOTION: Representative Ellsworth moved to send S 1096 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Ellsworth will
carry the bill on the floor.
S 1122: Heather Reilly with the Idaho Prosecuting Attorney’s Association, was
recognized. Ms. Reilly said this legislation clarifies that a person may be
charged as an accessory to a felony when the person, having knowledge
that a felony has been committed, willfully withholds or conceals the
felony. Currently, the person who committed the felony must be charged
with or convicted of the felony before a charge of accessory may be filed.
Ms. Reilly said an amendment to the bill was drafted which re-inserts into
the bill current language regarding a person who has been charged with
or convicted of the felony.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to send S 1122 to General Orders with
Committee amendments attached. Motion carried.
Representative
Smith will carry the bill and amendments on the floor.
ADJOURN: Prior to adjourning, the Chairman said the Committee will be hearing H
122 on Thursday, March 13. This will be an engrossed bill with
moratorium language on the death sentence removed. There being no
further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was
adjourned at 3:40 p.m.






DATE: March 13, 2003
TIME: 3:25 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

None
GUESTS: See attached sign-in sheets
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Wills moved to accept the minutes of
the meeting held on March 11, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
H 337 and H 338 Chairman Field said, if there was no objection, H 337 and H 338 would
be moved to the agenda for Monday, March 17, 2003,
in order that all
the Courts’ bills could be heard together. There being no objection the
bills were moved.
S 1016: Dale Higer was recognized to explain the legislation. The purpose of this
legislation is to provide the adoption of the uniform child witness
testimony by the alternative methods act, promulgated by the National
Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. The legislation
provides alternative methods in both criminal and non-criminal
proceedings to take the testimony of a child witness.
MOTION: Representative Wills moved to send S 1016 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Edmunson will carry
the bill on the floor.
S 1093 The Chair recognized Dale Higer to explain the bill. Mr. Higer said this
legislation amends Section 39-6303A, Idaho Code, relating to the Uniform
Interstate Enforcement of Domestic Violence Protection Orders Act. The
act removes language prohibiting tribunals of this state from enforcing
support provisions of foreign protection orders and provides that the
validity of an ex parte foreign protection order depends upon a respondent
having had or having in the future an opportunity to be heard in a manner
consistent with due process rights.
MOTION: Representative Shirley moved to send S 1093 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Kulczyk will
carry the bill on the floor.
S 1119 Chairman Field said the sponsor of the bill was not able to present the
legislation at this time, so S 1119 was moved to the Wednesday, March
19, 2003, agenda.
H 122: Representative Bieter was recognized to explain. Representative Bieter
said the fairness of the death penalty has recently come under serious
scrutiny. Nationwide, over 100 people have been exonerated of the
crimes for which they were sentenced to death. There are many
problems with the current system. This seems the most opportune time to
take a thorough look at this issue. There is an engrossed bill before the
Committee whereby the moratorium language has been removed. This
bill would appoint a commission to review whether the application of the
death penalty is consistent with constitutional requirements of fairness,
justice, equality and due process.



Representative Wills questioned the wording on page 2, line 44 of the bill
which would indicate that the commission shall make recommendations
for amendments to the statutes and court rules pertaining to cases in
which the death penalty is imposed to provide assurances that
defendants who are sentenced to death are in fact guilty of first degree
murder. Representative Wills said it would seem by this language that
the judicial system is challenged and the commission will decide if these
people should be re-tried. Representative Bieter offered to remove that
language from the bill saying that was not the intent. Representative Wills
said the legislation also seems to question the ruling of the judges in
these death penalty cases.

PRO: Attorney Tom McCabe spoke in favor of the bill saying he had
represented a client who was incarcerated because a judge had made a
mistake. This took place in 1990. In 1999, after appearing in front of
several courts, the state of Idaho agreed that a mistake had been made.
The client was finally released after almost 20 years in prison. This
legislation is an attempt to determine what is wrong with the current
system and how to fix it.
PRO: Attorney Tony Park was recognized. Mr. Park said this is a cost benefit
analysis. If the bill is passed, it supports fairness and justice. There
currently is a problem. Small courts can’t afford to prosecute death
penalty cases. A commission could certainly reduce problems. The risk
to the state is $50,000 which would appear to be a pretty small price to
pay. The commission should be allowed to analyze problems and make
the system work better.
PRO: Attorney Rolf Kehne was recognized. Mr. Kehne said he has defended
people on death row for almost 22 years. The Association of Trial
Lawyers supports this bill. Study of judicial issues is always worthwhile.
There are currently some serious problems with the system. Helping the
victim’s families is very important. Everyone wonders why carrying out a
death penalty takes so long.
PRO: Attorney Bill Mauk said early in his career he represented people in
homicide cases. He represented Don Paradis who spend 20 years on
death row for a crime he didn’t commit. Human life is not a partisan issue.
The current system makes mistakes. Idaho should be able to spend
$50,000 to build a higher level of confidence in the system.
PRO: Marty Durand, representing the ACLU, was recognized. Ms. Durand said
the ACLU supports H 122. The time is right to examine the death penalty
system. The current death penalty is unreliable and arbitrary. More
people have been exonerated than have been executed. The
commission will examine the fairness of the system. Mistakes can’t be
made when it comes to the death penalty. Any system which takes a life
must first give justice.
PRO: Sara Jaszkowski, a student at Sacred Heart School, was recognized.
Sara said no one loses in this bill. The commission would investigate the
truth in death cases. It is troubling to think of even one innocent person
being put to death in error. This bill would help prevent this from
happening. Life is sacred in all of its forms. Only in mathematics do two
negatives make a positive.
CON: Roger Bourne, Ada County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office, was
recognized. Mr. Bourne said the death penalty saves lives in the long run
because of the deterrent effect. The Legislature has been pro active in
the area of monitoring death penalties. Defending a death penalty case is
a major undertaking. Mr. Bourne said he has spent 700 hours in
preparing a case for trial and thousands of dollars in gathering information
and evidence. The current system is not broken. The 9th Circuit Court of
Appeals has prevented Idaho from carrying out the death penalty in many
cases.
CON: Shirley Blomberg was recognized. Mrs. Blomberg said her little girl has
been dead for almost three years and her killer, Darrell Payne, should
have been put to death sometime ago. People like Mr. Payne don’t
deserve rights. He took a life for kicks. When a cold-blooded murder is
committed and it is proven that the defendant committed the murder, that
person shouldn’t be granted all these rights of appeal. These murderers
are a waste of time and a waste of space. Let the punishment fit the
crime.
CON: Paul Blomberg was recognized. Mr. Blomberg said Mr. Payne has had 40
separate hearings. He will have additional rights and hearings even
though his guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Mr. Blomberg
asked that the members not pass the bill. The current system works.
PRO: Mia Crosthwaite was recognized. Ms. Crosthwaite said the Catholic
Church supports H 122. This bill does not address whether the state
should have a death penalty. People are called to do what is good and
this is a good piece of legislation.
PRO: Roger Sherman was recognized. The United Vision for Idaho, a coalition
which works on civil rights issues, supports the bill. The coalition takes
very few stands on public policy. However, it believes a study should be
done. Since the state has exonerated more people than have been
executed, the system obviously makes mistakes. The coalition is
concerned about how much money death penalty cases cost the state.
The commission could decide if the law has been applied fairly.
PRO: Pastor Stan Hooving spoke in favor of the bill.
PRO: Dr. Michael Blankenship was recognized. Mr. Blankenship said he stood
before the Committee as a social scientist with an extensive background
on the issue of capital punishment. His purpose is to focus on the
efficacy of capital punishment as a crime control policy. A survey of Idaho
citizens found that 80% agreed that capital punishment was appropriate
for first degree murder, 44% agreed that Idaho should impose a
moratorium and 42% disagreed. Passage of the bill would allow a review
of the administration of capital punishment with regard to race, quality of
legal representation, innocence and improved comprehension of jurors.
Also, research shows capital cases may cost as much as 3.5 times more
than non-capital cases. Current research suggests the death penalty is
no more of an effective deterrent than life in prison without parole.
CON: LaMont Anderson said the Attorney General’s office and the Attorney
General do not support the bill. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has
established a rigorous standard which is above and beyond what the
constitution requires. If a legislative body imposes a moratorium on death
penalty cases, it will cause state delay and capital cases changed to life
sentences. Both the Fain and Paradis cases have not been exonerated.
When a person pleads guilty, that person cannot be exonerated. Mr. Fain
will receive a new trial because of DNA testing. Mr. Paradis would have
been retried except for several problems which were incurred after 22
years incarceration, including the death of a key witness and the loss of
actual physical evidence.
CLOSING
REMARKS:
Representative Bieter said he would look favorably on a motion to hold
the bill for a time in order to work with all interested parties to resolve
concerns with the legislation. This is an area that deserves to be looked
at.
MOTION: Representative Ring moved to hold H 122 in Committee.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Smith moved to hold H 122 for a time certain until
Wednesday, March 19, 2003,
to see if concerns could be resolved.
Motion failed.
ORIGINAL
MOTION:
The original motion was to hold H 122 in Committee. Motion carried.
ADJOURN: Prior to adjourning, Chairman Field said there would be another long
meeting scheduled for the following week. There being no further
business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at
5:35 p.m.






DATE: March 17, 2003
TIME: 3:15 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Representative Ellsworth
GUESTS: Honorable Joel Horton; Kathy Baird; Mike Becar, Patti Tobias and Tom
Frost with the Courts; Cathy Holland-Smith
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review their minutes. Representative Ridinger moved to accept the
minutes of the meeting held on March 13, 2003, as written. Motion
carried.
S 1002aa: The Chairman recognized Kathy Baird to explain the bill. Ms. Baird said
statutory authority has been given to the Sexual Offender Classification
Board to establish the qualifications for approved evaluators who perform
psychosexual evaluations for the courts. However, it is in the best interest
of society and the criminal justice system that only professionals who
have an ongoing understanding of the complex nature of sexual offenders
and their behaviors conduct these evaluations. This bill will liberate the
judiciary from its responsibility for determining providers’ qualifications.
An application system will be established to approve, provide quality
assurance and certify that evaluators who seek to perform evaluations for
the courts meet the established standards. Rulemaking authority will be
provided to the Board in order to carry out these procedures. The fees
for implementation will be set by administrative rule. It is the intent to
charge $75 for an initial application and $50 a year after that.
MOTION: Representative Wills moved to send S 1002aa to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Clark will carry
the bill on the floor.
S 1028: Cathy Holland-Smith was recognized to explain the legislation. This
legislation will make a technical correction to section 18-918(8)(c), Idaho
Code, for a cross reference as to where certain funds are deposited to
allow for 10% of civil court fees to be redirected from the state’s General
Fund to the Peace Officer Standards and Training Fund. This was
unintentionally left out of legislation that passed during the 2001
Legislative Session dealing with revenues to support the Peace Officer
Standards Training Academy. The remaining 90% of the amount
collected by county clerks on behalf of the state will continue to be
deposited directly to the General Fund.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to send S 1028 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Anderson will carry
the bill on the floor.
H 335: Representative Ring was recognized to explain. This bill was brought
forth by the Supreme Court. It provides that a substance abuse
evaluation may be waived by a judge at the judge’s discretion. Presently,
an evaluation must be obtained in every case for the purpose of deciding
whether treatment of the defendant is indicated. Judges who handle
these cases believe that in an appropriate case these evaluations are
unnecessary and may be waived if the sentencing judge has sufficient
information to make an informed decision as to whether a treatment
program should be ordered. Representative Ring said an amendment
needed to be made to the printed bill deleting the word “tool” on page 1,
line 29.
MOTION: Representative Ridinger moved to send H 335 to General Orders with
Committee Amendments attached, deleting the word “tool” on page
1, line 29. Motion carried.
Representative Ring will carry the bill on the
floor.
H 336: Representative Wills was recognized to explain. This amendment
provides that a sentencing judge has discretionary authority to determine
that an alcohol abuse evaluation is unnecessary with respect to certain
DUI offenses when the offender has no prior DUI violations. This
determination may be made if the judge has the defendant’s criminal
history, driving record and evidentiary test of the degree of alcohol
concentration and has no reason to believe the offender regularly abuses
alcohol. The judge also has the discretion to waive an evaluation in any
case where the court has a similar assessment relating to the defendant’s
degree of alcohol abuse and/or need for treatment which has been
conducted within 12 months of sentencing. Representative Wills said on
page 3, line 49, the word “tool” needs to be deleted from the bill.
MOTION: Representative Ridinger moved to send H 336 to General Orders with
Committee Amendments attached, deleting the word “tool” on page
3, line 49. Motion carried.
Representative Wills will carry the bill on the
floor.
S 1139 President Pro Tem Geddes was recognized to explain. The purpose of
this legislation is to provide that the President Pro Tempore of the Senate
shall appoint a member to fill a senate vacancy which occurs on the
committee during the interim when the legislature is not in session.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to send S 1139 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Bieter will carry the
bill on the floor.
H 337: Representative Harwood was recognized to explain the bill. This bill
authorizes the clerk of the court to accept credit cards or debit cards in
the payment of court charges such as filing fees, fines, and court costs.
At least 25 other states have authorized this practice. Because credit
card issuers ordinarily charge the recipient of the funds a small
percentage of the transaction amount for each transaction they process,
issues have arisen as to the authority of the courts to accept credit cards.
As part of the requirements of this legislation, the card user pays the
costs of the transaction, so that the governmental entities that receive this
revenue receive the full amount that is due. The acceptance of credit
cards and debit cards will result in the prompt payment of court charges,
thereby reducing the risk that they will become delinquent and require
court time and expense to collect them.
MOTION: Representative Wills moved to send H 337 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Harwood will carry
the bill on the floor.
H 338: Representative Shirley was recognized to explain the bill. Court records
show that millions of dollars in fines, fees, surcharges and restitution are
owed by those who have been convicted of or admitted to a state or local
offense. In Idaho alone, there are $56.5 million dollars in delinquent
funds. This bill will help offenders meet their obligations and make
restitution. The legislation allows the courts to ask the Tax Commission
to hold back money to meet the obligation of these delinquent debts owed
to the courts. The provisions of the bill are patterned after laws already
on the books in Idaho. The Tax Commission has voiced no opposition
and will have no trouble administering this law. The bill defines debts
owed to the courts. It would apply only to debts that exceed $50.00. The
bills provides that claims for past-due child support and claims owed to
the state department of labor shall take priority over any claim for
delinquent debt owed to the courts. Conditions to be met prior to the set-off or withholding of a refund due a taxpayer are set forth in the bill.
MOTION: Representative Edmunson moved to send H 338 to the floor with a Do
Pass recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Shirley will
carry the bill on the floor.
ADJOURN: Prior to adjourning, Chairman Field said there is a proposed piece of
legislation which will be heard Wednesday, March 19, 2003, by the
Revenue and Taxation Committee, providing for the funding of the drug
and family courts. There being no further business to come before the
Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 4:25 p.m.






DATE: March 19, 2003
TIME: 2:50 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Representative Ellsworth
GUESTS: Senator Sorensen; Attorney Jim Jones; Attorney Chris Bray; Brian
Dockstader; Robert Gourley; Judge David Day; Terri Meyer, Dept. Health
& Welfare; Rondee Blessing, Boise City Attorney’s Office
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to
review the minutes. Representative Shirley moved to accept the minutes
of the meeting held on March 17, 2003, as written. Motion carried.
S 1119: Senator Sorensen was recognized to explain. The Senator said the bill
has to do with drug-free workplace programs. It clarifies that employers,
both public and private, may choose to have a drug-free workplace
program as laid out in the Drug Free Work Place Act to be able to qualify
for a reduction in the employer premium for workers compensation
insurance. It further establishes components, protections, and
advantages afforded to all employers. The bill is important because the
public employers cannot comply fully with the current statute and,
therefore, they are unable to access the worker’s comp discount. The bill
remedies that situation.
MOTION: Representative Clark moved to send S 1119 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Ridinger will carry
the bill on the floor.
H 215: Jim Jones was recognized. Prior to hearing his testimony, Chairman
Field said testimony from all interested parties had been taken at a
previous meeting on the bill. Therefore, the sponsor would be heard, but
other testimony would not be taken. Mr. Jones said the bill deals with the
disclosure of controlled substance abuse. He talked with the Attorney
General’s office and asked that office to contact him with their concerns.
They did not get back in touch with him. No proposed language has been
sent to him to be included in the bill. The attorney for St. Al’s Hospital
said the hospital could not obtain information on a nurse who was later
accused of tampering with prescription drugs, because of the impaired
nurses program. The Attorney General’s opinion was written by the
attorney who represents the Nursing Board. Mr. Jones said this is a
matter of public policy. There are many states that require much more
information be disclosed than this bill does.

Mr. vonTagen, from the Attorney General’s office, was recognized. Mr.
vonTagen said the Attorney General’s office is willing to work with Mr.
Jones to redraft the legislation.

MOTION: Representative Clark moved to send H 215 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Shirley moved to hold H 215 in Committee. In support
of his motion, Representative Shirley said there were many concerns
expressed over the language of the bill which needed to be resolved.
Representative Ring questioned the constitutionality of the bill.
AMENDED
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Wills moved to hold H 215 in Committee for a time
certain until Tuesday, March 25, 2003
. This would give the parties time
to redraft the language in the bill to satisfy all concerns. Motion failed.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
The substitute motion was to hold H 215 in Committee. Motion carried.
H 215 will be held in Committee.
S 1115: Chris Bray was recognized to explain. Mr. Bray said a similar bill was
passed by the Senate, but there wasn’t enough time to hear it in the
House last year. Since that time, some concerns were voiced regarding
the language. After further research, this bill was drafted which resolves
those concerns. It allows a credit to be given against an accrued child
support obligation in one limited circumstance. A credit would be allowed
for a period of time when the parent who is obligated to pay child support
has physical custody of the child with the knowledge and consent of the
custodial parent. The bill clarifies that granting a credit in this one limited
circumstance does not modify, alter, or set aside the terms of the decree.
The language is patterned after a law by the state of Oregon. This is a
policy decision which needs to be made by the Legislature.
PRO: Mr. Dockstader was recognized. Mr. Dockstader said he was the
divorced father of two sons. His sons moved in with him in 1998. Since
that time, one son moved back with his mother and the other son
remained with him. He was then sued by his ex-wife for unpaid child
support.
PRO: Mr. Gourley was recognized. Mr. Gourley said he was a divorced father.
After a long period of time, his daughter ran away from her mother. He
was asked if he would be willing to take his daughter in. She stayed with
him for over two years and he provided her sole support. He was later
sued for back child support while the child was living with him.
Representative Smith said this is a good bill and it is needed. However,
there is a subsection (a) in the legislation without a subsection (b). Also,
there should be a clear time frame requirement and the Department of
Health and Welfare needs to know about the change. That language
should be added to make this a better bill. Representative Clark said he
was not certain this bill is the right way to go to solve the problem.
CON: Judge Day was recognized to speak in opposition to the bill. The Judge
said the court is generally reluctant to become embroiled with the
legislative process. However, this is a bill where the court must make its
position known. The court didn’t have time to give its input to the Senate
before the bill was passed out of that body. The court has no problem
with the concept of the bill, but it does have a problem with the language.
This bill has some serious flaws. Under current law, when a child goes to
the other household, the child support is reduced at that time. The
primary household still has expenses for the child which need to be
covered, so a lower child support is collected. If there is a real change in
the circumstances, the parent should come to the court and get a new
child support order.



The courts in Idaho do have the discretion to apply equitable principals
and allow a reduction. The court can allow a credit now and the language
in this bill might actually limit that discretion. The judiciary would welcome
some guidelines, but this bill doesn’t give those. Child support is a very
emotionally charged issue. It is highly contentious. When the language is
vague, it will require a lot of litigation. This bill could bring a lot of cases
before the court and cause a lot of uncertainty for the people directly
involved. The legislation needs the support of the Family Bar and the
Department of Health and Welfare.

CON: Terri Meyer with the Department of Health & Welfare was recognized to
speak in opposition to the bill. The current language in the bill is too
vague. It isn’t going to help the Department serve these parents. The
Department would not be able to give them good guidance with this bill as
to whether or not they should take their case to court. A time frame
should be included in the language. Modifying arrears is heavily
scrutinized.
CLOSING
REMARKS:
Mr. Bray was recognized. He said some of the comments today are very
close to being uninformed comments. This bill is a significant change
from the bill that was brought forth last year. Parents do not approach
these child support problems in a friendly fashion. This is a legislative
policy decision. It is not a judicial decision. There is currently no authority
from the Legislature to authorize child support guidelines.
MOTION: Representative Smith moved to hold S 1115 in Committee.
Representative Smith said there is a real need for this type of legislation.
However, the language needs to be worked on.
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION:
Representative Bieter moved to send S 1115 to General Orders with
Committee amendments attached as follows:
after (2) on line 18,
delete the remainder of the bill and insert: “The court may allow a credit
against child support arrearage for periods of time exceeding 120 days
during which the minor children have lived primarily with the obligated
parent with the knowledge and consent of the custodial parent.” Motion
carried.
Representatives Bieter and Sali will carry the bill on the floor.
S 1121: Rondee Blessing was recognized to explain. Ms. Blessing said this is a
clean up bill. In 2002, S 1451 was originally proposed with felony
punishments for second and subsequent offenses relating to intentional
destruction of a telecommunication line or telecommunication instrument.
The bill was thereafter amended to remove felony punishments, making
all violations a misdemeanor. However, the language “for a first offense”
was left in the amended version of the bill. This legislation clarifies that
the offense of Intentional Destruction of a Telecommunications Line or
Telecommunication Instrument is a misdemeanor that is not enhanced for
a second or subsequent offense of this statute.
MOTION: Representative Boe moved to send S 1121 to the floor with a Do Pass
recommendation. Motion carried.
Representative Boe will carry the bill
on the floor.
ADJOURN: Chairman Field told the members that there are only two bills left in the
Committee. There might be a short meeting on Friday after adjournment
of the House to hear these. Then the Committee will have a brief final
meeting on Tuesday, March 25. There being no further business to come
before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m.






DATE: March 21, 2003
TIME: 1:30 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Representatives Clark, Sali, Smith, Ring, Bieter
GUESTS: None
MINUTES: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to review the minutes.
Representative Andersen moved to accept the minutes of the meeting held on March 19, 2003, as written.
Motion carried.
H 290: Representative Ellsworth was recognized. The Representative asked the members to hold H 290 in Committee. The Chair asked for unanimous consent. There being no objection, H 290 was so held.
HR 2: Representative Ellsworth was recognized. The Representative said this resolution was drafted to eliminate the pre-filing of bills since there have been so many problems with them in the past.
MOTION: Representative Harwood moved to send HR 2 to the floor with a Do Pass recommendation. Motion carried. Representative Ellsworth will carry the bill on the floor.
ADJOURN: Chairman Field said there would be an informal meeting held on Tuesday, March 25, 2003. There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 1:37 p.m.






DATE: March 27, 2003
TIME: 2:45 p.m.
PLACE: Room 404
MEMBERS: Chairman Field(18), Vice Chairman Clark, Representatives Sali,
Ellsworth, Smith(24), Ridinger, Harwood, Edmunson, Kulczyk, Nielsen,
Ring, Shirley, Wills, Boe, Bieter, Andersen
ABSENT/

EXCUSED:

Representatives Clark, Bieter
GUESTS: Senator Sweet
MOTION: Chairman Field called the meeting to order and asked the members to review the minutes.
Representative Wills moved to accept the minutes of the meeting held on March 21, 2003, as written.
Motion carried.
S 1160: The Chair recognized Senator Sweet to explain. Senator Sweet said this is a public safety amendment. It prevents persons convicted of murder or voluntary manslaughter from shipping, transporting, possessing, or receiving a firearm after final discharge from custody from the Idaho State
Board of Correction. It would close a loophole in the law which allows felons who were convicted of such crimes before July 1, 1991, to exercise this right. Based on their past conduct, such felons have demonstrated their unfitness to be entrusted with firearms. The bill is limited to those offenders who have committed murder or manslaughter. It is retroactive.
MOTION: Representative Edmunson moved to send S 1160 to the floor with a Do Pass recommendation. Motion carried. Representatives Kulczyk and Harwood asked to be recorded as voting “No” on the motion. Representative Edmunson will carry the bill on the floor.
ADJOURN: There being no further business to come before the Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 2:50 p.m.