January 8, 2003
January 13, 2003
January 15, 2003
January 17, 2003
January 20, 2003
January 22, 2003
January 24, 2003
January 27, 2003
January 29, 2003
January 31, 2003
February 5, 2003
February 7, 2003
February 10, 2003
February 12, 2003
February 17, 2003
February 19, 2003
February 21, 2003
February 26, 2003
February 28, 2003
March 3, 2003
March 5, 2003
March 7, 2003
March 10, 2003
March 12, 2003
March 14, 2003
March 17, 2003
March 19, 2003
March 24, 2003
March 31, 2003
DATE: | January 8, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
Introductions
|
Chairman Darrington welcomed members of the Senate Judiciary and Rules Committee indicating Senators Bunderson, Sweet, Marley and Burkett were not on the committee last year. He also introduced Marianne Hansen, returning for her third year as committee secretary and Jared Larsen from Declo, Idaho, who will serve as the Committee’s Page for the first half of the 2003 session. Chairman Darrington indicated the committee secretary needs to leave the meeting prior to adjournment so another secretary will finish taking the minutes. |
RS12510
|
Amend Idaho Death Penalty Statutes
Caralee Lambert, who works for Legislative Services and drafted the |
MOTION: | Senator Davis moved that RS12510 be introduced for print. The motion was seconded by Senator Sorensen and approved by voice vote. |
UPDATE | State Appellate Public Defenders Office (SAPD)
Molly Huskey, the State Appellate Public Defender, gave a brief overview The SAPD office currently has five death penalty cases. Because of Ring |
Tony Poinelli, representing the Idaho Association of Counties, briefly discussed the Capital Crime Defense Fund. To date expenses have totaled just under $720,000 and there is currently a balance of $1.3 million in the Fund. There have been 13 cases brought before the Capital Crimes Board. The Shackleford case from Latah County is the largest; the Capital Crime Fund has spent over $420,000 on that case. Establishing the Capital Crime Defense Fund has saved the counties a tremendous amount of money. |
|
Adjournment: | There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 2:25 p.m. |
DATE: |
Monday, January 13, 2003 |
TIME: |
1:30 pm |
PLACE: |
Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, |
MEMBERS EXCUSED: |
Senator Bunderson and Senator Davis |
MINUTES: |
Senator Burkett made a motion to approve the minutes as written. |
RS12324 |
Brent Reinke, Director of the State of Idaho Department of |
MOTION: |
Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS 12324 to print. |
RS12325 |
Brent Reinke, asked that this legislation, amending Section 67-2342 |
RULES REVIEW: |
The meeting was turned over to Vice-Chairman Lodge to conduct |
IDAPA 0501.03 |
Rules of the Custody Review Board. Brent Reinke told the |
|
Basically the rules for the Custody Review Board are the same as |
Department REVIEW: |
Mr. Reinke also gave an update on the IDJC (See attached sheet Mr. Reinke also reported that there is a serious need for substance |
Adjournment: |
Meeting was adjourned at 2:40 p.m. |
DATE: |
Wednesday, January 15, 2003 |
TIME: |
1:30 pm |
PLACE: |
Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington. Vice Chairman Lodge. Senators Sorensen. Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: |
Senator Richardson made a motion to accept the minutes as written. |
RULES MOTION: |
Senator Lodge had visited with Carl Bianchi of Legislative Services |
|
Tom Frost representing the Idaho Supreme Court presented a series |
RS 12511 |
This bill amends Section 18-310 to restore a persons civil rights, right to possess a firearm, upon completion of a sentence for felony, except in respect to certain crimes, one of which is “lewd |
RS 12512 |
This bill amends Section 19-514 to provide that when a defendant is stenographer no longer exists and this bill eliminates that requirement. |
RS 12513 |
This bill amends Section 19-3934 relating to the setting of bail for a |
RS 12514 |
This bill amends Section 1-506 and repeals Section 1-507, relating to |
RS12515 |
This bill corrects a typographical error in Section 2-208. Idaho Code, |
MOTION: |
Senator Burkett made a motion to Send RS12511, RS12512, |
|
GUBERNATORIAL APPOINTMENT |
|
Dan Charbonneau, appointed to the position of Director, Idaho |
|
Mr. Charboneau said he “fell in love with law enforcement” and has |
|
Senator Darrington asked what he could forsee in the near future, |
|
Senator Darrington asked Capt. Charbonneau if there are enough |
|
Senator Bunderson asked what goals he would like to accomplish. |
|
Senator Davis asked if there were some empty slots in the academy |
|
In answer to Senator Burkett’s question about Homeland Security. |
|
Senator Bunderson was concerned that with the decrease in |
MOTION: |
Senator Darrington asked the committee if they would desire to take |
|
RULES of the IDAHO STATE POLICE- Pending Rules |
11.05.0 |
Rules Governing Alcohol Beverage Control – Peg White presented |
11.07.01 |
Motor Vehicles Rules – General Rules |
11.07.02 |
Rules Governing Safety Glazing Material |
11.07.03 |
Rules Governing Emergency Vehicles/Authorized Emergency Vehicles |
11.10.03 |
Rules Governing the Sex Offender Registry – When there is a change |
11.11.02 |
Rules of the Idaho Peace Officer Standards and Training Council for |
11.11.03 |
Rules of the Idaho Peace Officer Standards and Training Council for |
11.21.01 |
Rules Governing Record Checks for Transfers of Handguns – The |
MOTION: |
Senator Davis made a motion to recommend to the full Senate, the |
|
PENDING FEE RULES for the Idaho State Police – Peg White |
1101-0201 |
Rules of the POST. This rule defines who is a prosecuting attorney. |
MOTION: |
Senator Bunderson made a motion to accept the Idaho State Police |
|
Senator Darrington told the committee that Mike Becar will appear |
|
Senator Darrington thanked Captain Charboneau for his |
Adjournment: |
Meeting was adjourned at 2:47 p.m. |
DATE: | Friday, January 17, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | Senator Bunderson made a motion to accept the minutes of January 15 as written. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
S1001 | Relating to murder; amending section 18-4004, Idaho Code, to revise the punishment for murder to provide that a notice of intent to seek the death penalty shall include a listing of statutory aggravating circumstances, to provide that the state may amend the notice of intent prior to trial upon a showing of good cause and to provide that the court shall inform potential jurors at the outset of jury selection if the death penalty is not a sentencing option. Senator Darrington pointed out that contrary to what has been in the |
Caralee Lambert, from Legislative Services, who drafted S1001, presented this legislation at the request of the chair. This bill was intended to bring the Idaho death penalty in compliance with Ring vs. Arizona. On June 24, 2002, the United States Supreme Court issued the Ring v. Arizona decision, which effectively invalidated Idaho’s death penalty law. Under current law, where a defendant is found guilty of first-degree murder and the death penalty is sought, the court orders a pre-sentence investigation and holds a sentencing hearing to evaluate any aggravating and mitigating circumstances. The determination of whether to sentence the defendant to death is then made by the judge, not the jury. In the Ring opinion, the Supreme Court found that aggravating Following the Ring decision, on August 6th, 2002, a unanimous Idaho As amended, Section 18-4004 provides that in a first-degree murder Section 18-4004A relates to notices of intent to seek the death penalty: As Section 19-2126 now provides, the jury is to be sequestered until the Application of the Act is set forth and provides that this act would apply to Greg Bower, Ada County Prosecuting Attorney, expressed thanks to Tom McCabe, a defense attorney in Boise told the committee that many Senator Davis asked if he believed S1001 would properly apply to Ring Senator Davis said his understanding was that the notice prior to Senator Burkett asked “with respect to the notice in charging pro- Mr. Mc Cabe responded “I don’t think Ring addresses that. My Senator Bunderson continually receives comments from constituents He answered that “In my opinion, as a criminal defense attorney, my Roger Bourne, from the Prosecuting office stood before the committee Senator Richardson has received a lot of mail from people thinking that Senator Burkett commented after reading the bill and listening to the Mia Crossthwaite legislative liaison spoke for the Catholic church. which Mike Henderson, Attorney General’s office, told the committee that the Ann Pasley Stewart, representing herself not as a lobbyist, is opposed Mike Bogert mentioned that the Governor looked forward to the Marty Durand, representing the American Civil Liberties Union of Idaho Paul and Shirley Bloomberg, the parents of Samantha Maher, who was Shirley Blomberg told the committee that “somewhere along the line, Senator Darrington expressed thanks to the Blombergs for their LaMont Anderson, chief of Capitol litigation for the Attorney General’s Dennis Benjamin, attorney for the Idaho Association of Criminal Molly Huskey, the SAPD, who participated in the deliberations, spoke in Senator Davis said that in her prior life, Ms. Huskey was the prosecuting Senator Burkett asked what the problem was in putting aggravating Rap Howell, representing himself though he is an ordained deacon in Mike Waslager, from Boise, supports S1001, as his daughter was a Some opponents of this bill may argue that this is “cruel and unusual”, Roger Bourne summarized by answering some of the questions during Senator Richardson asked Mr. Bourne to address Mr. Benjamin’s |
|
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send S1001 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Davis. Senator Sorensen said that after listening to the discussion today, the basic issue addresses procedural issue and whether it fits in with the Ring decision or not, and this legislation does bring our laws into compliance. The question that has been brought up, is whether we should have the death penalty or not, and this opens it up for question, but our basic philosophy of the death penalty hasn’t changed because of the Ring decision. The Blomberg’s brought up the issue of cost, and there is no cost that could compare to the cost of the loss of a loved one’s life, and that seems to be an argument brought up over and over. That should be put aside, and this does address the Ring decision very well putting it in compliance. Senator Richardson said the decision is whether we do what the death |
Senator Davis requested a roll call vote.
Senator Bunderson commented on the way the system is operated in Senator Burkett said he believed the Ring decision was the right There was a lot of confusion about this bill, and most people don’t know |
|
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION: |
Senator Burkett made a substitute motion to send the bill to the 14th order for amendment to look at the provision for the fixed sentence. He would like to see that come back as a separate bill. Second was by Senator Marley. |
Senator Davis told the committee that the single subject rule has not been violated, and that this was an attempt to undermine S1001. This bill deals with the sentencing process for those individuals convicted of first degree murder. As to the question of notice being given – in the print hearing, Chairman Darrington wanted to make sure there was plenty of time for individuals to be aware of the bill, and S1001 has been noticed up for today. |
|
VOTE: | Roll call vote was taken on the substitute motion, with Senators Marley and Burkett voting aye and Senators Darrington, Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis and Sweet voting no. Motion failed. Vote was then taken on the Original Motion which carried by a unanimous aye vote. S1001 will be sent to the floor with a do pass and will be sponsored by Senator Darrington on the floor. |
Adjournment: | Meeting was adjourned at 2:57 p.m. |
DATE: | Monday, January 20, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | The minutes are still being edited and verified and will be available for review in the next committee meeting. |
GUBERNATORIAL APPOINTMENT | |
Molly J. Huskey – reappointed to the State Appellate Public Defender for a term commencing September 13, 2002 and expiring August 1, 2006. |
|
Ms. Huskey was interviewed for this position, was asked why she wanted to be SAPD. She represents indigent individuals in our society which have been convicted of felonies, some of which have been given the death penalty. In some respects, it is a difficult job because she sees many who have committed offenses against children, and she has young children. Yet, even more important is that the person who is considered by many to be the lowest person in our society has rights that are upheld and has someone who will advocate for them, even if at times it means reprobation from other colleagues and their circles. She said she takes her duties very seriously, she loves the work she does. She is proud of the work she does, and she has to have that kind of pride in her work to do the job that is expected of her. Senator Darrington asked her what would happen down the road with Senator Richardson asked about the size of the department. Ms. Senator Darrington commented that the Assn. of Counties and also the |
|
RS12409 | Senator Bart Davis was asked by Dale Higer, who is recovering from surgery, to present this RS from the Commission of Uniform State Laws, of which he is a member. This legislation is to modify Idaho’s version of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act to make it consistent with the adopted modifications by the National Conference of Commissioners on uniform state law. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made the motion to send RS12409 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS 12412 | Senator Davis told the committee that this relates to the taking of a child’s testimony in a different way than you normally would a typical witness, both in criminal and non criminal proceedings. This is a unique and substantial change for lawyers across the country and Idaho is the first to look at this legislation. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS12412 to print. Second was by Senator Burkett and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS12495 | Senator Davis presented this legislation, which is not from the Uniform Act, and deals with failure to carry and maintain auto insurance. Locally, magistrate judges are reading the statute to say that if a person is given a citation for failure to carry and maintain auto insurance as an infraction, they are not able to impose restitution. So, if someone is involved in an accident and the court issues an order as it relates to failure to maintain auto insurance, the court is without any ability to compel any payment of restitution. Also this provides that the registration of the vehicle and the license plates be canceled if a person fails to carry and maintain auto insurance . Senator Bunderson expressed concern that if an individual is cited more |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS12495 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS12496 | This legislation is similar to RS1295 just printed, with one exception, as it does not include the cancellation of registration. Senator Darrington asked if these two pieces of legislation could co-exist and was told that they were different approaches to the same problem. Senator Burkett asked if restitution would apply to a person even if they were not at fault in the accident. Senator Davis said that he didn’t draft this legislation, but it was a good point, and he would take a look at it. Senator Richardson asked if these two pieces of legislation were an |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS12496 to print. Second was by Senator Burkett and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS12568 | When this is printed it will go directly to the floor and will not come back to our committee. Senator Davis presented this as the new majority leader, being his first opportunity to appear in front of this committee on the second half of the name. ” We think of it as the Judiciary Committee, but it is also the Rules Committee” he said. He is representing the majority caucus and asking the committee to change one of its rules. He asked the minutes reflect that this legislation is in behalf of the majority caucus to change Rule Four, adding the pledge of Allegiance to the second order of business, following the prayer. Immediately following the prayer, the page who sits in the front seat, on the right, will now be sitting in the “pledge” chair. They will stand where the chaplain stood, and lead the pledge of allegiance. The next day’s journal will reflect the name of the page that led the pledge the previous day. Senator Burkett told the committee that the minority caucus will gladly join in support of this legislation. |
MOTION: | Senator Richardson made a motion to send RS12568 to print. Second was by Senator Sweet and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS12585 | Senator Darrington explained that the Idaho State Bar has a client security fund which costs $10 per bar member, to reimburse those who were wronged by an attorney. The legislation is to change the name of the fund from “Client Security Fund” to “Clients Assistance Fund,” and also raise the fee to $20.00. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made the motion to send RS12585 to print. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
Adjournment: | Meeting was adjourned at 1:55 p.m. |
DATE: | Wednesday, January 22, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | Senator Richardson made a motion to approve the minutes of January 17 as written. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Bunderson made a motion to approve the minutes of January 22 as written. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
VOTE: | Gubernatorial appointment of Molly J. Huskey to the SAPD for a term to expire August 1, 2006. Senator Bunderson made a motion to accept the re-appointment of Ms. Huskey as the State Appellate Public Defender and recommend to the Senate that she be confirmed. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
HCR 004 | Jeannine Wood, Secretary of the Senate, presented a series of resolutions to the committee as part of the printing contracts. This resolution provides for the printing of the House and Senate bills, resolutions, memorials and amendments. She told the committee that it is very hard to get bids anymore and the State printing shop was the most economical and the most convenient. Senator Sorensen asked if there had been less paper usage, as Senator Richardson asked for an average cost of printing for the last 10 |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send HCR004 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Darrington will carry this on the Senate floor. |
HCR 005 | This resolution provides for the printing of the House and Senate legislative daily journals and the State Print Ship runs them for $18.00 a page. The Secretary of the Senate’s office sends them down at night; they are back up in the morning as by law they have to be back by 9 a.m. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send HCR005 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Lodge will carry this on the Senate floor. |
HCR 006 | This resolution provides for printing the House and Senate legislative permanent journals . The State print shop doesn’t do permanent journals, so Custom Printing publishes the paper bound journal for the Attorney General, President of the Senate, Senate Pro Tem, Secretary of the State and the Speaker of the House. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send HCR006 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Sorensen will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
HCR 007 | This resolution provides for the printing of Session Laws. Mrs. Wood told the committee that Caxton Printers from Caldwell has done the session laws for years. Senator Sorensen was concerned that only Caxton printers gets contacted, but Mrs. Wood replied that it is almost impossible to find someone who does hardbound binding anymore. Caxton does SMYTHE binding which is very sturdy and can withstand the use the books receive. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send HCR007 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Richardson will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
S1002 | This bill will be heard on Monday, January 27. |
S1003 | Brent Reinke, Director of the State of Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections, presented this legislation, relating to support of juveniles, to help clarify the way that Juvenile Corrections will be collecting the reimbursements for the care and treatment of the juvenile offenders in the Idaho Department of Juvenile Correction custody. Whenever a juvenile is placed by the court in custody other than that of the juvenile’s parents, or legal guardian designated to care for them, the court may order that the parent pay a reasonable sum, as directed by the court to cover in whole or in part , the support and treatment of the juvenile. If the parent refuses, then the court may proceed against them for contempt, and in the form of a civil judgment. One of the challenges encountered is that the needs of the 44 counties In the Juvenile Corrections Act, it is the very clearly stated that it is the Senator Sorensen asked what the cost was for this, and what is charged Senator Burkett asked how the legal process fees were handled. Mr. Senator Sorensen asked if it says in the legislation that the money goes Senator Bunderson expressed concern about the consequences where Senator Darrington commented that this program was highly successful |
MOTION: | Senator Darrington gave the committee the option to go to the 14th order as asked by Director Reinke, or draft a new RS and go through the whole process, or maybe not act on it at all. Senator Sorensen made a motion to hold the bill in committee to see the final bill returned. Second was by Senator Davis and the bill will be held in committee. Motion was carried by a voice vote. |
Tom Frost representing the Idaho Supreme Court presented a series of bills that the Supreme Court has recommended in its annual report to the Governor the concern defect or omissions in the laws. |
|
S1004 | This bill amends Section 18-310 to restore a person’s civil rights, including the right to possess a firearm, upon completion of a sentence for conviction of a felony, except in respect to certain crimes, one of which is “lewd conduct with a minor child under the age of sixteen.” This crime is identified by statute number as “18-1508 (3), (4), (5) and (6), Idaho Code.” There are no subsections in 18-1508 and this bill removes these subsection numbers. |
MOTION: | Senator Davis made a motion to send S1004 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion was carried by a voice vote. |
S1005 | This bill relates to the printing of the Idaho Supreme Court reports to remove outdated language requiring the printer to furnish 400 copies of each volume of the Idaho Reports and also furnish a $500 performance bond in respect to the printing contract. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send S1005 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Sweet will carry the bill on the Senator Floor. |
S1006 | This bill removes an 1864 provision that when a defendant is charged with a felony, the defendant must be taken before a magistrate who conducts a preliminary examination of the charge. The practice of taking testimony by a stenographer no longer exists and this bill eliminates that requirement. |
MOTION: | Senator Bunderson made a motion to send S1006 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Burkett and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Sweet will carry the bill on the Senator Floor. |
S1007 | This bill corrects a typographical error relating to the qualification of prospective jurors for jury duty. Senator Darrington reminded the committee of the time there was legislation to remove a comma. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send S1007 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Sweet will carry the bill on the Senator Floor. |
S1008 | This bill relates to the setting of bail for a person after arrest to eliminate archaic references to “probate and justices'” courts which are no longer in existence and causes confusion. |
MOTION: | Senator Davis made a motion to send S1008 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Sweet will carry the bill on the Senator Floor. |
Adjournment: | The meeting was adjourned at 2:20 p.m. |
DATE: | Friday, January 24, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | Senator Lodge made a motion to accept the minutes of January 22 as written. Second was by Senator Sweet and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS12660 | Kathy Holland Smith presented this legislation relating to court fees to correct a code reference to transfer 10% of fees directly to POST. This is a fix to make sure that these fees are given to POST, who are behind this legislation and really need it. This is an easier way than to raise fine amount and would have the same effect. |
MOTION: | Senator Sweet made a motion to send RS12660 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS12623 | Robert Aldridge , from the Taxation, Probate and Trust committee of the Idaho State Bar, presented this legislation. This one is a technical correction and part of an ongoing review and revision of this complex area to reflect modern estate planning methods while preserving basic protections for family of the deceased. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS12623 to print. Second was by Senator Burkett and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS12625 | This legislation answers questions that arise in probate court, but when there is no probate proceeding. This will let the surviving spouse appear by electronic appearance or submit an affidavit. This bill eliminates confusion and will lower the costs of summary administration. |
MOTION: | Senator Davis made a motion to send RS12625 to print. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS12630 | This legislation adopts updates to code for non-probate transfers, from the old code in 1972 and to cure problems that have been created. The only change is when Idaho changed the 1 year statute to 2 years, that is still retained. |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made a motion to send RS12630 to print. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS12670 | When the Idaho Nonprofit Corporation Act was amended in 1997, prior sections were repealed, and replaced by parallel sections. This bill inserts the proper references tot he existing sections in the Act, so that they can be found without having to consult the References Table each time. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS12670 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS12671 | This provides for certain types of exempt property to pass to a surviving spouse, or children if there is no surviving spouse. However, a question arose as to whether the will could provide that such exempt property allowance not be given to children, or only to some of the children, especially in cases where the decedent was estranged from one or more children. This clarifies the will and carries out the general philosophy that terms and conditions in a will can override many of the provisions of the act. |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made a motion to send RS12671 to print. Second was by Senator Bunderson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS12672 | This legislation is coordination with AARP , which concerns mostly grandparents raising grandchildren, and is to provide for a simple method to delegate the temporary care, custody and control of a minor child to another person. This bill addresses that when the power is for a minor and is granted to a family, that the power will last for three years instead of six months. This was brought about during the Deseret Storm conflict when the time limit for temporary custody was expired, but the parents were still out of the country and could not renew the custody agreement. Senator Davis asked about the language overriding the rights of |
MOTION: | Senator Burkett made a motion to send RS12672 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
ADJOURNMENT: | Meeting was adjourned at 1:50 p.m. |
DATE: | January 27, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | Senator Lodge made a motion to approve the minutes of January 24 as written. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
S1002 | Kathy Baird, Sex Offender Classification Board presented this bill whose primary purpose is to implement a formal application and approval system to ensure that providers who perform psychosexual evaluations for the courts prior to sentencing, meet the additional sex offender-specific training and experience qualifications. Those approved will be identified as certified evaluators, and they will be identified on a statewide roster to aid the courts in selecting providers to conduct these evaluations. Senator Darrington asked how many will apply and pay the fee and was Senator Darrington asked when these evaluations are done, and are The person’s doing the evaluation must be a “certified evaluator”, which Senator Burkett asked a psychiatrist could qualify from experience and Section 18-8314 will be amended to establish the approval system and Section 18-8317 will also be amended to include authority for mental |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made a motion to send S1002 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sweet. Senator Davis made a substitute motion to send S1002 to the 14th order for amendment. Second was by Senator Bunderson and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Darrington will sponsor S1002 on the Senate floor. |
RULES REVIEW – Commission of Pardons and Parole | |
IDAPA 50 | Olivia Craven, Executive Director, presented the rules which are the final ones here for approval. One section was changed and a definition of Case Worker was added. Section 100.03 lets public know of a hearing for inmate releases. In this release procedure, as things are computerized now, it is not necessary for the inmate to submit written parole plans, but can be verbally present the plans to a case worker or hearing officer. The commission may waive investigations of parolee plans in special cases, such as if someone is in a coma, or similar situation. Senator Davis questioned the electronic record, and was told that this is required by the department. They used to require inmates to come with a parole plan to a hearing, and now they can give it to a case worker. Ms. Craven said there could be an amendment to require a parole plan, but the case worker asks the questions of the inmate: ” Where are you going, and what are you doing to do?” The case worker is responsible to put those responses in the computer, so the information is on record and the inmate doesn’t have to come before the Commission. Section 09a. was changed that only the executive director or the Concerning pardons: if the applicant for pardon is residing in a |
MOTION: | Senator Davis made a motion to accept the rules of the Commission of Pardons and Parole. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
REPORT ON COMMISSION OF PARDONS AND PAROLE | |
Olivia Craven gave a report on the Commission, which is a 5-member part time board, and serves only during hearings. They are appointed by the Governor to serve 3-year terms. Ms. Craven is the Executive Director, and is responsible for the day-to-day operation of the Commission, preparing them for hearings, and carrying out their decision. The hearings are conducted monthly, and last year, 1727 parole Senator Darrington expressed concern for the videoconferencing “as The first hearing for an inmate is scheduled when they reach the RDU Senator Bunderson commented that about 4 years ago, there was Ms. Craven introduced her assistant, Tracy Shearer who came from the |
|
Adjournment: | Meeting was adjourned at 2:45 p.m. |
DATE: |
Wednesday, January 29, 2003 |
TIME: |
1:30pm |
PLACE: |
Room. 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators |
MINUTES: |
Senator Sweet made a motion to approve the minutes of |
Introduction: |
Senator Darrington introduced Joe and Jamie Larsen, of Burley |
|
GUBERNATORIAL APPOINTMENTS Commission on Pardons and Parole |
|
Robin Sandy of Boise, Idaho reappointed to the Commission |
|
E.E. “Bud” Brinegar of Meridian, Idaho reappointed to the Commission on Pardons and Parole for a term commencing |
|
Robin Sandy told the committee that this is a 3 year |
|
Senator Bunderson asked if these mothers are doing drugs |
|
Senator Richardson said he receives input from his |
|
Senator Burkett asked if there is a long-term drug treatment |
|
Bud Brinegar, has served for 3 1/2 years on the Commission |
|
Senator Darrington thanked Ms. Sandy and Mr. Brinegar for |
S1019 |
Mike Oths, Idaho State Bar, presented this legislation as his |
|
Senator Darrington asked him to address the question of the |
|
Senator Davis asked if on Monday when Mr. Oths puts on his |
|
Senator Sorensen commented that she feels much like the |
Motion: |
Senator Burkett made a motion to send S1019 to the floor |
S1028 |
Mike Becar deferred to Kathy Holland Smith from the budget |
|
The original state fiscal impact of enhancing revenues to the |
|
Senator Darrington stressed that this bill is a result of an |
|
Senator Burkett said he couldn’t see the logic of the intent to |
|
Mike Becar, Director of POST, clarified the question of civil |
MOTION: |
Senator Davis made a motion to send S1028 to the floor with |
|
Bob Marsh, Public Policy for Boise State University gave a |
|
This is the fourteenth annual report to the Idaho Legislature |
Adjournment: |
Meeting adjourned at 2:42 p.m. |
DATE: | Friday, January 31, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | Senator Richardson made a motion to approve the minutes of January 29th as written. Second was by Senator Sorensen, and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
Committee Vote: Gubernatorial Appointments |
Motion was made by Senator Lodge to recommend to the full Senate, the Gubernatorial appointment of Robin Sandy to the Commission of Pardons and Parole. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. Motion was made by Senator Bunderson to recommend to the full Senate the Gubernatorial appointment of E.E. “Bud” Brinegar to the Commission of Pardons and Parole. Second was by Senator Sweet and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
GUBERNATORIAL APPOINTMENT:
Pamela J. Huntsman of Twin Falls, Idaho, reappointed to the Sexual Kathy Baird, Executive Director of the Sexual Offender Classification Senator Richardson asked if it was more difficult to rehabilitate a Violent |
|
S1016 | Rex Blackburn, Uniform State Law Commissioner presented this bill to provide the adoption of the Uniform Child Witness Testimony by the Alternative Methods Act. This act circulated through members of the Idaho State Bar, the Courts, Judiciary, the Trial Court Judges throughout the state, who all gave input and he addressed the concerns expressed, but there was not really opposition to this legislation. Senator Darrington had a concern that the age was being moved from 16 to age 13, but there was total support in the Attorney General’s Office and the Prosecutors Office for this change. Mr. Blackburn said that this act sets standards and procedures for a child who has to testify in either a civil or criminal proceeding to determine if they will be permitted to testify by a means other than face to face confrontation with others in a courtroom. The purpose behind the act is to balance the rights of a party to confront and cross-examine a witness and yet balance the interests of children with their sensitivities. Idaho made an effort to address this in Code 19-3024a, which addressed only criminal proceedings. This bill repeals that section and covers both civil and criminal proceedings. This act is needed to provide uniformity, and the advantage if adopted in surrounding states, is that we get the benefit of the judicial interpretations of the same acts in those states. This was read in two separate annual meetings of the National conference and passed last year. The first of the four concerns was if the court could, on its own motion, start Senator Darrington asked Patti Tobias, from the Supreme Court if Mr. |
MOTION: | Senator Davis made a motion to send S1016 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Davis will carry this bill on the Senate floor |
Rules Review: | Idaho Division of Veterans Services |
Docket
21-0101-0201 |
Richard Jones, administrator of the Division of Veterans Services presented the pending rules. This rule addresses the current admission requirement that a veteran be eligible for, apply for, or be in receipt of a VA disability pension as a prerequisite for admission to a State Veterans Home. Peacetime veterans are now eligible for admission but don’t qualify for VA disability pensions, so this requirement will only apply to wartime veterans. Since the Veterans Homes became Medicaid-certified in 2001, nursing care residents now pay their maintenance charges in advance and are not required to pay a security deposit. |
MOTION: | Senator Burkett made a motion to accept Docket 21-0101-0201. Second was by Senator Darrington and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
Docket
21-0102-0201 |
This rule would insure that Emergency Grant funds are available to veterans who are truly in need, and that veterans be required to list Idaho as their home of record in order to be eligible for an Emergency Grant. This would eliminate abuse by those who travel from state to state collecting available veteran benefits. Surviving spouses also qualify by benefit of their eligible veteran spouse. Also, there is a change that only one county service officer training session per year be held, rather than 2. Also individuals who request reimbursement for travel or training must be official county service officers. |
MOTION: | Senator Sweet made a motion to accept Docket 21-0102-0201. Second was by Senator Darrington and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
Docket
21-0103-0201 |
When State Veterans Homes were initially certified for Medicaid, it was determined that the maximum monthly nursing care charge would be uniform in all three homes. This rule change strikes that requirement and makes the charges more accurately reflect the cost of care in each home. |
MOTION: | Senator Burkett made a motion to accept Docket 21-0103-0201. Second was by Senator Sweet and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
Docket
21-0104-0201 |
This is an entirely new chapter establishing the rules for the operation and maintenance of the Idaho State Veterans Cemetery. Groundbreaking ceremonies for the Cemetery were held on October 31, 2002. Construction started in November 2002 and will continue through 2003 and 2004. It is scheduled to open during the summer of 2004. Mr. Jones told the committee that there would be no cost for a veteran for a cremation crypt, but the funeral home would have to be paid. Senator Burkett asked who qualified, and was told that any individual who served on active duty and received an honorable discharge would be eligible. The only exception would be if that veteran was convicted of a capital crime, such as Timothy McVeigh, and would not be eligible to be buried in the cemetery. |
MOTION: | Senator Sweet made a motion to accept Docket 21-0104-0201. Second was by Senator Darrington and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
Docket
21-0105-0201 |
This is also a new chapter establishing rules for the operation of the pilot Transportation Payment Program for wheelchair-confined Veterans. The 2002 Legislature appropriated $30,000 for this program, and this chapter of rules sets forth who may use the program. There has been very positive input from those who have used it, as many injuries to these wheelchair-confined veterans occur when their spouse tries to help them into a car. Those in a nursing home are not eligible for this program. Twenty-eight of the forty-four counties spent under $1000 in six months for this carrier service. |
MOTION: | Senator Burkett made a motion to accept Docket 21-0105-0201. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
This concludes the rules review for the committee for this legislative session. There will be no committee meeting on Monday, February 3. |
|
Adjournment: | Meeting was adjourned at 2:28 p.m. |
DATE: | February 5, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MEMBERS
EXCUSED: |
Senator Sorensen |
MINUTES: | Senator Richardson made a motion to accept the minutes of January 31 as written. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
Committee Vote: | Gubernatorial Appointment
Pamela J. Huntsman of Twin Falls, Idaho, reappointed to the Sexual |
Motion: | Senator Sweet made the motion to recommend to the full Senate the re-appointment of Pamela Huntsman. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
Bob Aldridge, who has worked with the Probate and Trust Section of the Idaho State Bar presented a series of bills to the committee which are part of an ongoing review and revision of the complex area to reflect modern estate planning methods while preserving basic protections for family of the deceased. |
|
S 1029 | This bill passed originally in 1987, provides for limitations on the civil liability of officers, directors, and volunteers who serve without compensation for a nonprofit corporation or organization. Part 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 adopted. The cross reference sections are therefore now incorrect. The remaining equivalent section in the new Act which requires a cross reference is Section 30-3-82 (Loans to or guarantees for directors and officers). The actions covered in the old cross-referenced sections are otherwise covered by sections of the new Act; for example, Section 30-3-85 covers standards of conduct for officers of nonprofit corporations and the consequences for violation of such standards. Therefore, that section does not need to be cross-referenced and the bill simply corrects the old cross references to the proper new cross reference. |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made a motion to send S1029 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sweet and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Lodge will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
S 1030 | The alternative to probate is called summary administration, which is a convenient way of passing property from a deceased spouse to a surviving spouse without going through a full probate proceeding. Because there is no probate, all debts of the deceased’s estate are assumed by the surviving spouse and there is no administration of the estate. Because this is not really a probate proceeding, the 3-year period limitation on probate proceedings does not apply. This bill eliminates the confusion of whether the spouse must appear at a hearing, or can submit the affidavit by telephonic appearance or electronic transmission, which lowers the costs of summary administration. |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made a motion to send S1030 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sweet and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Richardson will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
S 1031 | This bill is an update for the Uniform Law Commissioners on probate transfers and unlike the existing law, provides a clear statement of the definition of a “nonprobate transfer”and what liability the transferee has to the estate of the deceased. The language is clear and direct, and gives clear guidance which allows the deceased to provide in will for their preferred order of reimbursement. One important point is that the bill does not extend or change whether a debt or right can be enforced against a non probate asset; the bill only clarifies the procedures and also that the decedent can specify the order in which non-probate assets are liable for the debts or rights granted in probate to surviving spouses or minor children. This bill will not interfere with the ability of persons to use non-probate transfers: it merely makes it clearer what will happen at death. |
MOTION: | Senator Sweet made a motion to send S 1031 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Davis and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Sweet will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
S 1032 | This bill is to correct an improper cross reference. When the Idaho Non-profit Corporation Act was amended in 1997, prior sections were repealed and replaced by parallel sections as noted in the compiler’s notes to the current Idaho code. However, the reference in Section 30-1209A was not corrected; therefore anyone looking at this section would have to know that the reference was incorrect and also know where to find the compiler’s notes and parallel sections table. |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made a motion to send S 1032 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Lodge will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
S 1033 | The main purpose fo this bill is to exempt property allowance for children of a decedent when there is no surviving spouse. There is provision in existing law for certain types of exempt property to pass to a surviving spouse, or children if there is no surviving spouse. Two years in an overhaul of the exemptions in Idaho Code, a question arose as to whether the will of the decedent could provide that such exempt property allowance not be given to children, or only to some of the children. In one case, the child has been convicted of criminal assault on the parent and was incarcerated for that crime. Nonetheless, the child appeared to have had a right to claim the exemption under the existing statute. This amendment clarifies that the will of the parent can provide that a child cannot claim the exemption, and also carries out the general philosophy of the probate act that the decedent can override many of the default provisions of the act by express terms and conditions in a will. The amendment does not apply to surviving spouses; such allowances for a surviving spouse can be taken care of in prenuptial or postnuptial agreements. Senator Davis asked what the Uniform Act provided, and was told that it |
MOTION: | Senator Richardson made a motion to send S1033 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Bunderson and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Burkett will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
S 1034 | This bill was originally brought about in 1991,because of Desert Storm, to provide for a simple method to delegate the temporary care, custody, and control of a minor to another person. Since its enactment, the statute has expanded in its use, but without amendment. In addition to being used for school purposes, where a minor may attend school in a location away from his parents, the power can also be used when a family member, having problems with drugs for example, wishes to have grandparents or other family members care for a minor child of the family member. In many cases, the child is left with the grandparents or siblings and the parent disappears, sometimes for an extended time. The existing statute contains a six-month limitation for standard cases and twelve months for military personnel serving outside the United States. This often creates a problem when the parent disappears and the power cannot be renewed. This has been occurring quite often since that time. This bill provides that when the grant of power is for a minor and is Senator Davis was concerned with the revocation procedure, as he has Senator Davis asked if he understood this correctly, “nothing in the Senator Burkett asked about the powers of the parents granting these Senator Burkett also asked about use of the word “delegate” instead of Senator Davis looked up the definition of the word “delegate” being “to Meri Brennan for the Dept. of Health and Welfare, Children and Family Jack Jones, representing AARP commented on grandparents raising Georgia Mackle, President of the Treasure Valley Grandparents as |
MOTION: | Senator Davis made a motion to send S 1034 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Davis will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
Adjournment: | Meeting was adjourned at 2:42 p.m. |
DATE: | February 7, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MEMBERS
EXCUSED: |
Senator Bunderson |
MINUTES: | Senator Lodge made a motion to accept the minutes of February 5. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS 12410 | Dale Higer, Uniform Law Commissioner presented this legislation which amends Section 39-6306A, of the Idaho Code, relating to the Uniform Interstate Enforcement of Domestic Violence Protection Orders Act. The act removes language prohibiting the courts from enforcing support provisions of foreign protection orders. It also 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: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS 12410 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS 12878 | Brent Reinke, Director Department of Juvenile Corrections presented this legislation to clarify the ability of the Department to collect reimbursement from parents whose juveniles are in custody of the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections. They have always had reimbursements from the parents, but due to a new law, the Dept of Health and Welfare cannot help with this collection, so an amendment was needed. The Department anticipates that this amendment will allow collection of between $300,000 and $400,000 by Fiscal Year 2005 in support and reimbursement orders from parents of these juveniles. It is further anticipated that once the collections systems are stabilized and funded through this amendment, the Department will maintain an annual revenue of approximately $450,000. |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made a motion to send RS 12878 to print. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS 12880 | Brent Reinke also presented this legislation which amends the Juvenile Corrections Act, and adds a section regarding secure detention of status offenders in the Juvenile Corrections Act. Change is needed to make Idaho statutes consistent and to keep Idaho in compliance with requirements of the federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, as amended. These modifications in the Juvenile Corrections Act should minimally affect Tom Frost from the Supreme Court worked closely with this legislation, Senator Marley asked about the language, “minority only” in this phrase. |
MOTION: | Senator Sweet made a motion to send RS12880 to print. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS 12891 | Brent Reinke also presented this legislation which would amend Idaho Code to allow the custody review board of the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections to conduct an executive session, when authorized by law. This will also amend Idaho Code to exempt from disclosure certain records of the custody review board and add a new section, stating the duties of the custody review board to comply with open meeting laws, hold executive sessions and retain confidential reports of proceedings, to be available to certain parties. He told the committee that this is a mirror image of the Pardons and Parole section, regarding the Public Records Act. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS 12891 to print. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
H 85 | Bill von Tagen presented this bill on behalf of the Attorney General’s office. This bill amends Section 13-128 to provide the attorney general authority under the direction of the Department of Lands to prosecute actions for the recovery of penalties and costs incurred by the Direction of the Department of Lands or the Fire Warden of any forest protective district. Currently, only the county prosecutors fo the county where the costs are |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made the motion to send H85 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
H50 | Jim Woods, Program coordinator for the Department of Corrections presented this bill, which will cover administrative and membership costs required by the Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision, which is a new commission that consists of interstate compact states where offenders can be shipped in and out of the state. There is a membership fee, that is applied to each state each year, and pro-rated by the amount of offenders. The fee for this year is $18,000.00 and there are no funds readily generated to cover this. 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. Because of the interstate compact rules, the Dept. does not collect cost of supervision once the offender has been accepted in another state. As a result, 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 when they leave the state of Idaho and move to another state. Senator Richardson asked if a prisoner moves to another state, would Senator Davis asked if the chairman was aware of any judicial Senator Richardson asked if this bill was appropriating $40,000 annually Randy Tilley, Department of Financial Management responded, at the |
MOTION: | Senator Sweet made a motion to send H50 to the floor with a do pass recommendation. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
Adjournment: | The meeting was adjourned at 1:55 p.m. |
DATE: | Monday, February 10, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | Senator Richardson made a motion to accept the minutes as written except for a change in the date to reflect February 7th , instead of February 5th. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice. |
RS12449C1 | Rick Collignon, Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation presented this legislation that pertains to Recreational Trespass-Landholder Liability Limited. The Idaho Supreme Court has ruled that when fees are charged by a governmental entity for recreational purposes the existing limitations on liability for recreation trespass do not apply. The intent of this legislation is to clarify the liability of governmental entities for providing recreational opportunities whether or not a charge is imposed. Many recreational opportunities are supported by a user fee charge to partially defer some of the cost of providing these public services. Through this fee system the users who most directly benefit from these programs are expected to at least partially pay for the opportunities they enjoy. Due to a recent Idaho court decision, these charges could potentially lead to expansive undefined liabilities for governmental entities. If this issue is not addressed legislatively, other management alternatives If this legislation is not passed, important recreational programs and |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made the motion to send RS 12449C1 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
H 52 | Sarah Scott, Program Operations for the Commission on Aging explained this bill. She oversees case management and activities carried out by the staff in the field and she said this bill is necessary to set up athreshold 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. This mostly applies to care facilities, but could apply to a family member trying to care for a vulnerable adult. They don’t have the capabilities to handle them, and could drop them, causing an injury and then be accused of abuse. The statute is the Adult Abuse Neglect and Exploitation act. In the very Jim Baugh, Executive Director of Comprehensive Advocacy Inc. spoke in Senator Burkett asked Mr. Baugh if an investigation was accomplished, |
MOTION: | Senator Bunderson made a motion to send H52 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Marley. |
SUBSTITUTE MOTION: |
Senator Sorensen made the motion to send H52 to the 14th order for amendment. Second was by Senator Davis and the motion carried by a unanimous voice vote. |
DATE: | Wednesday, February12, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MEMBERS ABSENT: |
Senator Bunderson |
MINUTES: | Senator Lodge made a motion to accept the minutes of February 10 as written. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS 12983 | Chris Bray, presented this legislation that was passed by the Senate last year as S1419, but did not come up for a vote in the House Judiciary Committee before the session ended. It concerns instances where the parent who is ordered to pay child support is asked by the custodial parent to assume the care and support of the child. This would solve a problem by allowing a credit for a period of time when the parent who is obligated to pay child support has physical custody of the child. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS 12983 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS 12984 | Heather Reilly, Idaho Prosecutors Association, presented this legislation that would amend the Accessories law .The purpose is to clarify that a person may be charged as an accessory to a felony under Idaho Code when the person having knowledge that a felony has been committed, willfully withholds or conceals the felony; or harbors and protects the person who committed such felony even when the person who committed the felony has not yet been charged with or convicted of the crime. Currently, under Idaho Code the person who committed the felony must be charged with or convicted of the felony, such as murder, before a charge of accessory may be filed against a person who is hiding the murderer or concealing the crime. There were concerns from the committee that the law wouldn’t apply if a person just harbored or protected the person committing the felony. Ms. Reilly was willing to work with those concerns of the committee. |
MOTION: | Senator Davis made a motion to return RS12984 to Ms. Reilly. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
H 3a | Representative Jim Clark presented this bill that changes the current law that was created in 1998 as S1297, concerning the sexual offender registry and community right to know. Representative Clark said there is a certain small group of people whose Bonnie Heilander, from Coeur d’Alene testified in support of H3 and was Senator Darrington commented that just this last week he had looked at Kathy Baird, Executive Director of the Sexual Offender Board answered |
Senator Sweet asked Ms. Baird why these kinds of people are let out of prison and she was told that the Board has no choice, they are all sentenced, they serve their time and they are going to get out. There are no commitment laws in Idaho to keep them in prison, like there is in Washington state. Senator Darrington commented that the Commission of Pardons and |
|
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send H3 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Lodge will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
H72 | Representative Leon Smith present this bill that amends on that was heard last year relating to small lawsuit resolution. The Supreme Court had the comments of judges and justices. This bill has been word smithed to death, with no substantive changes. There are just technical corrections to make the act function in different court settings and in conformance with existing law and Supreme Court rules. |
MOTION: | Senator Davis made a motion to send H72 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Burkett and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Davis commented that Section 10 provides for an emergency clause and went into effect January 1, 2003, so these amendments need to get in place as soon as possible. Senator Davis will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
Adjournment: | Meeting was adjourned at 2:35 p.m. |
DATE: | February 17, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to accept the minutes of February 12 as written. Second was by Senator Davis and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS 12823 | This legislation would remove the sanitary supervision of barber shops, hairdressing parlors, retail cosmetics dealers, public bathrooms and bathing places from the jurisdiction of the Director of the Dept. of Health and Welfare. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made the motion to send RS12823 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. This will return to the Health and Welfare Committee as a bill. |
RS 12992 | Rondee Blessing, Boise City Attorneys Office presented this legislation. This was presented in the 2002 legislative session as S1451, originally proposed with felony punishments for second and subsequent offenses. This bill was then amended to remove felony punishments making all violations of this section a misdemeanor. However, the language “for a first offense” was left in the amended version of S1451a. This legislation will clarify that the offense of Intentional Destruction of a Telecommunications Line or Telecommunication Instrument is a misdemeanor that cannot be enhanced for a second or subsequent offense of this statute. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS12992 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS 12984C1 |
Heather Reilly presented this legislation which was corrected to clarify the requirement that a person knows when a felony has been committed and then harbors that person. This is the same legislation as she presented last week, but now it is more clear who will be charged as an accessory to a crime. |
MOTION: | Senator Davis made a motion to send RS12984C1 to print. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS 12962C1 |
Senator Burkett presented this legislation that would amend Idaho Code relating to the duty of persons who do not disclose known information related to convicted sex offenders who are registered under the Notification and Community Right-to-Know Act. The purpose of this legislation is to amend section 18-8325 to require private employers to inform their minor employees and parents when the child is working with a convicted sex offender. This legislation is needed because it is not feasible for children or their parents to identify registered sex offenders in the workplace and they should know when the employer has such information. The employer may incur civil liability for damages if they are negligent in informing minor employees and their parents. Senator Davis asked how it imposes a duty for those circumstances where an Senator Burkett responded that it indicates employers would have to provide Senator Davis asked how they would identify the parent or guardian, and how |
MOTION: | Senator Davis made a motion to return RS12962C1 to the sponsor. Second was by Senator Sorensen. |
Discussion | Senator Davis commented that this legislation should probably not be put in the immunity section of Code, and there should be plain language that they only disclose what they have actual knowledge of and if there is a duty to investigate. He also questioned what the sponsor’s expectation of the employer is concerning an investigation. He also struggled with the negligence issue and was troubled by the joint liability language in line 25, which makes every potential employer liable for damages. ” Parents and guardians are not as easy to identify these days and that fact should also be considered,” Senator Davis concluded. Senator Darrington suggested that this legislation be discussed with the business community before it is brought back to the committee for printing. |
VOTE: | Motion carried by a voice vote. |
S1093 | Dale Higer, Uniform Law Commissioner presented this bill addressing the requirements of the Uniform Interstate Enforcement of Domestic Violence Protection Orders Act. The Act removes language prohibiting courts 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: | Senator Sweet made a motion to send S1093 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
Adjourn: | Meeting was adjourned at 1:58 p.m. |
DATE: | February 19, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | Senator Sweet made a motion to accept the minutes of February 17 as written. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
S1115 | Chris Bray, presented this legislation and told the committee that this bill concerns instances where the parent who is ordered to pay child support is asked by the custodial parent to assume the care and support of the child. This would solve a problem by allowing a credit for a period of time when the parent who is obligated to pay child support has physical custody of the child. There are frequent instances where the parent who is ordered to pay child Senator Davis asked for a definition of the term “credit”. Mr. Bray said the Brian Dockstader testified about his experience with this situation. His two Bob Gourley, of Emmett, Idaho testified that his daughter moved to live in Kirsten Ocker, Department of the Attorney General for the Dept. of Health and Senator Davis asked about the new language in the bill as to the final Senator Darrington asked Ms. Ocker what her suggestions were for this bill. Senator Davis asked if he understood correctly that the Dept. was not Mr. Bray summarized by saying that the Department of Health and Welfare |
MOTION: | Senator Davis made a motion to send S1115 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sorensen . Senator Bunderson felt the group working on this wouldn’t have conclusions until next year, and those amendments should be seen before deciding on this legislation. He made a substitute motion to send S1115 to the 14th order for amendment. This motion died for a lack of a second. The main motion for do pass was carried by a voice vote. Senator Burkett will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
S 1096 | Brent Reinke presented this legislation to amend Idaho Code to state that certain records of the Custody Review Board are exempt from public disclosure and can conduct an executive session. The Custody Review Board was empowered on January 1, 2003, and this would add a new section to the Juvenile Corrections Act to clarify the obligations of the CRB to meet under the Open Meeting Laws, to set forth details of confidential records. This is almost identical to the Commission on Pardons and Parole statutes. The reason for this is that matters discussed during the proceedings of the CRB need sensitivity and confidentially, and the current laws do not clearly apply to the proceedings of this new board. This will also preserve the privacy of victims who attend, as well as their addresses and written statements. However, normally required notices will still go out to any who have the right to attend, which is unchanged from present statute. This has been approved by the Allied Daily Newspapers and they are in support. |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made the motion to send S1096 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Lodge will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
S1095 | Brent Reinke presented this legislation relating to the Juvenile Corrections Act which amends the Juvenile Corrections Act, regarding detention of status offenders, both when apprehended and then, after sentencing. This also adds a new section regarding secure apprehension and detention of status offenders in the Juvenile Corrections Act. Change is needed to make Idaho statutes consistent and to keep Idaho in compliance with requirements of the federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, as amended. This will also consolidate handling of status offenders in one section. Several sections of the JCA conflict with one another in appropriate management of status offenders in Idaho. Tom Frost from the Supreme Court worked closely with this legislation, helping to define “status offense” and “status offender”. “Status offender” means a person who commits a status offense. “Status offense” means “an act, omission or status that is prohibited by federal, state, local or municipal law or ordinance by reason of minority only, regardless of where the same occurred.” Senator Sorensen asked about the stricken language in Section 2, Senator Burkett asked if a private citizen could detain a juvenile and was told Tom Frost, Idaho Supreme Court was asked to explain this to the committee Mr. Reinke said smoking and alcohol are handled in adult court, but it is a |
MOTION: | Senator Richardson made a motion to send S1095 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sweet and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Richardson will carry this bill on the Senator floor. |
S 1094 | Brent Reinke presented this legislation which would amend code to clarify the department’s ability and methods to collect funds from parents of juveniles in IDJC . Legislative intent is that parents pay, in whole or in part, the state’s cost for the care and treatment of these juvenile offenders. As has been discussed before, the Department of Health and Welfare was earlier able to collect these funds, but Federal collections rules make that system no longer viable. This lack of funds has negatively impacted the state general fund, and the department’s funding. He distributed a reimbursement sheet showing actual cases and how the amount that parent’s pay is determined, as they try to work with these families not to put an undue hardship on them. (See attached #1) These payments will continue until the juvenile’s 18th birthday and then cease. |
MOTION: | Senator Bunderson made a motion to send S1094 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Bunderson will carry the bill on the Senate floor. |
H219 | Brent Reinke also presented this bill which amends the Juvenile Corrections Act to strike the language “criteria and operating procedures.” It is not the role of a state agency to determine criteria and operating procedures for county probation departments. |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made a motion to send H219 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Marley will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
Adjourned: | Meeting was adjourned at 2:47 p.m. |
DATE: | February 21, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES | Senator Lodge made a motion to accept the minutes of February 19 as written. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS13071 | This legislation had the number RS12387 on the Statement of Purpose and was presented by Ken Debert relating to qualifications of a designated examiner for purposes of adult and children’s mental health services, to furhter define terms of becoming a designated examiner. This will be sent to the Health and Welfare when printed. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS13071 be to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS13057 | Bob Aldridge presented this legislation which will clarify some language in Idaho Code Section 15-6-107. This section, both in its existing state and as it is proposed to be amended by Senate bill 1034, refers to how creditors of a deceased may seek payment for debts of the decedent from non-probate assets. That section is primarily procedural. Since 1961, Idaho has had provisions exempting certain insurance products from debts. This bill is a follow-up bill for Section 15-6-107 enacted in 1972 and its amendment in this session, to make this even more clear by adding the subsection “This section shall not be affected by the terms of section 15-6-107, Idaho Code.” |
MOTION | Senator Sweet made a motion to send RS13057 to print. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
S 1121 | Rondee Blessing, Boise City Attorneys Office presented this as a clean up bill to remove the language “for a first offense” which was left in the amended version of the bill as it appeared last year, S1451a. This will clarify that the offense of Interntional Destruction of a Telecommunications Line or instrument is a misdemeanor that is not enhancable for a second or subsequent offense of this statute. |
MOTION: | Senator Bunderson made a motion to send S1121 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Sweet will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
S 1122 | Heather Reilly returned with this bill to clarify when a person may be charged as accessory when the accessor harbors and protects a felon. This language needs to be in place to broaden the ability to charge and accessory before the trail and sentencing of the felon. |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made a motion to send S1122 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Burkett and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Richardson will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
H 115 | Mike Kane, representing the Sherrif’s Association presented this bill designed to take care of a problem occurring in jails relating to sexual contact with a prisioner. This is supported by ICRIMP, who has paid out claims for this type of behavior. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send H115 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Darrington will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
H 116 | Mike Kane also presented this bill which is to clarify 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. Currently the law does not explicitly state that persons who are authorized to be on the land and who become lost cannot be held liable. This bill will make it clear that such persons cannot be proceeded against in court. |
Senator Darrington asked if the sign has to be posted, and Mr. Kane responded that a verbal agreement or a sign posted every hundred feet or so is in keeping with the trespass law. This just applies to persons with actual knowledge have to prove knowing deliberate intentional violation. |
|
Senator Burkett asked if this applied to private land, and was told that the existing law is used on private land. Ski hills are private land, but the county is called to go to rescue people who go into areas that are off limits. This is broad enough language to include land owners. Senator Darrington asked about 2477’s and mentioned that there is a lot of conflict between those who want access from the land owner and this legislation. Mr. Kane told he committee that if an area is closed to the public by anyone, and someone goes there deliberately and gets lost, then they will be held liable for all the costs incurred. |
|
MOTION: | Senator Burkett made a motion to send H118 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Marley will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
Adjournment: | Senator Darrington told the committee that there would be no meeting on Monday, February 14, and that the committee would hear H92, the Tort Reform bill on Monday, March 3. Meeting was adjourned at 1:58 p.m. |
DATE: | February 26, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | Senator Lodge made a motion to accept the minutes of February 24 as written. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS13062 | This concurrent resolution would reject a pending rule of the Idaho Commission on Aging relating to senior services program fees and client contributions. The bill will be sent to the Health and Welfare committee. |
RS13064 | This concurrent resolution would reject a pending rule of the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare relating to eligibility for aid to the aged, blind and disabled and concerning rebut table presumption. Senator Darrington told the committee that these were concurrent |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS13062 and RS12064 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS13096 | This is relating to regulation of installers of heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems, and is a bill being printed in our committee at the request of Senator Andreason and the Commerce Committee. It will be returned to that committee as a bill. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS13096 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS13098 | This is a resolution to recognize March 3 as “Read Across Idaho Day” and honors Dr. Seuss’s birthday as a time to remember the importance of reading. Senator Malepeai and Senator Marley co-sponsored this bill and asked the committee to send it right to the floor, so it would be in place by next Monday. |
MOTION: | Senator Richardson made a motion to send RS13098 to print and to the Senate floor. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
S1109 | Rick Collingon, Parks and Recreation presented this bill that would clarify the liability of governmental entities for providing recreational opportunities whether or not a charge is imposed. The Idaho Dept. of Parks and Recreation was created with the intent to secure areas of scenic beauty, historical significance, recreational utility and to provide recreational opportunities for our citizens. They have also been directed by the legislature to make reasonable charges for the use of these areas. There are now more than 75 State parks and recreational trailways used by more than 3 million residents and visitors each year. At most of these parks and trailways, there is some type of self-supporting user fee to help offset the cost of operating and maintaining the operations. Collectively these user fee/self-tax efforts offset more than $7 million of the cost of operating these each year. In Idaho, all State Parks and public parks regardless if they are managed by the state or a political subdivision are financed 100% by public funding. The intent of this legislature is to address the issue of whether or not there is This language makes it clear that publicly supported programs or services Dave Fair, director of Parks and Recreation for Post Falls, testified that this Senator Burkett asked what is the difference between parks and recreation David Kerrick – Idaho Trial Lawyers Assn. spoke in opposition to this bill. As Mr. Bithell states that “there is no rule in Idaho requiring the owner of land to Mr. Bithell also states” There may be protection by Idaho’s Recreational Use Mr. Kerrick asked the committee to hold the bill and take care of this in the Senator Darrington told the audience that this discussion would have to be |
Adjournment: | The meeting was begun at 2:20 p.m. and was adjourned at 2:55 p.m. |
DATE: | February 28, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MEMBERS
EXCUSED: |
Chairman Darrington |
MINUTES: | Senator Marley made a motion to accept the minutes of February 26 as written. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
Committee Vote: |
H62 was referred to our committee and needs to be re-referred. Senator Sweet made a motion to send H62 to the floor to be re-referred to the Commerce Human Resources committee Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS 12506C1 | Senator Bunderson presented this legislation which bans the promotion of or participation in Badman, Tough man, ultimate fighting and martial arts events, whether amateur or professional, with certain exceptions. Violators will be guilty of a felony. Throughout the nation, these “events” often result in serious injury and death of some participants. In 2002, a participant in one of these events in Pocatello was killed. Prohibiting such events is sound public policy. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made the motion to send RS12506C1 to print. Second was by Senator Bunderson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
S1109 | Rick Collingnon, Idaho Parks and Recreation gave an update to re-acquaint the committee on the discussion from Wednesday. This legislation addresses recreational trespass in a section of code where a state allows itself to be sued for land used for recreational purposes. Brad Eidam, Idaho Trial Lawyers Association spoke in opposition to the bill Mike Kane spoke in behalf of the Idaho Association of Counties which Senator Sorensen asked if it would help to define the term, “publicly Senator Davis asked if someone comes on private land, what happens and There was a lot of discussion about the word “charge” and what it covers, and Lynn Luker, an attorney representing himself, spoke in opposition of the bill Senator Marley asked if we can’t change and close off parks and people go in Jim Dickinson, Ada County Prosecutor’s office spoke in favor of the bill as did |
MOTION: | Senator Bunderson made a motion to send S1109 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Marley. Senator Davis said he was not in favor of this bill and there shouldn’t be a difference in standard care for a private or public land. The definition of owner needed to be defined. Senator Sorensen said the legislation wasn’t clear and correct and if parks are closed it will impact the issue of state funding. She would not be voting for the bill. Senator Burkett said that there was a need for a separate statutory scheme. By combining these sections of code, it messed it all up. He didn’t feel that parks would be closing if this didn’t pass, but it needs to be held and the issues addressed. Senator Burkett made a substitute motion to hold the bill in committee for re-drafting. Second was by Senator Sorensen and a roll call vote was held. Vote was 4 to 3 in favor of holding the bill. |
H 216 | Representative Mack Shirley presented this legislation for the Board of Certified Shorthand Reporters to permit them to continue to fulfill the statutory mandate to protect the public welfare through licensing and enforcement activities, it is necessary to increase the previously established cap on the amount that the board can charge for renewal fees. This board is a self-sustaining agency in Idaho, and this will raise the fee for renewal to $75.00. They are audited annually and fees paid come from court reporters. Increasing the cap rate on renewals will provide the board with the flexibility to adopt, by rule, renewal fees that exceed the currently established amounts. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send H 216 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Davis and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Lodge will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
H 253 | Rick Collingnon presented this bill he worked on with Representative John Campbell. The purpose of this legislation is to reduce some penalties from misdemeanors to infractions for certain recreation laws. This relates to penalties for violation of recreation laws to provide for infraction penalties for violations of statutes or rules of the department of parks and recreation. It mainly addressees 4 penalties within the code. They are for Registration of ATV and motorbike, transfer of sticker (15-day requirement), non-resident registration exemption, and noise abatement – ATV and Motorbike. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send H 253 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Davis and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Sweet will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
Senator Bunderson gave the committee copies of his report on the Task Force of key leaders to evaluate Idaho’s Statutory Rape Laws. After all the data was gathered and reviewed, there appeared to be no compelling reason to move forward with any legislation at this time, and accordingly none was recommended. At the chairman’s request, the report will be a part of the official minutes. (See attached report) Senator Sweet asked about male rape and was told by Heather Reilly, Prosecuting attorney’s office that male rape is in a separate code section, and there is not a comparable subsection criminalizing what is commonly referred to as “statutory rape”. Senator Lodge, acting as Chairman suggested to the committee that this |
|
ADJOURN: | Meeting was adjourned at 3:20 p.m. |
DATE: | March 3, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Marley, Burkett |
MEMBERS
EXCUSED: |
Senator Sweet |
MINUTES: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to accept the minutes of February 28 as written. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
H 92 | Ken McClure representing Givens Pursley on behalf of the Liability Reform Coalition spoke in favor of Tort Reform, and presented a list of the Members of the Idaho Liability Reform Coalition. (See attached #1) He said this was brought about to modify rules for the determination and In 1987, the “deep pockets” rule was repealed except for subsection 5 which |
Limitation on noneconomic damages is being reduced from $400,000 to $250,000 beginning July 1, 2004. In Idaho Code 6-1603, Economic damages is described as “mean objectively verifiable monetary loss , including but not limited to out-of-pocket expenses, loss of earnings, loss of use of property, cost of replacement or repair, cost of obtaining substitute domestic services, loss of employment, medical expenses, or loss of business or employment opportunities.” In the case of a wrongful death, each gets up to $250,000. This cap is constitutional and violates the right to a jury trial. There is no history of large punitive awards in Idaho and this is award is not designed to compensate for injuries, but for civil punishment for the person causing the injury. The function of the judicial system is to compensate, but not more than necessary. If a person owes another, and they know it, why does there need to be a lawsuit, unless the person wants to become rich and retire off the lawsuit. Senator Darrington asked what you say to a young person who has been in an Senator Darrington then commented that according to his mail, doctors and Senator Davis asked in the interest of time, to submit three pages of questions He did ask Mr. McClure if the proposal the coalition brought forth in 1987 had an Senator Bunderson asked about punitive damage in the public sector domain, Senator Marley asked for a better definition of “wanton” as it was talked about Senator Burkett asked about the people who have written letters expecting Senator Richardson was trying to weigh the value of the mail he has received |
|
H92 | David Kerrick, representing the Idaho Trial Lawyers spoke in opposition to H92, as he has grave concerns with the bill. The concerns are not so much for the claim of existing clients, but for future victims of negligence in this state, and who might be affected by this. Idaho is not known for being the insurance or manufacturing capital of the United States. So when we look at this bill, we wonder how this is going to help Idaho, and the net effect is to help out -of-state interests by protecting corporate wrong doing, insurance companies, and big manufacturers at the expense of Idaho citizens who will have their fundamental jury rights drastically curtailed. If you don’t think this is a drastic piece of legislation, think back to when you first heard about it. The doctors have been really pushing this bill, which is misguided as very little of the bill relates to doctors. The first part of the bill protects manufacturers of medical devises and pharmaceutical companies, which if you were a doctor involved in a negligence action, you would want to make sure that it was possible for a claimant to recover against a large pharmaceutical company or someone who manufactured a defective medical devise, both of which are outside the state of Idaho. The second provision, the cap of $250,000 on non-economic damages doesn’t The Idaho Trial lawyers have provided a lot of documents over the course of the He distributed a letter from Patti Tobias, Administrative Director of the Courts The fiscal impact on this bill is inaccurate, and you will learn from other “When a measure such as this that violates our traditional notions of justice in Mr. Kerrick felt that there wasn’t a problem, especially in Idaho. Juries in Idaho Senator Bunderson was looking at a report from Price Waterhouse Cooper on Mr. Kerrick responded that he had not seen that article, but noted that it said Senator Sorensen asked where frivolous claims are mentioned, as she couldn’t Senator Richardson asked where the right to have a trial by jury was taken Senator Sorensen mentioned that in Nevada the Ob-Gyn’s are struggling as |
Senator Sorensen felt it was very clear that in Nevada rates have soared whereas in other states, such as California where they have had tort laws, such as this, their rates have stayed more stable and availability of the carriers is far greater. Mr. Kerrick responded that he was glad that the California example was brought up as they had passed Proposition 103, which creates a commission , similar to Idaho’s Public Utility Commission, where insurance carriers have to request increases to justify their rate increases and that is what has moderated the rates in California. The actual cause is that the insurance companies were trying to vie for market shares and now the market is down, the interest rates are down, and the insurance companies have to raise their premiums to stay profitable. Senator Davis said that if on September 11, 2001, a plane was hijacked and Senator Bunderson asked then what would be the economic damages, Senator Burkett asked for the definition of non-economic damages and was |
|
Mr. Kerrick turned over some of his time to Kurt Holzer who showed data from judges throughout the state asking if there were verdicts that in Idaho where juries are making decisions awarding non-economic damages that are out of control and making punitive damage award that are out of touch with what is going on. The short answer is that there is not a problem in courtrooms in Idaho today. In the response to the judges survey, 32 of 38 judges with 235 years of combined experience, thy could only identify 3 punitive damages in their careers in excess of $1 million dollars. One was the Aryan nations. Another was where the insurance company stopped payin medical expenses for an 84 year old lady and there was a $4 million punitive damage to this woman who relied on them to provide her medical care. The other was $2 million against a strip bar in Meridian, as the bartender had intentionally gotten the driver of a car drunk so he could slip out and not pay the driver for work done at the bar. There were no punitive damage awards against a medical providers in their |
|
Adjourn: | Senator Darrington noted that the time was passed for this committee meeting and the discussion on H92 would continue on Wednesday. Meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m. |
DATE: | March 5, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | Senator Richardson made a motion to approve the minutes of March 3 as written. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON H 92 – TORT REFORM | |
PRO: | Jerry Davis spoke in favor of the bill as executive director of the Idaho Dental Association. He represents about 800 businesses comprising the Association, who gave full support of the bill. They endorse a national liability insurance program through the Assn. and that program provides liability risk management continuing education courses for those people covered under the program and if they attend the courses, they get a premium credit back. It seems that any insurance company who recognizes those who will attempt to avoid litigation and give a credit, has some impact. Even though this bill puts a cap on non-economic damages, they recognize that this is a reasonable bill and would like to see it passed. |
CON: | Senator Fred Kennedy spoke in opposition to this bill. He has been a licensed attorney in Idaho for almost 40 years, many of those as a trial lawyer. He has struggled with this issue in an attempt to resolve it in a manner that would hold down increasing insurance costs, while preserving the rights of people to seek redress in the courts for damages caused by the negligent, reckless or intentional actions of other people or corporations. When Idaho enacted strict tort reform legislation in 1987, the insurance companies had represented that these changes would hold down the costs of insurance. He told the committee, “It didn’t work then and I don’t believe it will work now”. He asked that if the legislature didn’t believe punitive damages should be allowed in cases against doctors, hospitals and other medical provides, then specifically exclude them from the other cases where punitive damages can be awarded, but don’t dismantle Idaho’s system of justice to the extreme harm of innocent people by passing this legislation which is being sought by insurance companies under the false pretext that it will result in lower insurance premiums. Senator Sorensen questioned why he felt that the tort reform of 1987 hadn’t |
PRO: | Julie Taylor , spoke in opposition to the bill as Governmental affairs coordinator for Blue Cross, which is the largest insurance company in the state with 3000 members. She referred to the Price, Waterhouse, Coopers report about the study for American Assn. of Health Plans, The Factors Fueling Rising Healthcare Costs. Beyond general inflation, other forces are driving recent healthcare cost increases, which rose 13.7% in 2001-2002, or 5 billion dollars. The study finds that increased consumer demand, drugs, medical devices, and other medical advances are behind nearly half of the increase. The other half is driven largely by litigation, mandates, and rising provider expenses. Damages awarded in malpractice suits are skyrocketing. The median malpractice award increased 43 % in 2000 to $1 million, according to Jury Verdict Research. A few claims even ran as high as $40 million. Awards are only part of the picture, since the majority of cases never result in a judgment, but cost millions of dollars to defend. The doctors don’t ever feel they have done enough for the patient, and might get sued. The threat of litigation is a significant driver in the unnecessary use of treatments which means 4 tests instead of two and several medicines, which not only add to the cost of healthcare, but may actually dilute its quality. Senator Burkett asked if a patient with a large salary would be treated differently as they would have a larger economic damage claim, than the patient that was low-income or a child. Ms. Taylor said that should be left for the physicians themselves to answer. Senator Davis asked her how much of these claims are in Idaho and she |
CON: | Susan Wilcox spoke in opposition to the bill. She was hit by a drunk driver in March of 2001, lost her husband, William and will be handicapped for the rest of her life because someone decided to make a mistake. She is glad this bill wasn’t passed when she had her accident, as she would have more problems, such as enough money to cover all her medical bills, and money to survive on for the rest of her life. She suffers from many disabilities as a result of her accident, and has permanent nerve damage in her left hand and arm and has burned herself seriously when she is cooking, as she has lost feeling in her limbs. Her right shoulder is shattered and permanently damaged so she has limited use of her hand and she has sustained permanent brain damage. She also cannot have children and her voice box was permanently damaged. She asked that this not be allowed to become a law as it should be up to a jury of people, case by case to decide the compensation for a victim, as $250,000 is not enough for the pain and suffering. Her complete story is on file in the committee office. |
PRO: | Dr. Jim Scheel, Idaho Medical Association spoke in favor of H92 from his experience of 33 years as a physician and he presented a graph showing liability insurance costs that Dr. Ring had prepared, and said his costs mirrored those. He was the most expensive doctor in Jerome in 1970,charging $6.00 an office call, but paying malpractice insurance of $250 to $300 a year. There was almost no malpractice going on, but by the end the 70’s that changed and in the early 1980’s the costs of liability were $15 to $20,000 per year. In 1987 tort reform went in and within 5 years his costs were back down to $5-6000 a year and he was delivering babies then. By the mid 90’s the costs were down ot $3000 and he wasn’t delivering babies any more. In 2001 he stopped full-time practice and became a lobbyist in 2002 and since he has been working part-time for Primary Health as a fill-in. Primary Health has 50-60 providers and when someone needs a replacement, he would fill in. He found out that he no longer has insurance, and Primary Health’s insurance went up $1 million dollars this year, or 350%, and they don’t cover the fill in physicians. So when someone leaves, they don’t have anyone to cover. He would like to argue the fact that Mr. McClure made on Monday, that there is no crisis insurance, and would like him to ask the chief of Primary Health if that increase is a crisis, as it certainly is for him because he no longer has any liability. Senator Sorensen asked why the tort reform didn’t help the liability costs. He |
CON: | Mitchell Curtis of Rigby, spoke in opposition of the bill. He was diagnosed with thyroid cancer in 1993, underwent a thyroidectomy, and had radioactive iodine treatments in an attempt to kill the cancer cells. He was in good condition as long as he stayed on his thyroid replacement hormone, which took the place of the missing thyroid but also suppressed the cancer cells. In October of 1998 his doctor changed his prescription and called it into a Rite-Aid Pharmacy. The pharmacist made a gross error and filled the dosage with 1/10th of the dose required. Mr. Curtis’s metabolism became slow and he heart rate decreased, so he was cold and sluggish all the time. After 5 consecutive refills, he went to another pharmacy to get his prescription filled and in April, 1999 the error was discovered. This resulted in him having to have additional cancer radiation treatments, but for months they thought he would die. Had the new pharmacist not discovered the error when he did, Mr. Curtis would have soon slipped into a coma and died. Upon investigating they were told that the pharmacists were so busy they didn’t even have time for a break. Eventually, Mr. Curtis and his attorney found that Rite Aid was engaged ina nationwide plan intentionally putting profits ahead of public safety. Rite-Aid had reached an agreement with the Washington State Pharmacy Board after 134 complaints of dispensing errors over 3 years, and the chain agreed to pay $50,000 in fines and review its staffing policies. At the same time, Oregon Rite Aid paid $60,000 to resolve a pharmacy board investigations. He was the victim of a huge company making conscious decisions to put profit again of safety with conscious disregard of the consequences of their conduct. This happened in Idaho even without H92. He thinks money talks with these companies, and if H92 is passed, it will enable unscrupulous companies to continue to compromise safety by taking away the deterrence that civil punitive damages provides. He feels the courts should decide these issues on the facts of the case. |
PRO: | John Eaton, represented the Idaho Building Contractors Assn., who stand in support of this legislation. The building contractors in the last couple of year have experienced as severe increases in the affordability and availability of general liability insurance in Idaho. In some cases there has been a growth of 200% in rates annually. Most companies that provided coverage have left the state, and now the contractors are in a secondary market. Two years ago a contractor paid between $6000 and $8000 for insurance and last year he paid $25,000 and this year it is $75,000. They believe this legislation will provide a more stable marketplace for insurance. |
CON: | Paul Curtis, an attorney from Ammon, who is the brother of Mitchell and worked on the case with Rite-Aid. He felt it was ironic to appear to gather information before the committee makes a decision on the bill because the bill basically closes out people like Mitch from presenting their information to a jury, because the decision is already made on how much punitive damages apply to his case, without the facts. He wanted to address this issue and felt it was worth driving 8 hours to have 3 minutes to present his testimony that a one size fits all damage award doesn’t fit. If his brother had died, he would have had huge economic damages, as he ha high income, and 3 times the punitive damages. Fortunately, for his family and 4 children, he lived and his damages aren’t very big and the punitive damage would be lower under this bill, but the conduct was the same and that conduct should have been punished. This bill gives the same damage award regardless of what happened. In Idaho the jury instruction is to award the plaintiff an amount that would punish the defendant and deter them from engaging in similar conduct in the future. He told the committee if you reduce the deterrent, you reduce the amount of damages effect on these people. The inmates in jail are doing time for wrong conduct, but you can’t put a business in jail. The way to deter businesses is to award punitive damages and the way to stop high punitive damages is to stop the conduct. The point is that by reducing the punitive damages, the conduct is not being deterred, it is being encouraged as they can continue to commit wilful, malicious, oppressive wanton conduct and gross negligent conduct in conscious disregard for the safety of others, so we want you to reduce our punishment. Senator Bunderson said a number of other states direct a percentage of |
PRO: | Alex LeBeau representing the Idaho Assn. of Relators., which is a member of the Idaho Liability Reform Coalition, spoke in favor of H92. They believe the proposed amendments will help control the insurance rates over the long term, but aren’t sure if it will have immediate effect. The premise of insurance is to spread cost and risk of the needs of a few among the many. If the amount and frequency of damages of individuals expand, costs are passed on to the group. He said it is a curious assumption to claim that laws which serve to control risk have no impact and H92 is designed to reduce the incentive to file claims that he believes have little merit. He told the committee that the real estate industry is being ravaged by mold Senator Bunderson mentioned that the Environmental Common Sense |
CON: | Pam Dowd passed out some packets describing her situation as one of the youngest breast cancer patients in Idaho, who at age 27 underwent a radical mastectomy. Five years after that she started her “journey through breast reconstruction hell”. She has had a muscle transplant, 3 ruptured breast implants, skin grafts and undergone numerous surgeries costing thousands of dollars and must still face more surgeries to clean up the mess left behind. In her packet are stories from other breast implant patients, who would wonder why a surgeon would repeatedly use the same brand of implant if it were so faulty it had to be replaced in so many women, some within a few days. Also, it is a wonder why the manufacturer would continue to supply the implant to these doctors when the procedure is not done properly. This made her understand that when money is the end object, even doctors may lie. She has studied H92 hoping that those who don’t have a law degree can understand it but feels it is written in such strong legalese that no ordinary person can understand what rights are being given away with this legislation. Concerning “clear and convincing evidence”, she said, “No corporation or others who are responsible through their own negligent acts for damage to others will willingly give over damaging information to the individuals harmed by their acts. This evidence will require a researcher at a great cost per hour. Concerning punitive damages, imposing a limit of $250,000 passes the buck for the health and welfare from the negligent parties directly to the taxpayers of the state. This bill gives non-working women a value of $250,000. Yet if we are disabled through the negligent actions of others, the health care will deplete the family finances. This leaves the taxpayers of Idaho to pick up the tab, and this is wrong. There are barriers to excessive awards and frivolous lawsuits, and the statute of limitations pus many medical malpractice suits out of reach. Judges have the judicial oversight to amend any award that is excessive and appeals and out of court settlements cut down on these. She urged the committee to table this bill and trust the juries of Idaho to do the right thing. |
PRO: | Jane Gorsuch, represents two organizations, the Associated Logging Contractors of Idaho and Intermountain Forest Association, which are in support of this bill which addresses liability compensation and limitations in Idaho. They feel the bill could be the difference between bankruptcy and solvency in many small business situations, and does not unjustly punish them nor exonerate those guilty of malicious crimes. The liability insurance of the timber and milling business is an important item, as several are small family run bushiness with limited resources. This costly insurance is a necessary item but one that puts great strains on operating budgets. She urged the committee to pass the bill. |
CON: | Walter Ronk testified against this bill as he has a current lawsuit pending for the loss of his eye and feels the cap for damages is ridiculous. Evidence states that Idaho juries are very competent and are not running away with high damage awards, as they are well informed. This bill is taking away what should be left to the judiciary and judges and juries to hear case by case. He felt these are constitutional issues, as old English common law, the Declaration of Independence, the Federal Constitution and the State of Idaho constitution. In our state constitution it declares the Federal constitution to be the supreme law of the land and there shall not be a law that will go against this constitution. His dreams were taken away that are worth more than $250,00. He would rather have his eye back, as he cannot do the job he was trained for, because of an impact in a car. Now, if he is hit in the face, he could be totally blind for the rest of his life. He feels because of this law, that corporate entities are pushing this with their attorneys |
PRO: | Brent Olmstead, executive director of the Milk Producers of Idaho, spoke in support as members of the Associations are in favor of this legislation because of four basic key points: it reduces the cap on non-economic charges to $250,000 and indexes that amount for inflation, it places a cap on punitive damages at $250,000 or three times the amount of the compensatory award whichever is greater. It places a cap on the size of the bond a defendant must pay in order to appeal a negative decision from the court. Presently a business must pay a bond of 136% of the award. This bill limits that amount to the first $1 million awarded. Finally, the bill repeals the remaining references to “joint and several liability.” This is the infamous “deep pockets” theory where one defendant can be held liable for damages caused by others simply because the other parties are unable to pay. The ever increasing cost of providing insurance benefits for employees has created a definite hardship on businesses throughout the state, but particularly those engaged in the commodity markets. This is a great concern for the Milk Producers as they are presently suffering through the lowest prices for their product in over 20 years which places not only the dairy industry in jeopardy, but threatens the entire rural economy of Idaho. House Bill 92 will take an important first step in slowing the increased costs of providing benefits for their hard working employees and they encourage support of it. |
CON: | Jan Frieze of Boise was signed up to testify, but was unable to come due to her health today, so she sent her comments to the committee as follows: “I have signed up to testify against H92 at the hearing on Wednesday, but am unable to attend at this time. Thank you for reading what I had planned on saying. The general sentiment is as follows: I do believe that Doctors do a lot of good, but some Doctors make mistakes and they do commit malpractice. In my situation, a terrible mistake happened during a routine medical procedure, which resulted in three further surgeries attempting to correct the problem. (She had her colon punctured during a colonoscopy) That was October 23rd, 2002, and I still am unable to perform normal jobs, in taking care of my house and family. Two hundred and fifty thousand dollars would never, ever be enough to compensate for the pain I was put through and still do experience every day of my life. I am almost guaranteed further complications and can’t plan for the future. The medical expenses are astronomical and I expect them to continue. Our out of pocket expenses are also very great and unplanned at this time of our lives. I think this bill is unfair and it should be voted against.” |
CON: | Sam Hoaglund is a registered pharmacist, has been an attorney for over 20 years and is an instructor of pharmacy law at the Idaho State College of pharmacy, and spoke for himself. What he finds the most objectionable about this bill is that tit takes the situation where the persons are injured the most or have to suffer their injuries the longest are asked to pay the cost by not getting fair or full compensation for their injuries. Most cases have never reached the caps, and most lawyers income is not affected by this bill as few cases will ever reach these caps, but the ones that do are the ones that are most injured and most severe. He referred to a young lady, age 10, run over by a car and burned very severely over 30% of her body. She is going to be maimed and scarred for the rest of her life, and if that is 75 years , with the $250,000 that works out to be about $3000 or $10 a day to be maimed and scarred for the rest of her life. That would be the impact of this bill andt hat is my main objection. Another concern is the tax issues, Federal law provides that punitive damages are taxable and non-economic damages are taxable, and if you hit this $250,000 with taxes, the highest Federal rate is 38% and the state rate is 8-10%, you are looking at 50% of this award is going to taxes, which has an economic impact to a state and a economic detriment to the person receiving it. He didn’t want anyone to think this money is a windfall to the individual, where in fact, about half is a windfall back to the government. Senator Sorensen questioned that the amount of money this young girl would receive were economic damages. He was referring to the non-economic damages of the psychological impact of living with the scarring and pain and what she would get under this bill. Senator Sorensen said that even under today’s law, she would get up to $682,000 and if that is divided up that is also a minimum amount. Mr. Hoaglund responded that the economic damages would cover medical and lost wages, where the non-economic damages don’t have a receipt, like pain and suffering, humiliations, embarrassment, those mental damages. |
PRO: | Representative Bob Ring testified as a physician and came to explain the chart that was presented earlier, concerning liability insurance and its relation to the tort reform, and variations in the stock market. The chart (see attached) was prepared by his bookkeeper when he was in the Caldwell Women’s Clinic for the last 25 years, to determine what each physician in the clinic paid each year for a standard $1 million-$3 million malpractice policy. In 1983 each paid between $5 and $6000 for a standard malpractice policy. In succeeding years, it capped out in 1987 at $43,000 per year and that did happen despite a booming stock market. Tort reform was enacted in 1987 and in the next 3-4 years, it dropped to around $10,000 despite the 1987 stock market crash. Senator Lodge asked if he had any big judgments against him. He responded Senator Richardson asked if Dr. Ring practiced defensive medicine due to the Senator Burkett referred to the chart and felt it was a reverse mirror image of |
CON: | Wendy Gunn spoke in opposition to this bill, as she was a juror in the case of Robinson v. State Farm in Ada County. She used to be offended when she heard that a jury had handed down a large punitive damage award, and thought that was reckless. She can see now, that after knowing the details presented at a trial, a jury does make a rational and informed decision is such cases. She told the committee that ” By passing this bill, you are sending future jurors of this state a message that, while they are required to spend their precious time serving the system, they really are incapable and incompetent to make a decision themselves as to what non-economic damages or punitive damages should be awarded on a case by case basis. Each trial is unique in the details and circumstances and of course, one verdict does NOT fit all. This bill essentially destroys the entire constitutional concept behind allowing a jury trial in civil cases.” She now understands that the word “punitive” implies that punishment should be imposed. The jury she sat on handed down a verdict of $9.5 million and anything less would not have punished the defendant, State Farm Insurance Company. After much debate over 3 days, the majority of the jury decided to punish the defendant by approximately 1 day of its profits. This amount sounds obscene but after having the information, it sounded insufficient in the punishment department. The message they were trying to send to all insurance companies was that their actions in this case were improper, outrageous and that as ordinary citizens, they didn’t want to find themselves in the victim’s shoes one day. If this bill passes, the large companies, including the insurance industry is being sent a message that they can cheat and mistreat people of this state as long as they can afford a slap on the wrist, and are willing to pay this minor fine. Senator Bunderson asked how much of that settlement was economic and |
PRO: | Pete Skamser, State director of NFIB, representing 7000 business owners in the State of Idaho and urged the committee to send H92 the floor unamended with a do pass. His members are facing problems relating to two areas of insurance. One is the insurance they buy to protect themselves and their assets, and are finding it hard to find companies willing to write policies for businesses and the premiums are oging up and out of fear of large judgments, they tend to want to buy more insurance to protect themselves. On average, the members spend 7% of gross sales on insurances, not counting health insurance, and that is a large amount when their margins are 2% or 3% or 4%, they are spending more for insurance than they make. Only half are able to provide health insurance for their employees, and they cannot afford to have it themselves. The hospital director from Moscow, they testified that their malpractice went from $8000 a month to $50,000 a month. |
CON: | Bryan Smith, Idaho Falls attorney spoke in opposition to this bill. He is an attorney, but not a member of ITLA or any defense or insurance organizations, but he does represent insurance companies, and businesses and injured people. He is representing himself today to voice opposition to bill. He shared some observations about this legislation. He worked in a medical malpractice defense firm in California. That firm started in 1975 with 9 or 10 lawyers, and by 1994 when he moved back to Idaho, there were 33 lawyer who did mostly malpractice defense. During the 70’s the microcap of $250,000 was passed which was supposed to reduce the complaints that was filed against doctors, and it was supposed to encourage settlements. In the Fiscal Impact of this bill it says the bill produces efficiencies and will have no effect on this state. He has sat in meetings with lawyers when people are injured. When there was a cap for general damages, they discussed why would we ever offer the cap on a settlement when that is the most that a person can receive at trial. If that is the outside risk, why would this ever be offered for settlement. The answer is that if that is the outside risk you have no risk besides that. The plaintiff would say, as the lady who had her breasts removed because the doctor put the slide in the wrong slot. The insurance company would say we won’t pay more than $250,000 and the lady would say that her breasts were worth more than that, and that was a recipe for trial. They saw more cases go to trial than before the microcap had passed and the result was that it took longer to get to trial, because the legislature didn’t appropriate more money for courthouses and judges, it took longer and people said there are too many frivolous lawsuits on trial and we can’t get to trial. They need some sort of tort reform, and it becomes a vicious circle. His personal experience has been when you draw arbitrary lines result in the sand, they result in uneven bargaining power, that causes fewer cases to settle (catastrophic cases) and they will get tried more often if H92 passes. Senator Richardson said that a Health and Welfare report said the tort reform |
Adjourn: | Meeting will be continued on Friday, and those who are signed up will have a chance to give their testimony then. Meeting adjourned at 3:02 p.m. |
DATE: | March 7, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | Senator Bunderson made a motion to accept the minutes of March 5 as written. Second was by Senator Sweet and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
GUBERNATORIAL APPOINTMENT |
|
Anna Jane Dressen of St. Maries, Idaho was reappointed to the Commission on Pardons and Parole for a term commencing January 1, 2002 and expiring January 1, 2005. Ms. Dressen shared with the committee the challenges that the board faces Senator Darrington asked how many individuals are in prison that shouldn’t be |
|
H 92 | TORT REFORM – Continuing testimony |
PRO: | Ray Stark, representing the Boise Chamber of Commerce, spoke in favor of the bill as the cost of power and energy are big and this is an economic development issue for the Chamber. The Chamber’s 1700 members feel this will improve the economic outlook in the state. The competition with Utah, Nevada, New Mexico and other surrounding states, and the more positive things that Idaho has, such as tort reform are an advantage to the Boise Chamber. |
CON: | Wayne Soward, was asked by the Trial Lawyers to answer the insurance questions raised by H 92. He has been in the insurance business since 1964, including being the director of the Idaho Dept. of Insurance from May 1984 to 1987. He is now an insurance litigation consultant for Idaho, Washington and Wyoming. He said there are significant factors affecting Idaho insurance rates and they are financial markets, reinsurance 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 became better, they needed to increase their premiums. Some companies have gone out of business because of lack of reinsurance payments. Companies made money on underwriting and returned the money to the stockholders. He emphasized that H92 will not stabilize insurance rates and will not cause them to go down. What it will do is remove a deterrent to bad conduct – the existing system works and the $250,000 cap is not a deterrent. Senator Richardson asked if Tort Reform helped in California and Mr. Soward |
PRO: | Jack Lyman, representing Idaho Mining Association and Idaho manufactured Housing told the committee that the two organizations he represents strongly support H92 and ask that it be sent to the floor without amendment. |
CON: | Jim Petrowski, a labor and employment lawyer in Idaho said he didn’t have a stake in punitive damages, but to ask that the committee not lend support to H92 because of the clients he represents. One of his clients is comprised of the 400 plus employees of Wal-Mart, who for 5 years have been trying to force Wal-Mart to pay them for the actual hours they have worked. This issue came because Wal-Mart has the employees clock-out and then keep working for free. There has been some substantial success in the case, but he came today to let the committee know that there is still no change in the conduct of the largest employer in America. This misconduct is still continuing in Wal-Mart stores. The reason there is no change in the conduct, is that their downside is limited to economic damages. The litigation can’t result in punitive damages, and without a realistic threat that wrong doers, or that intentional lawbreakers be punished by the court of this state and others, there is no reason for these out-of-state employers to behave within the law. Without the realistic threat of punitive damages, big companies are better off economically violating the law and taking their chances with litigation rather than settle with an employee. This affects Idaho as this conduct reduces the wages of employees. Companies based here care about their reputation and obeying the law. Large out of state corporations have no stake in the welfare of Idaho. They can’t be held accountable as there is no downside. As members of the bar, attorneys needs tools to deal with these issues and put them in a position where breaking the law in Idaho doesn’t make economic sense. |
PRO: | Robert Vande Merwe Executive Director of Idaho Health Care Assn. spoke in favor of the bill. He recognized that the bill was not about insurance premiums, but about tort reform. Without H92, it is hard to calculate risks. Things happen in nursing homes, and it is unfair not to help protect nursing homes from increasing lawsuits when Medicare and Medicaid pay less than the actual cost of care, but pay up to 80% of all nursing home costs. He feels the reason that insurance rates have increased dramatically is because of the huge increase in the frequency of lawsuits in the last few years, and because of billion dollar settlements in Florida, Mississippi, Texas and several other states. Even though we haven’t had the billion dollar settlements in Idaho, if we don’t pass TORT reform, we are a part of the problem, rather than part of the solution, as litigation continues unabated. |
CON: | Stan Hobson signed up to testify but was out of town today, so submitted his testimony in writing. He is opposed to the legislation on the overriding basis of keeping or minimizing government intrusion in the lives of it’s citizens. The judicial system on this subject doesn’t appear to be broken in Idaho, as both Mr. McClure and Kerrick attested in their testimonies. There have been large punitive damage awards, but they have been overturned or reduced on appeal. That is how the system is supposed to work and it does. The medical and legal professions need to more closely monitor and take appropriate and definite actions against malpractice and those that bring frivolous lawsuits. Manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, etc, must also take responsibility for those actions that result in harm, injury, damage or even death to the users of their products when those are shown to be defective. He also expressed concern with the inconsistency of the Legislature. In a bill just passed and signed by the Governor, juries are deemed to be sufficiently intelligent to determine when a death penalty award is appropriate. This bill suggests that juries are not sufficiently intelligent to understand the case before them and come to a conclusion regarding the culpability of a defendant. ” Doesn’t this say that society values money more than life itself?,” he asked. He felt the bill wasn’t good for the individual citizen, but good for corporate America. |
PRO: | Mark Benson submitted a letter as he was signed up for testimony and is out of town for this meeting. He pointed out that liability reform is about more than medical-related claims and insurance costs. He felt H92 is good for Idaho business and Idaho’s citizens. (See attached letter #1) |
CON: | John Keenan, Goicoechea Law Office, is a trial attorney that said it is hard work to help people who are hurt as the present law prohibits large lawsuits. There are fine juries in this state and the jury system will stand up against harsh actions both from governmental and private entities. He asked the committee to consider the founding principles of this country, that you are part of the guardians and the jury is part of the checks and balances. There is also something already in place to take care of excessive verdicts, and that is the conservative State of Idaho. The nature of freedom is the ability to choose and Idaho needs a responsible independent jury system to make these types of decisions. |
PRO: | Steve Ahrens, President of the Idaho Assn. of Commerce and Industry, which is a charter member of the Idaho Liability Reform Coalition, the sponsor of H92. He focuses on the essential reason the business community supports H92 and that is the problem of costs involved in our tort system, costs that hit businesses of all kinds and sizes right on their bottom line. Several factors drive up tort costs for businesses and they include: Skyrocketing insurance premiums, availability of insurance, as three malpractice carriers left Idaho in the last couple of years, and the cost of defense against lawsuits, even when they are successful, is high. A study of cost was released by Tillinghast-Towers Perrin, that found the cost of the U.S. tort system grew by 14.3% in 2001, the highest single-year percentage increase since 1986. Their study also shows that U.S. tort costs are equivalent to a 5% tax on wages, and that it cost $205 billion in 2001,or an average of $721 per U.S. citizen. In September, 2002 a study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reported that liability premium increases last year averaged 12% in states with caps, and 44% in states without caps. He told the committee that it is clear that reducing costs in the tort system will help control legal costs for Idaho businesses and urged passage of H92. Senator Davis asked if Idaho was in that category of 12% states with a cap and |
CON: | Ken Kavanagh went through a civil trial with his wife who was seriously and permanently injured due to the irresponsible behavior of a large corporation. Prior to this he couldn’t understand how someone who didn’t have a case could win a case. What impressed him was how good the system is, and how serious and impartial the jury was. Day after day, he could tell by their faces that what they were doing was important to them. The jury system is a brilliant invention and a good way to resolve any case. If the jury must be able to make a capitol case, why not a judgment in civil case. There is no way to control irresponsible behavior by large corporations with a $250,000 punitive damage judgment. Then there are appeals that come after that. Living with his wife and all her pain has made him realize that this is not a fair amount to be given as a settlement. Senator Richardson asked why it is that people relate a reluctance on the part |
PRO: | Greg Nelson, Idaho Farm Bureau Federation represents 57,400 members which is over half the farmers in the state, and they support H92. Senator Marley asked how passing this bill would help malpractice insurance. He was told that rural Idaho has trouble keeping medical professionals because of the high insurance rates to protect doctors from malpractice, although there hasn’t been a lot of malpractice in Idaho. Senator Richardson asked if farmers were threatened with lawsuits, and was told that they are, as most farmers use burning to prepare their fields, and if smoke becomes a trespass, then there can be punitive damages awarded. Senator Davis said he fears for farmers as some companies haven’t been fair |
CON: | Christopher Phillips, who is confined to a wheelchair testified against the bill. He was injured 18 years ago in a truck wreck on a forest road built by the Forest Service. He broke his neck and was drowned. In his lawsuit, C. Phillips v U.S. Forest Service he was awarded 3 million dollars for pain and suffering, and loss of life. This judgment was appealed, but the award was upheld, and he felt that the money he received let him stay in his own home, and not be stuck in a nursing home. It certainly wasn’t enough to cover the pain he feels every hour of every day, but it made a difference in his lifestyle. He asked how a price tag could be put on quality of life and said he feels there needs to be accountability of individuals and companies. If they know that their liability is limited to just $250,000, they won’t be as careful as they should be. |
PRO: | Bob Seehusen, CEO of the Idaho Medical Association said he just returned from Washington D.C. where he listened to the Senate majority leader, House majority leader and President of the United States saying we need tort reform, we need limits of $250,000 on non-economic damages. Idaho has a fragile health care system, especially in the area of malpractice. He showed a chart that showed the medical malpractice premiums with the enactment of MICRA, and then caps upheld, and the passage of Prop 103. (See attached #2) He answered the question Senator Richardson had asked about Proposition 103. Insurance reform micro law was passed in 1975 and Proposition 103 was years later and it never did work as they wanted it to. The rates were going up and they did flatten with Proposition 103. It was the MICRA bill that helped and Senator Diane Feinstein from California is going to introduce a MICRA bill in the United States Senate. He said that rates have gone up 167% since 1975 and this bill is proposing to stabilize rates. The issue is the cost of litigation and how it affects the patients who need health care. Insurance rates will not go down because of this legislation, but they will stabilize. |
CON: | Brad Eidam, Idaho Trial Lawyers said he empathizes with the doctors being gouged by insurance rates, but this isn’t the answer. In 1976, the $250,000 caps were put in place in California and he passed out a graph with the statistics of California premiums from 1976 to 2001 comparing their premiums with the national premiums. (See attached #3) The source is the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, with the California premiums highlighted in yellow. The rates for California after passage of the caps paralleled the increase until about 1988 when Proposition103, insurance regulation was put into effect. At that time, rates dropped for 3 years in a row as that was part of the law that they had to drop and then they leveled out and stabilized. Caps for 13 years had no effect, until Prop 103 was passed. Punitive damages are taxable and in addition to attorney fees, a plaintiff must declare receipt of punitive damages on income tax returns as ordinary income. On a $500,000 punitive damage verdict the attorney fees would be $150,000 or more and $28,661 would go to the Idaho State Tax Commission, $136,000 to the federal government, and the plaintiff would receive $184,839 of the total verdict. The attorney fees are also taxable income to the attorney with $10,260 to Idaho Tax Commission and $49,422 to the federal government. Therefore this $500,000 punitive damage verdict generates a total of $224,843 in tax revenue to state and federal governments. Proponents of this legislation have offered no more than a hope that rates might Senator Marley asked what the difference is between MICRA (Medical Injury Senator Sweet recognized that there was a lot of debate on tort reform impact |
CON: | Lyn Darrington, Regence Blue Shield of Idaho which represent 265,000 Idahoans who have insurance, spoke in support of any measure which would contribute to any overall health care cost containment and she believes that H92 is one of those measures. She referred to the study by Price, Waterhouse Coopers that Julie Taylor of Blue Cross mentioned, about the cost drivers of health insurance benefits. Five million dollars yearly can be attributed to limitation in the united states. Regence diligently works in the areas that will have a positive and direct impact on the cost of health care benefits to their members, such as disease management and good provider network. They also advocate and support other areas that will help to control overall costs, such as litigation constraints and better access to affordable prescription drugs. Blue Cross-Blue Shield Assn. released a study of how the national malpractice |
CON: | Jim Harris spoke for Breck Barton, an attorney in Rexburg, and distributed a handout prepared by Mr. Barton. It showed the 20 appellate cases that have gone before the Idaho Supreme Court and Idaho Court of Appeals in the last 10 years, for an average of 2 per year, which deal with punitive damages based on jury verdicts in the state of Idaho. The largest category of these are not tort cases, but are in fact where small businesses sue large businesses for fraud or breach of contract. You have heard a lot the last three meeting days from the business community and if a serious and accurate analysis was done of the history of punitive damages in Idaho, you will find out that the real victims are the small business owners in Idaho, who will lose the ability to sue the foreign giant corporations which victimize small Idaho businesses and are the subject of substantial punitive damages awards in a number of cases. Also, based on an average of 2 cases a year, we don’t have a problem with Senator Richardson said that Idaho seems to be following the nation and he Senator Sorensen asked how the refunds were given. She was told that with all |
PRO: | Pam Eaton, Idaho Retailers Assn .whose members are of all sizes all over Idaho said this is a big issue to big members, but it is most important to the little businesses, and she asked for support for the bill to be passed. |
CON: | Marty Durand, legislative council for the America Civil Liberties Union of Idaho spoke in opposition to H92 as she felt that this legislation restricts the fundamental constitutional right, found in the 7th amendment to the US constitution and also in Idaho constitution. Anytime legislation threatens to restrict a constitution right, we must object. This legislation targets juries and their discretion to weigh wrong doing and to access damages. The framers of the constitution decided that juries must have the power to provide justice to those who are harmed. Sometimes the jury is the last defense in a democracy, as unlike elected officials, jurors are not subject to intense lobbying and are not asked to develop or implement public policy, but to look at the specific facts of an individual case, determine who is at fault and award damages to punish wrongdoing and compensate for those injuries. H92 undermines our individual system of justice, as this committee won’t hear and evaluate the evidence that a juror would hear. We must trust democracy and trust the constitutionality established jury system and asked the committee to hold H92. Senator Richardson said it had been mentioned that this bill was constitutional, and she replied that if the jury’s power was limited, it would be unconstitutional. |
PRO: | Steve Millard, President of the Idaho Hospital Association, gave three examples of malpractice insurance premiums increase for hospitals, which were Oneida County, up 54% increase; St. Lukes up 265% ; and Gritman, in Moscow up 500%. They went to the insurance companies and asked what was going on. One of the major carriers of malpractice insurance said there are three things causing them to raise the premiums. The first is the severity of the claims, not really the frequency. Secondly, reinsurance costs are up, due to the severity of these claims. Lower investment income to invest in bond market is the last reason. Their investment income went from 7% to 3%. The company in Washington that writes their insurance said it was due to lost ratios that they could not keep afloat. Their Association supports H92 as it now stands. Senator Burkett asked why the insurance in Moscow went up so much. Mr. |
CON: | Breck Seinegar, a lawyer representing himself, spoke in opposition to the bill. His dad passed away a couple of weeks ago and told him “It is always good for business to limit liabilities.” There is no question you can help business by cutting out liability. In our country there are a lot of people who like to wave the flag, but there are only a few principles in this country who protect a person. First is “One man, One vote” to make sure you have fair representation to make the laws, “Free Speech” insures that you get the right information and “the power of the jury” makes sure that the law is ultimately returned to the jury. In Idaho we can be proud that our constitution says that the right to trial by jury shall be inviolate. The spirit of Idaho’s constitution is that when parties have a dispute, juries should decide it. What must be important is that when someone comes to you and tells you that juries are incompetent to do this and our framers were wrong, you would demand the proof of this. That would be the issue and that would be the focus. He told he committee that they had the honor to decide if a case had been made and he hoped they would do a fair job and determine if we can trust our juries. |
Summary: | David Kerrick told the committee that the Idaho Trial Lawyers have presented all of the statistical evidence throughout the session that they need to make a decision. The proponents claim that insurance rates are going up, but they also admit that this bill won’t lower rates, they just hope it will do something someday, someway. If you were in a court of law, and were trying to prove a case, and you told the jury, somehow, someway, someday, this bill might be of benefit to Idaho citizens, do you think the jury would find a preponderance of evidence that you had proven your case. You wouldn’t have even gotten your case to a jury as the judge would have thrown it out long ago. We have presented the evidence showing you that there isn’t a problem in Idaho courts, they are doing a good job, the juries are conservative and rending common sense verdicts and in some cases the Supreme Court where the judge is second guessing the juries, so there isn’t a problem there. There is no promise from the insurance companies or representatives, that the rates will go down, and they are conspicuously absent from the hearing today. There is nothing in the bill that is going to affect insurance rates no matter how many times you hear it. The economy wouldn’t benefit from welcoming those businesses and industries into Idaho who won’t give compensation to those they wrongfully injure. He asked that the committee do what their first reaction was to this bill, before they were lobbied so heavily, and vote NO. |
Summary: | Ken McClure, Proponent, told the committee that the legislation brought is from businesses, professionals, small and large organizations, people who are concerned about our litigation in the state. This isn’t just for people who are being sued, as they may bring cases and be forced to live by the rules that they are asking others to live by. They haven’t brought something which they think is unreasonable or unfair. They think it sets a standard of conduct which they feel all people ought to adhere and it enacts a set of rules which they should be proud to enact. In response to some of the things heard the last 3 days, the concerns are with respect to the cap on non-economic damages. The Idaho Supreme Court says this cap enacted in 1987 on non-economic damages is constitutional, and it says specifically it does not violate an individual’s right to a jury trial. That issue should not affect this legislation. The opponents are absolutely convinced that this will not reduce the cost of insurance or make it more available. We believe this will have a positive influence on the availability and afford ability of insurance in Idaho, for several reasons. Common sense says that if insurance is a risk sharing mechanism, if the cost goes down, then the cost in sharing also goes down. According the document of Health and Human Services, states that have caps of this level, have a lower cost of insurance and a lower loss ratio than states without caps. Another document from the insurance institute shows a significant increase in net underwriting loss, which is a result of claims exceeding premiums. For the year 1997, there was a $1 billion dollar nationwide, loss, 1998, it became |
MOTION: | Senator Bunderson made a motion to send H92 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sorensen. Senator Richardson said he had spent hundreds of hours studying this, and he felt he was being forced to make a decisions between two options, both of which are wrong. There isn’t a right answer before us today. He has sympathy with the medical community and yet he finds 17% of the doctors in America are self-insured and are able to pull in a pool like we do with the catastrophic fund in Idaho. What he is worried about is the businesses in the state and their legitimate complaints. People are injured and need to be taken care of, he is amazed how the insurance companies hold off if a person has a legitimate complaint, they fight it and hold it back, letting, and then the people are not getting much out of it. He can understand why the insurance companies are holding back because we are in a “sue society”. He felt we needed a group smarter than those here today to study this and people from both sides should study the constitutionality of it and give real help as to where we need to go. We should take the decision which helps most of the people and harms the fewest. |
Senator Bunderson commented that there are good people on both sides, and it has been his background to cut through and see what is happening on the farm. Businesses are being stressed through outlandish premiums, and we have heard reasons why that is and they bounce all over the table. He has personal knowledge of that, and it is common sense for someone to say “if you cut risk, you cut one of the elements that is driving premiums”. This isn’t an insurance bill, but it is interesting that people he talks to feel they are paying outlandish costs, and we need to cut the risk. |
|
Senator Burkett called for a substitute motion based on Senator Richardson’s comments of the two solutions that won’t address the issues of caps or the punitive damages. The question is what is a reasonable level and as a committee we should set the cap. As for the punitive damages, he believes there are other alternatives that could help people in Idaho challenge big corporations and take the funds and use them for the benefit of state government. A new piece of legislation, (an RS), such as Senator Davis’s, or another bill is what we should have, which would set caps as we choose, and address the punitive damage issue to bring the funds into state government. We need to take time with it and study it and this bill needs to be held in committee. Second was by Senator Davis. Senator Sorensen said that we have to be blind not to see what is going on around the nation and surely have felt the effects in Idaho of premium rates. This has been studied, analyzed, and looked at since the 70’s and 80’s. It is obvious that this is the time to go forward and this is the vehicle for it to go forward in and the case has been made and she would vote no on the substitute motion. Senator Davis reflected on the testimony given earlier. In 1997 the agreement was agreed to have the amount of $400,000 in the escalator. If asked if they could get the $250,000 they wanted, the amount would be $426,000. He didn’t feel this was a healthy exercise and he didn’t have a problem revisiting that amount from time to time. He has an RS on the table of $426,000, the number used earlier. He is concerned about the punitive damage section the most, as there are some companies that aren’t of high character. He reminded the committee of recent events where an individual under the influence in Idaho took the lives of a young father and his child. This may be wanton, but to strike this language would allow for the imposition of punitive damages in a DUI case. To put a cap on the compensatory damages is troubling especially with large international companies coming to Idaho. There aren’t small businesses anymore, but large companies doing business in Idaho and do we know what about their business code of conduct. He felt he owes it to the people of Idaho to not limit them. He sees it as small Idaho businesses trying to make sure they are properly protected. He previously voted for tort reform, but his mom taught him that “if you are in doubt, don’t” and when he looks at H92, he is in doubt, and he won’t. Senator Bunderson pointed out that this bill was a result of a study committee, Senator Davis requested a roll call vote. The substitute motion is for the bill |
|
Adjourn: | Meeting was adjourned at 4:10 p.m. |
DATE: | March 10, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | There are no minutes to approve for today, but Chairman Darrington told the committee that the minutes that were approved on Friday, were for March 5, not March 3 as announced. The minutes were correct, but the date was wrong. |
COMMITTEE
VOTE: |
Anna Jane Dressen of St. Maries, Idaho was reappointed to the Commission on Pardons and Parole for a term commencing January 1, 2002 and expiring January 1, 2005. |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made a motion to recommend the re-appointment of Janie Dressen to the full Senate for confirmation. Second was by Senator Sweet and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS13078 | Senator Sweet presented this legislation which is a public safety
amendment to prevent persons convicted of degrees of murder or voluntary |
MOTION: | Senator Marley made a motion to send RS13078 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
H214 | Bob Aldridge presented this bill that concerns separate property and community property. Since 1867, Idaho has had statutory definitions of Separate Property and Community Property in marriages, in Idaho Code sections 32-903 and 906, which are in the area of the Code for Domestic Relations, Husband and Wife. The separate property definition has not been amended since 1941, and the Community Property definition has not been amended since 1980. The Idaho Probate Code, in its general definitions has two subparts which also define these properties. They parallel the definitions in 32-903 and 906, but are not exactly the same. This bill does two things, which are to change put the definitions of separate and community property in a single location and to add the language, “rents, issues, and profits” wherever the word “income” appears. This will mean that there are no inconsistent definitions in the Code and that the definition of community as to income property reflects the definition used by Idaho courts. |
MOTION: | Senator Sweet made a motion to send H 214 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Richardson will carry this bill on the Senate floor |
H220 | Heather Reilly presented this legislation which is “housekeeping” to make Idaho Code Section 19-1601 consistent with Idaho Code Section 19-1114 and 19-1115. In 2000, the Legislature amended these Idaho Code sections removing “transactional immunity” language and replacing it with “use and derivative use immunity” language. When those amendments were made, section 19-1601 (5) was overlooked. Currently, that section requires a court to set aside or dismiss a criminal indictment when a person has been granted immunity from prosecution in connection with his testimony as a witness. Contrarily, pursuant to 19-1114 and 19-1115, if a person testifies under an agreement of immunity with the prosecutor, any answer given, or evidence produced, and any information directly or indirectly derived from the answer or evidence, may not be used against the person in a criminal case, but the person may still be prosecuted. Therefore, these code sections are currently inconsistent. Senator Burkett asked if a person takes their 5th amendment rights, then what |
MOTION: | Senator Richardson made a motion to send H220 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Lodge will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
H266 | Heather Reilly also presented this bill which criminalizes knowingly using the internet by an adult (18 or older) to solicit, seduce, lure, persuade or entice a minor child (under the age of 16) or person defendant believes to be under 16 to engage in any sexual act. The maximum penalty for this felony is 15 years. This also amends the Community Right to Know Act, by requiring a person convicted of Enticing a Minor over the internet to register as a Sex Offender. The Internet Crimes Tax Force is made up of Boise Police Department, Ada County Sheriff, Canyon County Sheriff and the FBI, who all support H266. Also the Law Enforcement Legislative Counsel, the Idaho Association of Counties support this as well. Idaho currently does not have a law to address this specific form of commun-ication used by adults to target and groom children for sexual purposes. With Communications via the internet are through emails, chat rooms, and instant Being able to carry out this type of investigation with a detective undercover is Senator Burkett asked if the statute was broad enough to apply to a 15-year Senator Sorensen asked how these people were identified, unless a detective Patrick Calley, Ada County Sheriff’s office told the committee that this bill has Senator Darrington commented on a case in Burley, that involved several Several of the Senators were interested in interstate jurisdiction within a few |
MOTION: | Senator Davis made a motion to send H 266 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Darrington will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
H 71a | Jim Woods, presented this bill for the Department of Correction who is seeking to increase the maximum cost of supervision fee to $40.00. Currently, the monthly Cost of Supervision (C.O.S.) level allowed by Idaho Code for all state probationers and parolees is $35.00 dollars. In addition to the monthly C.O.S., 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 change the upper limit of monthly Cost of Supervision to $40.00, we can include some of these programs with no additional costs to the offender. Additional benefits to the public would be better drug and alcohol programs; better electronic surveillance and more offenders impacted through shared costs. |
An estimated 5,650 probationers and parolees pay into this fund each month which is subject to legislative appropriation. The Department estimates it will collect $2.3 million in FY 2003, and with this increase $2.7 million in FY 2004. This legislation will allow the Department of Correction to charge offenders for drug testing, programming materials, and for electronic monitoring and to deposit the funds into the State Treasury. The agency will be able to comply with a legislative audit finding that all fees collected from offenders, and services paid on behalf of offenders should be reported through the state accounting system. |
|
MOTION: | Senator Sweet made a motion to send H 71a to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Sweet will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
ADJOURN: | Meeting was adjourned at 2:32 p.m. |
DATE: | March 12, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Davis, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MINUTES: | Senator Sweet made a motion to approve the minutes of March 10 as written. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS13102 | This bill will be sent to the Commerce Committee. It is relating to a study for self-supporting day care centers for State employee’s children. |
MOTION: | Senator Marley made a motion to send RS13102 to print. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS13081C1 | Senator Burkett presented this legislation relating to sex offender notification requiring employers to provide written notice to minor employees and their parents or guardians, if there is a known sex offender employed in the same workplace. This is the bill that was changed to address the concerns of the committee when it was presented before. It is now clarified that the employer is required to notify minor employees only if they have knowledge and this language was found to be best placed in the Juvenile Protection Act. Senator Bunderson asked what the penalty was for someone who failed to Senator Davis asked if they had gotten support of the business community and |
MOTION: | Senator Marley made a motion to send RS 13081C1. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
HJM 4 | Representative Barrett presented this House Joint Memorial which 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, wherein the judges thereof administer justice fairly, impartially and free from bias and distortion of the Constitution of the United States, and to place Idaho in this new circuit. She said there is no fiscal impact. There is already support underway to create a 12th circuit that would include Idaho, and is supported by Senators Larry Craig and Mike Crapo. Rep. Barrett told the committee that the decisions of the 9th circuit are more frequently overturned by the US Supreme Court than any other circuit in the country, for about 80-90% of the time. Senator Bunderson asked about the workload between the 9th circuit and others and was told that the 9th circuit has too many judges at 28 where the others average 12.6. They have a huge backlog of appeals which account for one-fourth of the pending appeals nationwide. The appeals filed there are more than double that of other circuits. Senator Marley asked if there was a population trigger that determined the Senator Davis told a little history of the movement to split the 9th circuit and |
MOTION: | Senator Richardson made a motion to send HJM 4 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sweet. Senator Burkett said that we should approach what is best for Idaho and the 9th circuit definitely has a political slant, as the others do. From his limited experience with other circuits, he felt the 9th circuit is recognized as the most efficient, fair and impartial of the circuits. But to say that they are prejudice, bias and partial is not really good for Idaho to be putting out that message and he can’t support this bill for that reason, even though the 9th circuit is big and needs to be split. Senator Sweet felt ” two things in recent times tell me that the 9th circuit Senator Lodge said this legislation, for the division of Idaho from the 9th circuit, The motion carried by a voice vote. |
H171 | Caralee Lambert presented this bill from Legislative Services, which is a result of many hours of work by Representative Debbie Field, Senator Darrington, Ada County Prosecutors, State Appellate Public Defender, Attorney General’s office Ms. Lambert, in conjunction with the other death penalty bill. House Bill 171 is designed to bring Idaho’s death penalty law into line with the Pursuant to this legislation, the issue of mental retardation would be raised, and Senator Darrington mentioned that this is just like the other death penalty Senator Richardson asked if any person who commits murder must be Senator Bunderson asked if it is hard to tell the difference between someone Senator Marley asked if this bill has only to do with Mental Retardation and not Roger Bourne, of the Ada County Prosecuting Attorneys office spoke to the Molly Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender told the committee that their Marty Durand, legislative counsel for American Civil Liberties Union of Idaho, Senator Darrington asked Ms. Durand if she doubts that a person on death LaMont Anderson, Deputy Attorney General, capital litigation unit, spoke in There is an individual on death row, Max Hoffman, who has filed a successful |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send H171 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Sorensen commented that this was well thought out and a lot of time was taken to make sure that all the concerns and the potential problems have been identified and resolved. This is the right thing to do. |
ADJOURN: | Meeting adjourned at 2:32 p.m. |
DATE: | March 14, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Sweet, Burkett |
MEMBERS
EXCUSED: |
Senator Davis, Senator Marley |
MINUTES: | Senator Richardson made a motion to approve the minutes of March 12 as written. Second was by Senator Bunderson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
RS1392C1 | Senator Bunderson introduced this legislation which makes clear that the State Division of Building Safety has the building code enforcement responsibility (plan review, permitting and inspection) for all building facilities constructed or used by state agencies including those owned, constructed or financed by the Idaho State Building Authority. It also provides that the Division of Building Safety and the Fire Marshal will work with affected local government agencies and will take into consideration their comments and ordinances and will notify them of actions taken and provide them with final copies of building plans. Questions on this arose at a meeting of Idaho Cities, and these have been addressed and agreement reached. There was a hearing held in the State Affairs office earlier and Senator Bunderson asked that this be approved and sent to the 2nd reading calendar on the floor. Senator Sorensen, co-sponsor of the bill said there has been much |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send RS13192C1 to print and also to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Bunderson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
H169a | Representative Tom Trail presented this bill which amends Idaho Code18-6101 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. 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. Senator Darrington mentioned that the Health and Welfare Committee in Gary Young, former Representative testified in favor of this bill, as he is Senator Burkett asked what states were looked at and was told that the Senator Sorensen asked what specifically was in the law before, that held Senator Richardson asked what constitutes “physically resisting”, and was Senator Darrington asked if he could think of two young adults getting |
Angie Fisch, testified in favor of this bill as a victim of rape. She is a senior at the University of Idaho, and has completed the court proceedings in an attempt to convict her offender. The problem is that she was let down by the way the law is worded and defined. Her freshman year, she attended a party at a friend’s apartment. She was handed a drink by her perpetrator, whom she knew and the rest of the night was a blur with recollections of her coming in and out of consciousness while being raped. She remembers not being able to move and feeling powerless. She also was confused and scared. This was a horrid experience that nobody could understand unless they were a victim. After much convincing by her friends, she decided to report this incident, even though telling her story to her parents as well as the police was the most emotionally draining experience of her life, and yet it was just the beginning of a long, drawn out process. She believed that her perpetrator would be brought to justice, as he admitted This is one reason that she has decided to share her story. Her family was Senator Darrington asked if GHB was used in her case, and was told that it Senator Richardson asked if the perpetrator was found innocent, and if the Senator Bunderson asked if the perpetrator knowingly prepared the drink, Senator Burkett asked who the prosecutor was told that it was Michelle Dan Bruce, Moscow Police Department, who also does law enforcement on To prosecute, the State had to prove that Angie was unconscious of the Don Lazzarini, a resource specialist with the U of I Dean of Students Office, Senator Darrington asked why the word “asleep” is included in the Senator Sweet asked if there was the right language to get this bill where Heather Reilly spoke in support of H169a if proposed amendments are Senator Burkett asked why the term resistance was changed, and Ms. Dr. Cynthia Brownsmith urged the committee to vote in support of the bill, |
|
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made the motion to move H169a to the 14th order for amendment. Second was by Senator Richardson. |
DISCUSSION: | Senator Burkett would like to see the engrossed bill with the amendments. He suggested that the bill be held until the next Monday, March 17, to see that. |
SUBSTITUTE
MOTION: |
Senator Burkett made a substitute motion to hold the bill indefinitely at the call of the chairman. Second was by Senator Bunderson. A roll call vote was taken with 4 nay and 3 aye and the motion failed. Senator Bunderson made an amended substitute motion to bring the bill back in a week. Motion failed for lack of a second. Original motion carried and H169a went to the floor in the 14th order for amendment. |
ADJOURN: | Meeting adjourned at 3:20 p.m. |
DATE: | March 17, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Richardson, Bunderson, Sweet, Burkett |
MEMBERS
EXCUSED: |
Senator Davis, Senator Sorensen, Senator Marley |
MINUTES: | Senator Sweet made a motion to accept the minutes of March 7 as written. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
S1138 | Senator Bunderson said this bill was brought about as a result of a death in an amateur boxing event. This legislation bans the promotion of or participation in Badman, Toughman, ultimate fighting and martial arts events, whether amateur or professional, with certain exceptions. Violators will be guilty of a felony. Throughout the nation, these “events” often result in serious injury and death of There will be costs of enforcement of criminal provision and civil enforcement Senator Bunderson suggested that the best plan of action would be for the |
Senator Darrington told the committee that the chair would hold S1138 and no action would be taken on the bill at this time. |
|
H123 | Representative Allen Andersen presented this bill which is proposed to change the maximum possible prison sentence for the crime of incest from 10 years to 25 years. It is hard to determine a cost to the state as this is determined by the number of crimes committed, convictions and sentencing. This legislation does not establish a minimum legislation, remove any discretion judges may need when addressing persons convicted of this crime. Under current Idaho law, rape is treated much more severely than incest, however. As with rape, incest can be just as devastating and destructive. In the opinion of the mental health clinicians and counselors, there is as much or more trauma associated with incest as with rape and the sentences should reflect that. If the purpose of a sentence is to act as a deterrent, then the increase in the penalty is warranted. If the sentence is to punish, then the increase from 10 to 25 years is appropriate for this crime. Senator Bunderson asked what the motivation was to bring this legislation |
Representative Elaine Smith, co-sponsor of the bill spoke to the committee and said the legislation had only 1 dissenting vote in the House committee, as that person wanted a harsher penalty. She said the reason the sexual abuse wasn’t reported earlier, was that the family denied that it was happening, which is very common. This bill changes the maximum sentencing but is not a mandatory sentence. |
|
Gloria Curl Myler, an incest victim spoke to the committee of her experiences of being sexually abused by her father from age 3 to age 18. At age 18, she was locked in a box and did not see her mother for 25 years. She did not go to school, did not go outside much at all, and was kept in bondage by her father. He molested her as a child and as an adult she was raped repeatedly by her father, who also fathered 3 of her children. Last December her father was found guilty of the crime of incest and sentenced to the maximum penalty of 10 years in prison. In the Idaho State Journal, Bannock County Prosecutor Dennis Wilkinson was quoted as saying “I lumped all of the charges together and called it incest.” In the same newspaper, dated February 1, a man was awaiting sentencing in Bannock county for inappropriately touching an 8-year old. The maximum penalty for this single offense involving a non-family member is 15 years. She told the committee that she could “guarantee from the amount of Senator Richardson asked why her father didn’t get locked up for breaking the Senator Bunderson asked why the prosecutors didn’t charge kidnapping and |
|
Sue Fullmer, also testified in favor of H123 and has spent many hours with Mrs. Myler since the account of her abuse has been on local radio, television and in the newspapers. She told the committee that this was the most unbelievable story they would even hear, and yet it is very true. Mrs. Fullmer also had two daughters who were victims of incest by a foster brother, who was later adopted, from the time they were 3 until they were 15, and she was not aware of the situation. “The suffering of the victim is in no way minimized because the offender of the crime was a family member”, she said, “To the contrary, it is intensified! How difficult it would be to have to face the offender in your own home time and time again, where you should be protected against evil. Due to threats, shame, or fear of whatever force was used against them, the victim often remains silent and the abuse continues. When the victim finally is able to tell the story and the rapist is arrested, justice is certainly not served with a 10-year maximum sentence.” She said this bill is a beginning to address a crime that has long been overlooked. Senator Darrington asked her if she was happy with the way the case was Senator Bunderson asked if the judge wanted to give a different sentence. She Senator Burkett asked Ms. Fullmer if the case went to trial and was told that Senator Richardson asked if cases of incest are difficult to prove. Ms. Fullmer Senator Burkett said he felt there were situations where prosecutors think it is |
|
MOTION: | Senator Bunderson made a motion to send H123 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Richardson. |
DISCUSS: | Senator Richardson felt that there was nothing mandatory given here but it gives the opportunity for greater punishment to be given by the judge, which makes sense. He feels there should be a bill come back that addresses incest/rape because he has a hard time believing that after what the committee has heard, that any of this would be consensual. He feels that the book should be thrown at these offenders. Senator Sweet echoed those sentiments, saying that he has seen this devastate a relative’s family and there needs to be some language come back that makes the punishment commensurate with the crime. |
VOTE: | The motion carried by a voice vote. |
Adjourn: | Meeting was adjourned at 2:20 p.m. |
DATE: | March 19, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MEMBERS
EXCUSED: |
Senator Davis |
MINUTES: | Senator Bunderson made a motion to approve the minutes of March 17 as written but with one correction. He was the one suggesting that the task force meet on S1138, the Toughman bill, instead of the Attorney General, but would like the AG to participate. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried to approve the minutes as corrected carried by a voice vote. |
S1160 | Senator Sweet presented this bill which deals with the restoration of civil rights to convicted felons. This public safety amendment prevents persons convicted of degrees 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 eliminate the loophole of allowing felons who were convicted of such crimes before July 1, 1991 to exercise this right. Based upon their past conduct, such felons have demonstrated their unfitness to be entrusted with firearms. Those who have used a firearm in the commission of a crime are not entitled to have that right restored to them. Senator Richardson asked how serious it was to ship a gun to someone. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send S1160 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
H218 | Tom Beauclair, Director Department of Corrections, presented this bill not as a prospective of compassion, but as a prospective of operational effectiveness. Maximum Security prison was designed to hold 300 inmates, and currently there are 550 housed. That design was to single cell all inmates in that prison and currently most of those inmates are double-bunked. This legislation would remove the restrictions in code and give the Department of Corrections discretion to move someone off death row, but leaving them in maximum security. There are only two other states that handle death row inmates like Idaho, Wyoming and South Dakota. This allows some flexibility in the system, while not decreasing security. One problem is that there are more dangerous inmates in general population than are on death row. They may not have a death sentence, but they are being housed there for murder or other crimes, and their behavior is much more dangerous than some on death row. Passing this legislation will actually increase the ability to provide security and they are asking to allow the Department of Corrections to do the job they were mandated to do and use the discretion they need to move people in and out of those areas as they feel the need to do so. He has talked to the correction officer in the housing area of death row, and they don’ts ee this as an increase in risk to their safety. There are 18 inmates on death row, with one being there for 20 years, and only one being executed in a long time. Senator Bunderson asked if passing this legislation would result in freeing Senator Bunderson then asked if the term “death row” would cease to exist, Senator Burkett asked if they had that discretion under statute in present
Senator Richardson said he felt that solitary confinement is not a security Mia Crosthwaite, legislative liaison for the Catholic Church of Idaho, spoke in Heather Reilly, Idaho Prosecuting Attorneys Association, said their Senator Marley asked, if this is done in other states, what are the results Senator Lodge had a concern about an inconsistency in the bill where it Senator Sorensen also felt that there was a conflict between the old section Senator Sweet asked how this conflict could be resolved and Senator |
MOTION: | Senator Bunderson made a motion to send H 218 to the 14th order for amendment. Second was by Senator Sorensen. There was some discussion about what to accomplish through the amendments. Senator Burkett had been looking into this bill and was not comfortable with the time that was spent on it. He and Senator Bunderson agreed to help with the amendments . |
VOTE: | Motion carried by a voice vote. |
ADJOURN: | Meeting was adjourned at 2:25 p.m. |
DATE: | March 24, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Sweet, Marley, Burkett |
MEMBERS
EXCUSED: |
Senator Davis |
MINUTES: | Senator Lodge made a motion to accept the minutes of March 14 as written. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Richardson made a motion to accept the minutes of March 19 as written. Second was by Senator Lodge and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
H269a | Representative Shirley Ringo presented this bill that relates to threats of violence at schools and is supported by the Association of School Administrators. 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 proposed legislation defines terms, procedures, and requirements to afford defamation immunity. She said as she thought about this legislation,” it would have been unthinkable in the past to entertain the notion that our children were not safe in their schools. And now there are situations where children are not safe in their own homes, and in their own beds.” As a former teacher, she felt the responsibility that children should be safe Senator Darrington asked Rep. Ringo what Idaho problem would be solved Senator Lodge asked if the wording of the bill could include custodians and Casey Green, spoke in favor of H269a, as a patrol office for the Moscow He mentioned a “We-Tip” program in place where a person can call and leave Senator Bunderson asked if this legislation was limited to violence or could it Senator Richardson asked if there had been many false alarms reported. Senator Burkett asked how many times did this apply to a student or anyone Phil Homer, Legislative Advisor, Idaho Association of School Administrators, Dale Kleinert, Asst. Principal of Moscow Jr. High School spoke in support of Mr. Kleinert told the committee that “this legislature needs to act quickly before Senator Darrington asked if there have been other suits filed in other states, Senator Sweet wanted to make it clear that this bill was just about liability for Senator Bunderson asked if bringing forth this law means the other law is |
MOTION: | Senator Richardson made a motion to send H269a to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Marley will carry this on the Senate floor. |
ADJOURN: | Meeting was adjourned at 2:14 p.m. |
DATE: | March 31, 2003 |
TIME: | 1:30 pm |
PLACE: | Room 437 |
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
Chairman Darrington, Vice Chairman Lodge, Senators Sorensen, Richardson, Bunderson, Sweet, Marley, Roberts |
MEMBERS
EXCUSED: |
Senator Davis, Burkett (Barbara Roberts serving for Senator Burkett) |
MINUTES: | Senator Sweet made a motion to accept the minutes of March 24 as written. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. |
Senator Darrington told the committee that the bills to be heard today are a series that started in the House, and are from the officer of the Court. These are similar to the “defects in the law” legislation that started in the Senate, and shepherded by Senator Sweet. |
|
H 335 | Representative Robert Ring presented this legislation for the Idaho Supreme Court after suggestions from the Trial lawyers that amends existing law relating to sentencing criteria in drug cases; to provide that substance abuse evaluations may be waived in certain circumstances. Prior to the sentencing for certain drug crimes, Idaho Code provides for a Judge Joel Horton told the committee that he has a background in Under the amendment proposed by H 335, the judge is given the discretion to First Time Offenders If the offender being sentenced has no prior or current Availability of Comparable Information Additionally, and regardless of the There will be a cost benefit to individuals, also to counties, and the primary Senator Darrington mentioned that the evaluations can be expensive and Senator Darrington then asked if the Judge was satisfied with the quality of Senator Bunderson asked what percentage of these cases would not Thomas A. Wilson, a licensed alcohol and drug abuse evaluator and has Senator Darrington asked him if the judges feel they have adequate |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made a motion to send H 335a to the floor with a do pass. Second as by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Lodge will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
H 336 | Representative Richard Willis presented this legislation which is along the same lines as H 335, but relating to driving under the influence of intoxicating substance. Prior to the sentencing of a defendant for a violation of driving under the influence of alcohol, current Idaho Code, provides that the defendant shall obtain an alcohol abuse evaluation for the assistance of the sentencing judge in deciding whether alcohol treatment is indicated and this is mandatory in all DUI cases. The Judiciary believes that in appropriate circumstances the sentencing judge should have the option of waiving these evaluations. In many cases, the sentencing judge already has sufficient information through other records and reports relating to the defendant’s degree of alcohol abuse to make an informed decision concerning whether an alcohol treatment program should be ordered. The amendment to Section 18-8005, Idaho Code, contemplated by this bill provides that the sentencing judge has discretionary authority to determine that an evaluation is unnecessary with respect to certain Driving Under the Influence (DUI) offenses committed by persons who have no prior violations of the DUI laws if the judge has the defendant’s criminal history, driving record and evidentiary test of the defendant’s degree of alcohol concentration and has no reason to believe that the offender regularly abuses alcohol and may be in need of treatment. Similar to the legislation for substance abuse, this bill also grants a judge discretion to waive an evaluation in any case where the court has a similar assessment which has been conducted within twelve months of the sentencing. Representative Wills recognized that there are no standards set, and Judge Horton also spoke to this bill saying the judges aren’t looking for a First-Time Offender If a defendant has no other prior or pending DUI charges with respect to The results of any evidentiary test for alcohol or drugs at the time of the Then the court may waive an alcohol evaluation for the standard DUI Availability of Similar Evaluation Additionally, the judge may also waive an alcohol evaluation and proceed Molly Cox, Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (M.A.D.D.) expressed concern |
MOTION: | Senator Sweet made a motion to send H 336a to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Richardson and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Marley will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
H 337 | Representative Dick Harwood presented this legislation which 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, and credit cards and debit cards are routinely used by litigants to conveniently pay these obligations in these jurisdictions. 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 because governmental recipients of this revenue would receive something less than their full share of the fine, fees and costs ordered by the judge. As part of the requirements of this legislation, the card user pays the costs of the transaction (including the fee charged by the card issuer), 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 also result in the prompt payment of these court charges, thereby reducing the risk that they will become delinquent and require court time and expense to collect them. |
MOTION: | Senator Sorensen made a motion to send H337 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Marley and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Sweet will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
H 338 | Representative Mack Shirley told the committee that court records show about $56 million dollars in fines, fees, surcharges and restitution are owed by those who have been convicted of a state or local offense. In an effort to improve the collection of unpaid fines, fees, costs, restitution, and other amounts ordered by a court, other states, such as Arizona, have enacted a debt set-off program by which the courts notify the tax authority if there are any court ordered amounts in arrears, which are then satisfied from any tax refund due to the debtor. In 2 ½ months, Arizona collected $2.5 million dollars. Idaho has a similar statutory procedure where the income tax refunds are applied to the taxpayer’s child support obligation. This bill authorizes the Idaho State Tax Commission upon application of the |
MOTION: | Senator Richardson made a motion to send H338 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Bunderson and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Richardson will carry this bill on the Senate floor. |
H 369 | Representative Debbie Field presented this bill that relates to funding for the drug court and family court services fund. This legislation provides for a two percent surcharge on the sale of all liquor through the Liquor Dispensary in order to provide an ongoing dedicated source of funding for Drug Courts and Family Court Services in the Judicial Branch. Section 23-217(a), Idaho Code, has become obsolete in the day-to- day operations of the Dispensary’s approach to pricing products. This bill results in an overall 2% increase in the total shelf price of liquor sold at the Dispensary. Section 23-217(b), Idaho Code is still relevant because it provides for the 5% markdown on the sale of liquor to all licensees, but has an incorrect reference to code Section 23-902e. A correction is included in this legislation. This bill basically takes advantage of current Idaho Code to create a new provision to provide funding for court services without disrupting any other distributions from the Liquor Control Fund. This bill will generate approximately $1.5 million to be deposited into the Drug Court and Family Court Services Fund. This fund will be subject to appropriation by the Legislature and is anticipated that it will free up General Funds that are now dedicated to Drug Court and Family Court Services. These programs have been put at risk due to reducing General Fund appropriations in the Judicial Branch’s budget. She showed the history of this bill which has been modified seven times. (See attached #1) In Ada County, 97% of those who participated in the Drug and Family Court Senator Darrington asked why the authority for the spending was given to Senator Bunderson asked if 2% would be based on the gross proceeds and Senator Roberts asked if there was talk about raising the tax on liquor to |
MOTION: | Senator Lodge made a motion to send H369 to the floor with a do pass. Second was by Senator Sorensen and the motion carried by a voice vote. Senator Darrington and Senator Lodge will co-sponsor this bill on the Senate floor. |
ADJOURN: | Meeting was adjourned at 3:37 p.m. |
Notifications