House Judiciary: Liens, More Legislators, and Guns for Felons

At least one plane made it out this morning, but the word was that most legislators were stuck in Juneau even though the Anchorage caucus had scheduled a meeting this weekend in Anchorage. 

(H)JUDICIARY		STANDING COMMITTEE *
Mar 12 Friday 1:00 PM		CAPITOL 120
+	HB 253	MECHANIC/MATERIALMEN LIENS	TELECONFERENCED
*+	HB 408	MISCONDUCT INVOLVING WEAPONS	TELECONFERENCED
+	HJR 38	CONST. AM: INCREASE NUMBER OF LEGISLATORS	TELECONFERENCED
+		Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled	TELECONFERENCED

Opening at 1:14pm. Two excused members are here because of the snow storm and they apparently weren't able to fly out.

Summary

HB 253 Mechanic/Materialmen Liens - sponsored by Committee Chair Ramras - would change the amount of time a business has to put a lien on someone for non-payment.  It would change the time limit from 90 days to 120 days.  Rep. Ramras called this the "Rocky Bill." 

The first to testify was Rocky Pavey owner of Rocky's heating.  Rep. Ramras introduced him as a friend since age 14 and Lathrop High Shool's best ever athlete and Hall of Fame Football player.  His testimony was similar to his written letter, though the friendly bantering continued between Chair Ramras and Rocky throughout.

So, 90 days isn't long enough to be civil with one's long time customers yet weed out those who are going to stiff you. He said he's lost tens of thousands, if not a hundred thousand to people who take advantage of the 90 day limit. Another 30 days would be the right amount he and others said.

The others testified along the same lines and Chair Ramras said the bankers lobbyists are opposed, but I didn't catch the reason.

The bill passed out of committee.  Next stop the Rules Committee and from there it would go to the House floor and then it would have to go through all that on the Senate side.  And there are less than 40 days left.


HJR 38:  CONST. AM: INCREASE NUMBER OF LEGISLATORS

This one I've heard argued in State Affairs and in the Senate version, but I can't remember where.  This passed out of committee after Rep. Herron played the "Angel's" advocate by asking who is going to promote this Constitutional Amendment among urban voters who will not see they have anything to gain.  Rep. Gruenberg said it keeps all districts a little smaller than they would be in terms of population and that's good for everyone.   It was passed out of the committee.  I think it goes to House Finance next.

HB 408:  MISCONDUCT INVOLVING WEAPONS

This would allow felons who had served their time to carry weapons, including concealed weapons.  Alaska had a law with which, apparently, everyone was reasonably satisfied.  It  let felons (I think just those who had not used a weapon in their crime) gradually gain back the right to have weapons up to, but not including, concealed weapons.  All was fine, until the Feds passed a law that said if you had any state weapons restrictions, you couldn't have any weapon.  So the part that prohibited concealed weapons use, essentially prevented people from using any firearms. Testimony came from reformed felons who wanted to go hunting, who needed weapons to go fishing in bear country, and a bush pilot who needs a weapon as part of his business in rural Alaska.   Also from Robert Judy of the NRA Alaska and Wayne Anthony Ross.  Everyone seemed to be supportive, but they wanted more information to tweek the bill a abit. 

I'm going to post this now and add my notes when we get back from dinner later tonight.

UPDATE March 13:  I've added the rough notes, if this works, it should be linked after the break. [I've tried this unsuccessfully before. It's not working, I'll have to figure out how to make this feature work.]

Here are my ROUGH NOTES.  AGAIN, ASSUME THESE ARE CLOSE, BUT DON'T DEPEND ON THEM.  CHECK THE AUDIO FROM GAVEL TO GAVEL (Get House Judiciary March 12, 2010) TO GET A MORE ACCURATE ACCOUNT.



HB 253 MECHANIC/MATERIALMEN LIENS
Don Habager (Ramras staffer) - We call this the Rocky Bill.  Hardworking men and women asked for change in state law to better serve customers.  Ground up piece of legislation.  Rocky Bill extends by 30 days the time a mechanic or materialmen can work with a customer before they are forced to file a lien.  From 90 to 120 days.

Ramras:  For people who live in a diesel community.  the harder your boiler works, more inclined to go out.  Usually on weekends in 60˚ below.  Your grateful they come to fix the boiler, but when the bill comes less grateful.  Check made to occupant, don't pay the ones who do the work.  Homebuilders in Anchorage are opposed.  You ought to be able to present a waiver of lien, not sure exact name of document, a promise that you're immediately suspect from the beginning of your work.  On behalf those communities lagging behind the natural gas communities.

Rocky:
I've known Rocky since I was 14.  A hall of fame quarterback at Lathrop High School, the greatest they ever had, why not recruited by colleges and NFL beyond me.


Rocky:  Second best athlete, that would go to ... best wrestler ever.  Near and dear to several small businesses.  Small Bsiness economic back bone of all communities.  Extend the time necessary to lien a customer by 30 days.  Strictly a timing issue.  If we do work at beginning of month, not billed to the end of the month.  Then customers feel they have 30 days to pay.  So that gets to 60 days.  For some reason a customer calls and says, "Rocky, I had car trouble, I just can't pay this month"  most are long term customers and we want good relationships.  If we have to wait, we have to determine if it will go beyond the 90 dat cycle.  So, do we lien this person at day 85 and imperil a relationship with a long term customer.  By extending it out to 120 days win/win.  After the 90 days expires about ten to fifteen days, we'll know if they're going to pay or not.  We don't have to damage their credit with a lien.  In the middle of the night in freezing temperature it is hard to get someone to sign a right to lien, or the owner of an apartment isn't there, the owner is at work.  We can do 20 jobs a day and tracking down all the owners to serve the right to lien.
I personally have lost tens of thousands of $, maybe $100K by unscrupulous customers who knew about the 90 day limit.  There are folks who know how to work the system.  We can't hold your equipment hostage until you pay.  Not like car repair.

Thank Mr Ramras for bringing this forward on my behalf and all the other small business owners.
Billy Weiss was a great wrestler.

Gatto:  Are any of your clients opposed to this bill?
Rocky:  Don't know the answer to that.  Don't see how it would negatively affect them by giving them more time.
Gatto:  What about any of your colleagues opposed?
Rocky:  To the contrary, they all support.  Every single one I've talked to have been enthusiastic in support.  It's cold here today and they are doing furnace work.
Gatto:  What if it were 180 days, would you like that too
Rocky:  No, 120 is perfect.  If I had an extra 30 days I can weed out those who can and can't pay.  180 would be great - the longer we have to work with our customers.
Ramras:  Bankers don't want anyone standing in front of their lien.  Service call for a boiler tuneup about $130.  But if you have to come after hours emergency.
Rocky:  STructure a little different basic is $325 gives us 1.5 hours.  Anchorage people may think that much higher.  AFter hours add $50 so min of $375 after hours.
Grace Rudy, Overhead Door Co. Fairbanks:  I agree with everything Rocky said.  120 would definitely allow you to weed out the people who will and won't pay their bills.  I can't think of anything he left out.
Ramras:  Succinctly said.  What does your work do and bills, not new construction.
Rudy:  We have the same type of after hour call out.  If Overhead dorrs stuck, calls where we don't know who the owner of the building is or info on the customer and you go out in good faith hoping they will pay.  We pay $120/hour, after hours $180, plus travel.  So minimun of $120.  We have 13 employees, Rocky said he had 15 (local families).

Wayne Long, Wayne's Air supply, one man by myself.  I agree with these guys.  Working with insurance company over $5 grand, they can take their time paying.
Ramras:  Not the insurance company that default, but it's the Insurance Com that
Long:  Work done, claim made.  they say check's in the mail.  Homeowner has a different story.  If it is close to 90 days we put a lien on the house.  Home owner kept the money or???  We like the extra time to make the decision.

Jim Slater of Slater Construction FBKs.:  I think the time frame should be expanded.  I've had to put liens on people's property.  On the other hand, had a concrete company company, the business owner was late - a year- in paying his bill, because of the lien laws to file against self or property owners.  If they'd had more time it would have save court time, etc. I think the 120 days for small repair folks would be fine.  But contractor longer would be better.  If they can't pay the bill, and I can't pay, then there are liens against my projects as well.  Add another 30 days or 180 days would be better.  If you have to file a lien, then there are honesty issues involved, beyond just the people can't pay.
General Contractor, sell off a lot of my work or do my own work.  I pay the subcontractor, I rob Peter to Pay Paul.  Big disadvantage when ...  My bills are $10K or more.  Even the lien issues should be revealed you have to file.  If it goes to litigation, not small claims, it goes to court and could take a year and a half here in Fairbanks.

Gruenberg:  I appreciate listening to the testimony.  But I've heard it would make it easier for homeowners and you because everyone avoids additional legal fees.

Ramras:  Opposed by Alaska Homebuilders Association.  I explained to them.  When Rep. Coghill left to go to the Senate.  Herron approached me to be on the committee and welcome because he is fine legislator and because he's from a rural area.  Diesel communities are different from natural gas communities.  Then you get caught:  do I pay my fuel bill or my old repair bill.  Homeowners stretched with the price of fuel up.  My home took 350 gallons of home heating oil.
Ramras Phone rang - fined two donuts

This bill went to Labor and Commerce first.  Resides in Judiciary and since no fiscal note, it goes straight to the Rules.  My job as the sponsor will agitate to get this bill to the floor.  Rules chair will make that judgment.  Then pass on the House floor and go to Fairbanks.

My childhood friend Rocky Pavey  there are about 50 or 60 jobs dependent on this.

Thank my friend Ray Ramras.
Ramras:  That would be Mr. Chairman - [big smile on his face. ]


Gatto:  Could this be done by a borough oridinance?
Ramras:  I believe this is in Alaska Statutes.  A boutique bill now, but has statewide ramifications.

Rocky:  Mr. Chairman
Ramras:  Thanks, I feel respected.
Gatto:  You know we have to put up with that all the time.
Gatto:  Ordinance can make statutes more restrictive.  Rep. Gruenberg might have that answer.
Gruenberg:  Sorry I was passing a note.  I learned that excuse in school. . . The answer is no.  Because of the way this is written.  In some circumstances the answer would be yes.  Like in tax exemptions there could be.  The field is preempted by state law.
Ramras:  public  testimony closed.
Herron:  Comment this will affect the small business I own.
Ramras:  We pass laws from the top down - in my opinion that would be Obama's Health Care Reform - and then we can pass them bottom up where it comes from the people themselves.  I prefer these and would be proud to carry this on the house floor if it gets there.
Rocky take care, my best to Catherine.
 Rep Wilson and I had a conversation and will have an empathetic ear here.




HJR 38:  CONST. AM: INCREASE NUMBER OF LEGISLATORS
Rep. Wilson:  This would increase to 44 reps and 22 Senators.  We are the smallest bicameral legislature in the nation.  Population has tripled.  Harder to comply with Constition requirement to have each district a contiguous with compatible socio-economic district.  Every reapportionment except the first one in 1960 have been decided in the courts.  Plus the 1965 Voting rights act.  [I've heard this preamble a couple times already - at State Affairs and Senate Finance. This bill has been amended from 48 to 44 and 24 to 22 members in the House though last I heard it was still 8 new reps and 4 new senators in the Senate version of the bill.]


Herron:  Let me take the position of the Angels Advocate. [He explained that his sister-in-law doesn't like the term Devil's Advocate.] Urban areas are going to gain members.  Under this plan they will still gain, but less populated areas will at least maintain for the next ten years.  Some would say that is still a dillution of power in the state.  Who will promote the passage of this Constitutional Amendment.  People in urban areas will say, "So..."


Wilson:  You have the map.  The yellow is one rep's district.  It is impossible already.  If we do nothing, this district will get larger.  And urban distrcits will get denser.  Also fairness, is it fair to the legislature and the people to be so spread out.  This disrict is the largest district in the country.


Herron:  Yes, I understand that and you and I understand it more than our colleagues and constituents.  When you drive in any part of Anchorage, why would a person, not legislator, but constituents bill, why concerned because of voting right act of 1965 it's not based on area, but one person one vote.  Who would advocate in urban areas for us?


Wilson:  It will probably go to court.


Herron:  I'm not speaking of reapportionament, but the Amendment.


Gruenberg:  Rep. Dahlstrom and I represent urban areas.  It will allow us to keep our districts small and cohesive as socio-economic areas.  She has mostly the bases, I have Mt. View - ours is like a gateway community, a lot of immigrants, assimilation, integration, etc.  I think to get this passed, it will be essential to get a group of urban people with you.  I would not characterize it as a rural bill, it may gain a seat or two, but it will keep the districts small.  Where else would people walking down the street know their reps?


Heron:  Explaining to Ramras who just returned, his question:  who will advocate who will advocate for this in urban areas.  And I still haven't gotten an answer.


Ramras:  We hae the Speaker of the House skulking in the back.


Gruenberg:  I think urban people will support because it keeps the districts small.


Herron:  I understand that, as an angel's advocate.  I don't think we'll get to New Hamshire, but one of my concerns about this.  Do I support the concept?  You bet I do.


Ramras:  I had lunch at Olivia's - a fine mexican restaurant - we talked, it would be interesting to keep the SEnate at 20 and expand the House to 60.  The cost of enlarging the capital.  You have the sympathy of the chair.  I like democracy.


Gatto:  Everyone in the state bar none will continue to have one rep and one senator.  That won't change.  With regard to this huge district.  Mostly empty space.  So actually it will shrink a bit.  It won't be the size of Texas, but maybe California.  As long as every rep has one Sen. and one Rep, that won't change.  Population doesn't like us.


Ramras:  My constituents like me.
Gatto:  They like their own, not others.
Ramras:  Excellent point.  We can philosophize forever on this.  We have Margerate Patton Walsh and Tam Cook from Legal.


Gruenberg: If it passes, it needs preclearance by DoJ, when does that have to take place.

Walsh:  After it is approved.  Once on the ballot we'd put material together so as soon as it passes we could file paperwork.  There's a 30 day turnaround to ask more info or approve or not.  If we don't hear in 60 days, assume they approve it.  If ask more info, it's another 60 days.  It would be tight but doable.
...... details of how to do the plan and time frame with reapportionment.  60 days after election would be early January before we get the Census data.


Gruenberg:  Need to keep it short because we have other bills:
Ramras:  But this is very important.
Gruenberg:  Are you aware of anything else that would have to be preapproved (other than redistricting) prior to 2012 election.
Walsh:  I don't know - Div of Elections may have other issues.
Ramras:  Mayor Bothello, former AG
Bruce Bothello:  Mayor of Juneau, appear here in my private capacity.  I was both Dep AG and AG intensely involved with 1990 reapportionment plan - implemented in 1994.  I testify in favor of HJR 38.  Go directly to Rep. Gatto and Herron's questions.
Gatto's one person one vote question - since US SC in 1964 interpreted one person one vote, it means that an Alaskan who lives in Anchorage will have a voice, no more and no less, than anyone else.  The message I would impart to my fellow citizens, is the fundamental sense of fairmenss  We intuitively know, all things being equal, a small compact district, we have some only a few square miles, are easier to communicate than those in districts that are thousand miles apart.  Those spaces may be empty, but they have to be traversed.
The next reapportion board will be even greater and will exaccerbate the conditions.  Fiscal and Space impacts.  Looking at body with house of 48 would minimze the increase of the footprint of any district and maintains the ??? of the legislature.


Gatto:  It certainly must be an optimum number, not just 48, if the best possible representation we should go to NH.  Did you choose 48 because ....


Bothello:  I suspect because it most closely matches the size of districts today.  I agree there is no one optimum in the balance, functionality of the body v. the ability to provide better access to their constituents.


Ramras:  Well said.  I'm with you.


Gruenberg:  We don't have anyone here from Alaska Municipal League or Mayors.  Do you have any idea of others or could you find that.


Bothello:  Only group I know of is SE mayors and they support them.


Ramras:  Youre doing a great job keeping things flowing.


Carla Scofied from Leg Affairs Agency:

Gatto:  Fiscal note has you signature on it, anything else you know of?


Scofield :  Not to my knowledge, we know it will have additional costs.


Gatto:  What about the LIO offices?


Carla Scofiel;  It's in support services for additional staff.


Gatto:  I'm looking for office rent.


Schofiel:  It's in the ??? - for expanding or establishing new LIO offices, but until we get there we don't know where these might be.


Ramras:  Carla that's an excellent job.  Close public testimony.
Move.  No objections  Rep. Wilson, you're string of wins in this room is continued.


HB 408:  MISCONDUCT INVOLVING WEAPONS

Ramras:  Mr. Mulligan it is a great pleasure to have a man like you before us....realize there are some issues with the bill still


Ben Mulligan, staff to Rep. STotz:   Some problems arising, even with permanent defense, still some problems with people having their rights to have their fire arms.  We change it from???.
Background on Caron, US law, interpreting all or nothing.  If you have any type of restrition for carrying a fire arm, you nolonger have that right.
In this case

Ramras:  Mr Mulligan, you have a friend in the Room [Rep Stoltze comes in the room]
Mr. Mulligan has been doing anexcellent job.

Stoltze:  Appreciate this bill coming forward.  Not an easy subject to comprehend, need the committee's help to develop a logical path for people who have lost their right carry arms can reestablish that.  Right to carry arms is important just as reestablishing voting rights.  Not easy to do it, but trying to find a logical path.  Some rural area people, not having a gun affects their way of life, very tangible , not abstract.  Not easy to do this, worthy of trying to find aapproach, may not be able to do it in 40 days.

Ramras:  We always promote good debate.  People two types in the bill.  People who lost their felony. In our bills we create felons.  Is there a way to separate people who committed crime with weapons and those who have not.

Stoltze:  I'm not an attorney - that's not an apology, a statement of fact.

Gruenberg:  We've been given two cases 1 is US SC case the other is AK appeal.

Ramras:  People who can give testimony>  Doug Moody, our good friend at the troopers, NRA, Richard Paterson from Barrow, Chugiak, .... and Wayne Ross from ..

Gruenberg:  Particularly the attorneys, Mr. Ross, Mr. Judy, I'd like citations

Ramras:  Civilians first.

Herron:  To our colleague, not being an attorney is a badge of honor.

Ramras:  We appreciate you hear, but Mr. Mulligan was doing an exceptional job.

Stoltze:  I don't know aht I add.

Ramras:  Entertainment value, entertainment.

Jim Adams:  I represent myself.

Ramras:  You're damn right you do.

Jim Adams:  Judge waived the anti-gun things and then after conciction I got federal firearms license.  I went to two gunsmithing schools between 86 and 89 and then I came back, I first came in 64-67 81-84 and 90 to present.  I had my fed license to July 2001.  that law that came in in 98, so they asked me to hand over my federal license, because I couldn't own my handguns, but rifles.  Then feds said I could have all or none and had to return all my guns.  I'd like to be able to legally go out an shoot, maybe some gunsmithing legally.  I haven't had any convictions since the beginning.  I have a very small social security.  We had nine kids and 17 grand kids, I'm not a threat to anyone, I just enjoy shooting guns and gunsmithing.  After I fell through no fault of my own....

Ramras:  I appreciate your testimony very much, Rep Stoltz?
Stoltz:  Thank you very much look forward to meeting you
Ramras:  Thank you for being here. Gruenberg.
Gruenberg:  I echo your comments, because I found that case compelling.  We're trying to do the right thing.
Ramras:  Well said.
Harry Stanley, representing myself:  I'm hoping someday I and the state of Alaska will have the right.  I've been an Alaskan for 20 years.  Found myself in wildlife situations where I was in fear for my life and loved ones.  No protections against bears.  I'm an average Joe, I've paid my debt to society and paid all the conditions of my probation.  Should I have the right to protect my own life?  Fishing is not only great reacreation, it is key part of my life.  because obears in the area, I have stopped taking my daughter fishing because of fear of bears.  I received stolen property as a teen, I'm now 33.  My daughter is now 13.  Doing my best as a single parent.  Hoping she won't fall into the false areas I did as akid.  We're missing out on a lot of recreation opportunities because I fear for my daughter's life.  I have nver had the opportunity to take her hunting.  I fear that day will never come.  I grew up in Aleutions, Dutch Harbor, it's a part of my life.  I fear a matter of time I will find myself in a bear confrontation I can't get out.  The words of the sb owners in fairbansk was "another bullet in the gun."  We don't have that opportunity.
Ramras:  Draw attention to the distinction between person who committed
Theft in the second involved a weapon, I was a dumb ignorant kid. Accepting a stolen weapon.
Ramras:  You didn't use a weapon in the committing of a crime.  It takes a lot of courage to bear you sole to a roomful of people you can't see.  This is how you change law in Alaska.  Thank you.  Your daugher has a heck of a role model.
Gruenberg;  Where to you live?
Eric:  In Soldotna, in a town.
Richard Patterson, Barrow, but in Kotzebue now.
Ramras:  Ilove Kotz how's it going?
Patterson:  16 below, very nice.  Honor to speak today.  50year old pilot in rural Ak for 30 years.  Serve and protect over 20 communites and 100s of thousands of square miles.  Firearm is a tool I must have in this profession.  Ierred in my ways years ago, saw it was wrong and corrected it.  Wife and two sons, hard work, dedication, on front lines of all that harms bush residents.  I driectly participate in the saving of 1000s of lives.  I've made extraordinary acts, recognized by this state.  I got a full unconditional pardon, it states in the pardon right to have arms.  I've been stalked by bears in plane crash.  Not a luxury and absolute necessity living in the bush.  Felons are not a cast of people who need to be thrown away.  I feel in full support but must be modified.  Unelss all rights in firearms restored, no rights are restored.  Leg. instruments that dilute the power of that pardon are in direct violation of separation of powers.
Gruenberg:  Mr. Patterson and the others.  This goes beyond the restorative rights to bear arms and affects my constituents.  I have neglected my duty - we have to be sure their rights are fully restored, as long as they have rehabilitated themselves and the people are protected.
Ramras:  I concur.
Don Clark, Palmer, brief please, still two more:
Clark:  In AK for 25 years, 65 years old.  Handy man construction and build furniture.  I was living with a lady friend who asked if I would grow a few plants for her.  I agreed, and all my rights would be restored.  Federal law conflicted.  Haven't gotten all my rights back.  Went to Wayne for help.  I feel the state failed me when they said I'd get my rights back.  Even firearms are a necessity for peace of mind and protection.
Ramras:  Thank you.  Next, one of the most colorful WAR.
WAR:  Leg. passed laws that restored rights to felons, shotguns and rifles and then ten years off probabtion, with some caveats - couldn't carry concealed off their property.  But federal 514.308.???  SC said, if any restrictions they can't buy any firearms.
Only Gatto, Ramras, Gruenberg, and Lynn still here.
One has a presidential pardon, some have governor's pardon, but can't get concealed license which gets feds to say they can't have any firearms.
Ramras:  Should we draw a distinction between those who used firearms to commit crime and those who haven't?
WAR:  Youre a legendary Alaskan.
Gruenberg:  Wayne, this is Max, I owe you a letter, I haven't forgotten.

Brian Judy:  Alaska State Liason for NRA.  Complicated issue, solution fairly simple, I've provided detailed tech background it would take time to go thru.
Ramras:  Brian, Gruenberg, he would prefer to hear the long form.  If you could give general direction of how you'd like to see this bill shaped.  When we come back we'll invite you to give a longer forum.
Gruenberg:  I support and want to help it. I want to put your concerns on the record.  I would rather we can talk on the phone and get this squared away.  We can hear the testimony later.
Judy:  Brief suggestion on NRA read.  AK State Law already restores rights to former offenders.  Caron decision, unless the state returns 100% rights.  AK restores 95% of rights but only limited concealed circumstances.
Distinction in classes is already the case in law.  Prohibition of carryin arms that are capable of being concealed and the for actual concealed.
You need to repeal 11.61.200g2 - the limitations on concealed carry.
Change affirmative offenses 11.61.200b and g  from affirmative offenses to exceptions.  Then you copletely restore the rights of those who are deserving.  If person who has had his rights restored, can be charged again, he's not the same as someone who never lost his rights.
I apologize, I know this gets confusing.  There is already the distinction between not a crime against a person and crime against a person.
Ramras:  Helpful, we need to wrap it up.
Gruenberg:  Would help me if you take a copy HB 408 and mark up what you like and don't like.
Ramras:  This is day 54 of a 90 session so we can get it into the queue and to the floor.
3:10 we are adjourned.