ARIZONA STATE SENATE

45TH LEGISLATURE

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

 

MINUTES OF COMMITTEE ON

TRANSPORTATION

 

DATE:

March 22, 2001

TIME:   9:30 a.m.

ROOM: SHR 2

 

 

CHAIRMAN:

Senator Aguirre

VICE CHAIRMAN:

Senator Burns

 

 

 

ANALYST:

Nadine Sapien

COMMITTEE

SECRETARY: 

Tracey Moulton

 

 

 

INTERNS:

Gabriel Aragon

 

 

 

ATTENDANCE

BILLS

 

 

Committee Members
Pr
Ab
Ex
Bill Number
Disposition

Senator Bee

X

 

 

H.B. 2181

DPA

Senator Blanchard

X

 

 

H.B. 2229

FAILED

Senator Daniels

X

 

 

H.B. 2230

DP

Senator Jackson

X

 

 

H.B. 2277

DPA

Senator Lopez

X

 

 

H.B. 2372

DP

Senator Martin

X

 

 

H.B. 2377

DPA

Senator Burns, Vice Chairman

X

 

 

H.B. 2511

DPA

Senator Aguirre, Chairman

X

 

 

 

 

 

 


GOVERNOR’S APPOINTMENTS

 

 

Name
Position
Recommendation

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tape 1, Side A

 

Chairman Aguirre called the meeting to order at 9:35 a.m. and attendance was noted. For additional attendees, see Sign-in Sheet (Attachment A).

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

 

Senator Aguirre announced that there were no minutes available for approval.

 

CONSIDERATION OF BILLS

 

H.B. 2181 – suspended driver license enforcement(now: school bus drivers; requirements)  – DO PASS AMENDED

 

Gabriel Aragon, Research Intern, explained H.B. 2181 updates statutory language pertaining to the use of fingerprints by the Department of Public Safety (DPS) in obtaining a criminal records check for any person applying for a school bus driver certificate. This legislation is in response to a request made by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) to DPS to have statute conform more closely to current federal standards on the issue of school bus driver’s criminal records check.

 

Mr. Aragon explained the Aguirre amendment dated 3/21/01; 8:42 a.m. allows school bus drivers to operate an alternately flashing warning light on a school bus anytime before the 100 foot mark prior to a stop or when the school bus is stopped on a highway for the purpose of children entering or exiting a school bus.

 

Rick Knight, Lieutenant, DPS,  testified in support of the bill and noted that the bill was drafted at the request of the FBI, who conducts all of the background checks for DPS. He explained the language in the current statute needs to be changed to conform to current federal standards.

 

Senator Aguirre announced the following people were present in support of the bill: Vicki Barnett, Supervisor, DPS; Mary Kay Myers, Coach and Transit; and Andy Swann, Legislative Liaison, Associated Highway Patrolmen of Arizona.

 

Senator Jackson moved H.B. 2181 be returned with a DO PASS recommendation.

 

Senator Jackson moved the Aguirre amendment dated 3/21/01; 8:42 a.m. be adopted.  The motion CARRIED by voice vote (Attachment B).

 

Senator Burns moved H.B. 2181 be returned with an AS AMENDED, DO PASS recommendation.  The motion CARRIED with a roll call vote of 7-0-0-1 (Attachment 1).

 

Senator Bee declined to vote and declared a rule 30.

 

H.B. 2229 – rental trucks; trailers; surcharges – FAILED

 

Nadine Sapien, Research Analyst, stated that currently statute requires that rental car companies collect a 5% surcharge on each rental contract for passenger vehicles.  She explained H.B. 2229 expands the five percent rental vehicle surcharge that applies to passenger vehicles to include trucks, trailers or semitrailers under 26,001 pounds gross vehicle weight.

Terry Smalley, Executive Vice President, Arizona Motor Transport Association, testified in support of the bill and commented that when this plan was initiated in 1992, Senator Keith Bee and Representative Jerry Overton sponsored legislation to address the concern of everyone paying their share in rental areas.   He remarked it was an oversight that rental trucks, trailers or semitrailers were not included.

 

Mr. Smalley stated that other states have similar legislation and have had success with their programs.  He explained that the rental companies now note the surcharge on their rental contracts.  This money is collected by the rental company owner and is put into a separate fund and on February 15th of every year they file with the State, an application and a check with the amount of money collected.  He stated that at the same time, the vehicle license tax and total revenue has been collected and any excess funds are directed into the highway trust fund.  This bill does not carry any appropriations because the system is already established.

 

Senator Aguirre announced that Pat Crahan, Director, Governmental Relations, U-Haul International was present in support of the bill.

 

Senator Burns moved H.B. 2229 be returned with a DO PASS recommendation.  The motion FAILED with a roll call vote of 4-4-0 (Attachment 2).

 

H.B. 2277 – red lights; violations; procedures (now: traffic lights; violations; procedures) – DO PASS AMENDED

 

Ms. Sapien explained H.B. 2277 requires a person who receives a red light or flashing red light citation to attend and complete Traffic Survival School, which excludes that person from attending defensive driving school and dismissing the subsequent red light violation.  The bill also requires ADOT to suspend the person’s driving privilege until completion of the traffic survival school and requires the Governor’s Highway Safety Team to study methods of reducing red light violations.

 

Ms. Sapien explained the 4-line Martin amendment date 3/21/01; 11:14 a.m. reinstates a person’s ability to attend defensive driving school and to dismiss the red light violation if the person is eligible for defense driving school.

 

Ms. Sapien explained the 9-line Martin amendment dated 3/20/01; 12:15 p.m. removes the requirement for a person who receives a red light citation to attend traffic survival school and the requirement that ADOT suspend the person’s drivers license until completion of the traffic survival school, except for accidents that result in serious injury or death.  The amendment also reinstates the person’s ability to attend defensive driving school for dismissal of the citation.

 

Senator Martin explained the reason he sponsored the two amendments was to give the Committee members three options. The first option being the bill as it is written.  The second option is the bill with traffic survival school and defensive driving school and the ability to have the citation taken off the record. And the third option, to reinstate the defensive driving school and the ability to have the citation taken off the record while retaining the study committee within the bill.  He opined the study committee is really important and remarked that he has been approached with different ideas to address red light running, which should be explored further by a study committee.

 

Ms. Sapien added that the Martin amendment dated 3/20/01; 12:15 p.m. also leaves in the requirement that ADOT suspend a person’s driver license if the red light running violation caused injury or death and the person did not complete traffic survival school.

 

Senator Martin stated that currently if someone is severely injured or killed, the driver has to attend traffic survival school.  Traffic survival school is designed for people with driving under the influence (DUI) violations and the drivers that cause serious accidents.

 

In response to Senator Jackson, Ms. Sapien clarified that the study listed in the bill would be performed by the Governor’s Highway Safety Team, rather than a study committee with legislative members.

 

Michael Green, Attorney, National Safety Council, testified in support of the bill and commented that there is no doubt that red light running is a very serious offense and one that the Legislature should devote resources and education to. 

 

Mr. Green noted that the Safety Council prefers the 4-line Martin amendment that states an individual would not automatically have points on their license but would be required to go to traffic survival school for the first offense of running a red light.  He stated the educational system presently in place, under the defensive driving program is working well.  Less than ½ of 1% of the people that received a red light citation had repeat offenses within the last 6.5 years. He commented that traffic survival school has historically been reserved for serious offenses, not the first inadvertent running of a red light.  He remarked that all of the terrible situations that result from red light running are already covered in statute with automatic points on the first offense and automatic traffic school.

 

Mr. Green urged the Committee to support the bill with the Martin 4-line amendment.

 

Senator Daniels commented that she is a member of the Red Means Stop (RMS) Coalition board and remarked that she does not support either of the amendments.  She stated that although Mr. Green’s statistics sound good, Arizona is still the number one red light violator in the country, in Mesa, Phoenix and Tucson.  She opined that if the public was aware that points would be issued on the first offense, drivers may not need to be sent to either driving school and the problem would be avoided with the result of lower incidents of red light violations.  She strongly expressed her belief that points should remain in the bill.  She remarked that being an insurance agent for over 21 years, rates are not always raised with violations.  She stated that she would be in favor of the driver being sent to either school, but reiterated that the points should be left in the bill.

 

Mr. Green commented that the bill without amendments seems to be draconian measures to a situation where there may be inadvertent red light violations.

 

Senator Daniels remarked that those incidents of “inadvertent” violations could be addressed in court and the citation could be dismissed. She commented that it used to be that a person cited with driving under the influence used to not have the harsh penalties that currently are in statute and opined that once this became public knowledge, the public’s behavior was changed. She remarked that this bill without the amendments would have the same effect. 

 

Senator Martin commented that the 4-line amendment is incorporated into the 9-line amendment. He noted that with this bill, an individual would not be allowed to pay a fine and take the points assigned to the violation.  Instead, the individual would be required to take the class.

 

Mr. Green commented another perspective on the statistics provided by the Arizona Supreme Court is that there were 466 repeat offenders out of 70,000 individuals.

 

Daryle Gregory, RMS Coalition, testified in support of the bill and stated that she is the grandmother of an individual that was killed in a red light running violation.  She remarked that she is not in support of either of the amendments.

 

John Keeler, President, Arizona Chapter, National Safety Council, testified in support of the bill and the 4-line Martin amendment.  He explained that leaving the defensive driving school in the bill is a good idea because the school works.  There are statistics that prove a decrease of recidivism of violations after people have taken this course.

 

Mr. Keeler stated that the defensive driving school also reduces the number of crashes.  In Florida, a similar school is utilized and Department of Highway and Motor Vehicle stated that out of a study group of 40,000 people, there was a 40% reduction in the number of crashes after taking the course.

 

Mr. Keeler opined that many people learn from their first mistake and noted that most people are not consciously trying to run a red light, but rather they make a split second decision to proceed through an intersection when there is not sufficient time left to do so.

 

Senator Daniels commented that although people are getting the message after attending a defensive driving school, this State is number one in the country with red light violations. Therefore the general public as a whole is not getting the message until they are caught.  She stated the reason she likes the original bill and neither of the amendments is because she wants the general public to think about running red lights before they get caught.  She noted it only takes one red light violation and someone could be killed; noted that not all red light violators are cited, but are creating dangerous situations.  Senator Daniels commented that red light running is a bigger problem than drunken driving and yet the punishment for that violation is much harsher.  She reiterated her opinion that this bill is one way to create behavioral changes in the general public.

 

Senator Martin stated that portions of Scottsdale, Paradise Valley and Phoenix are in his district, with Paradise Valley being the first in the nation with photo red light enforcement devices that document every red light violation that occurs.  He asked if there were any statistics of recidivism numbers.  Mr. Keeler replied the data from studies that were just completed were of individuals that took the defensive driving school because they had a red light violation, then measured how many of those individuals had to take the course again.  That is, less than ½ of 1% are doing the offense again.

 

Senator Martin remarked that even with the fact that people may not be caught on their first violation, people who have been caught, are not repeating the offense.  He commented that he has attended defensive driving school once and one of the things that was taught at the school was that a red light is not a brick wall. There is nothing stopping other drivers from coming through the intersection in the other direction.  He opined the bill with the amendments and having a study to evaluate the problem in the metropolitan area gets closer to the point that is taught in the school.

 

Les Marquis, President, RMS Coalition, testified in support of the bill and noted that the Coalition is not in support of either of the Martin amendments.  He explained that part of the reason is because the responsibility of stopping red light violations falls into three basic areas.  The Legislature has a requirement to let the public know that there will be consequences for this behavior.  The courts have to get into this process and realize that they must enforce the penalties to the fullest, and the individual driver must take responsibility to learn the traffic laws and drive correctly. 

 

Mr. Marquis remarked that it only takes one violation and a death can result.  He commented that all of the statistics that have been reported in this meeting do not address the number of red light violators that have not been caught.  There are 900 intersections in Phoenix and there will be twenty red light cameras installed. He commented that it is public education and changing behavior that will eventually solve this problem.  He reiterated that the Coalition does not support the amendments.

 

Frank Hinds, representing himself, testified the bill as written and stated that he was not in support of either of the amendments.  He commented that on March 16, 2001, his wife and he spent the morning at Phoenix Memorial Park, which is a cemetery in north Phoenix and placed red roses on their daughter’s grave. He stated that four years ago a driver ran a red light  and killed her.

 

Mr. Hinds stated that traffic experts recommend that red light running needs interventions that apply immediate and consistent negative consequences in order for drivers who commit this violation to change their behavior. Ideas for changing behavior are increased police enforcement, increased fines, photo enhancement and more education or required attendance at driver education classes.  Most people believe that red light running goes unpunished. This bill, without the amendments will be a step towards making the public change its behavior.

 

Robert Morehouse, Silver Haired Legislature, testified in support of the bill and remarked that his organization was not in support of either of the amendments.  He stated that the Silver Haired Legislature passed a resolution where the first offense of red light running has a $250 fine, the second offense has a $550 and the third offense has a $1,050 fine and loss of driver license.  He opined that full enforcement of the bill needs to be done to effect this problem.

 

George Diaz, Administrative Office of the Courts, testified that the bill as it reads right now will have an impact to the information technology fund which is expended on a local level.  The Justices of the Peace and the municipal courts will be hampered and will not be able to speak to one another. This would create a $250,000 hit to the fund.

 

In response to Senator Daniels, Mr. Diaz stated that the reduction in the fees paid by participants in the defensive driving school program would be the cause of the $250,000 hit. He noted the Courts would not be affected if the traffic survivor school was the effected program.

 

Senator Daniels commented that she could address this with an amendment on the floor.

 

In response to Senator Martin, Mr. Diaz remarked that it would be logical to say that people would have nothing to loose in taking their cases to court.

 

Katie Hodge, red light violation victim, testified in support of the bill and stated that she did not support the amendments.  She stated that it makes no difference that first offenders do not repeat the offense.  It only took one driver to run a red light to put her into a coma, causing a severe brain injury and killing her seventeen-month old son.  This problem needs to be dealt with before it happens. 

 

In response to Senator Aguirre, Ms. Hodge stated that the driver who caused her injury and her son’s death was given a citation for running a red light and did not show up in court and therefore did not pay any fines or spend any time in jail.

 

Senator Martin commented that in Ms. Hodge’s case, the bill with either of his amendments, the offender would have to attend driver survival school or lose their license.  He remarked that the bill or the amendments are not affecting the existing penalties for severe injury or death.

 

Senator Aguirre announced the following people were present in support of the bill: Jodie Marquis, Executive Director, RMS Coalition; Kelly Orrick, Assistant to Chief of Police, City of Mesa Police Department; John Mangum, Attorney, Lockheed, Martin; Sam Marquis, representing himself; Dr. Mark Levinson M.D., Trauma Surgeon; Donna Marquis, representing herself; Penny Tuszynski, representing herself; Kathy Philippi, red light violation victim; John Philippi, red light violation victim; Kelly Moody, representing herself; and Laurie Lange; Vice President, Public Affairs, Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association.

 

Senator Burns moved H.B. 2277 be returned with a DO PASS recommendation.

 

Senator Burns moved the 4-line Martin amendment dated 3/21/01; 11:14 a.m. be adopted (Attachment C).

 

Senator Martin moved the 9-line Martin amendment dated 3/20/01; 12:15 a.m. as a substitute to the 4-line Martin amendment dated 3/21/01; 11:14 a.m. be adopted.  The motion CARRIED by voice vote (Attachment D).

 

Senator Burns moved H.B. 2277 be returned with an AS AMENDED, DO PASS recommendation.  The motion CARRIED with a roll call vote of 6-2-0 (Attachment 3).

 

In explanation of her vote, Senator Daniels opined that with the adoption of the 9-line Martin amendment, the bill has been “gutted” and it is meaningless to do a study.  She expressed her disappointment that the Committee did not consider the 4-line Martin amendment, and voted “no.”

 

In explanation of her vote, Senator Aguirre stated that she wished the Committee had passed the 4-line Martin amendment, as it was more palatable to her, but even with the 9-line Martin amendment, she voted “aye” to move the bill to the floor.

 

H.B. 2372 – multistate highway transportation agreement – DO PASS

 

Ms. Sapien explained that Arizona entered into the multistate highway transportation agreement (MHTA) in 1982 to foster cooperation in establishing uniform standards in size and weight issues.  H.B. 2372 is a result of the meeting of the MHTA members and addresses needed modifications to agreement.  This legislation expands the purpose of the agreement to facilitate communication between legislators, state transportation administrators and industry representatives to address the emerging highway transportation issues.  The bill also expands the participating jurisdictions to authorize the operation of vehicle combinations in excess of 80,000 pounds or statutory lengths, or both, under special permit.  The bill also designates the chair of the Senate Transportation Committee and the chair of the House of Representatives Transportation Committee or the successor committees to represent the State on the Cooperating Committee.

 

Senator Bee, referring to the bill, page 4, lines 27 – 38, asked if the intent of this language is to allow or permit the triple trailers traveling through Arizona.  Ms. Sapien replied that this is an agreement and based on this agreement, states are persuaded to seek legislation to address what is in the agreement.  She commented that the agreement is not legally binding and would need further legislation to make this into law.

 

Senator Bee noted that it opens the door for this discussion to take place in relation to 80,000 pounds or length.

 

Senator Aguirre announced that Terry Smalley, Executive Vice President, Arizona Motor Transport Association was present in support of the bill.

 

Senator Burns moved H.B. 2372 be returned with a DO PASS recommendation.  The motion CARRIED with a roll call vote of 6-1-1 (Attachment 4).

 

H.B. 2377 – intergovernmental public transportation districts – DO PASS AMENDED

 

Ms. Sapien explained H.B. 2377 authorizes the creation of an intergovernmental public transportation district in rural counties, and allows two or more cities or towns to petition the county board of supervisors to establish this district. The bill also establishes a board of directors for a district and requires the district to maintain a public transportation fund.

 

Ms. Sapien explained the Aguirre amendment dated 3/20/01; 4:45 p.m. converts the proposed organization from a special taxing district, which does not have taxing authority to a public authority.  The amendment will allow the authority to include one or more municipalities rather than two or more as it is in the bill.  The amendment also allows the State University located in the municipality to become a member of the authority by intergovernmental agreement (IGA) and the president of the university would have to appoint a member to the board of directors.

 

In response to Senator Bee, Ms. Sapien explained that rural counties have the ability to establish some type of taxing countywide.  Often, transit needs are not countywide, and only result in certain areas. The bill would allow the rural counties to establish a district, incorporating the areas of need and upon creation of the authority, leverage federal transit funds and receive funding from the municipality that is involved. 

 

In response to Senator Burns, Ms. Sapien stated that the bill establishes a fund so if the rural counties receive funding from the municipalities, the university or federal transit funds to be used for transit needs, but the bill does not give the rural counties taxing ability.

 

Jim Shipman, Executive Director, Arizona Transit Association, testified in support of the bill and the amendment.  The bill will allow the rural areas that need to develop their own systems to deal with their own transit needs.  He commented the State currently gives the counties funds from the local transportation assistance fund II (LTAF II) specifically for transit issues, and money is received from the Federal Transportation Authority.

 

Senator Burns moved H.B. 2377 be returned with a DO PASS recommendation.

 

Senator Burns moved the Aguirre amendment dated 3/20/01; 4:45 p.m. be adopted.  The motion CARRIED with a voice vote (Attachment E).

 

Senator Burns moved H.B. 2377 be returned with an AS AMENDED, DO PASS recommendation.  The motion CARRIED with a roll call vote of 4-3-1 (Attachment 5).

 

 

 

 

 

H.B. 2511 – public monitoring devices; restrictions (now: public monitoring devices study) – DO PASS AMENDED

 

Mr. Aragon explained H. B. 2511 establishes a study committee to evaluate the use of public monitoring devices in Arizona.

 

Mr. Aragon explained the Aguirre amendment dated 3/21/01; 8:21 a.m. adds two extra members to the study committee on public monitoring devices.  One member will represent the retail grocery industry and will have retail security experience. The other member will represent the banking industry and will have banking security experience.

 

John Mangum, Attorney, Arizona Food Marketing Alliance, testified in support of the bill and the Aguirre amendment.  This bill is an outgrowth of two bills that were introduced in the House of Representatives that were flawed which relate to the use of security cameras by both public and private agencies.  He commented that the bill is primarily directed at public use of security cameras. The retail grocery and banking industries use video cameras on a constant basis for protection of the public and evidentiary purposes with regard to robberies.  He noted that the experience delineated in the amendment is important and asked the Committee to support the bill as amended.

 

Senator Aguirre announced that Ellen Poole, Executive Vice President, Arizona Bankers Association was present in support of the bill as amended.

 

Senator Burns moved H.B. 2511 be returned with a DO PASS recommendation.

 

Senator Burns moved the Aguirre amendment dated 3/21/01; 8:21 a.m. be adopted.  The motion CARRIED with a voice vote (Attachment F).

 

Senator Burns moved H.B. 2511 be returned with an AS AMENDED, DO PASS recommendation.  The motion CARRIED with a roll call vote of 5-3-0 (Attachment 6).

 

H.B. 2230 – vehicle titles; lienholders (now: watercraft violations; boating) – DO PASS

 

Mr. Aragon explained H.B. 2230 increases the violation for the failure to stop a watercraft when ordered to do so by law enforcement from a class 3 to a class 2 misdemeanor and reduces all other boating violations to a petty offense except for violations pertaining to negligent operation of a personal watercraft, collisions and casualties, tampering with watercraft identification numbers and operating a watercraft while intoxicated.

 

Senator Martin asked for clarification between a class 3 misdemeanor and a class 2 misdemeanor.  Mr. Aragon deferred to a representative from Game and Fish.

 

Senator Bee remarked that the fines listed in the bill are before the surcharge is added.  He asked what the maximum fines would be with the surcharges added on.  Mr. Aragon also deferred to the representative from Game and Fish.

 

Tape 1, Side B

 

Richard Stephenson, Legislative Liaison, Arizona Game and Fish Department, testified in support of the bill and noted that Leonard Ordway, Chief of Law Enforcement with the Game and Fish Department to answer any questions the Committee may have.

 

Mr. Ordway stated the penalty for a class 3 misdemeanor is a maximum of 30 days in jail and a fine up to $500. On a class 2 misdemeanor, the maximum is four months in jail and a fine up to $750. He noted that the penalty for a petty offense is up to a $300 fine.  The surcharge is generally included in the up to the maximum level of the fine.  It is then taken out and roughly runs between 60% to 70% from the maximum fine.

 

In response to Senator Blanchard, Mr. Ordway replied that it was his understanding, the intent of the bill, as identified by the sponsor of the bill, is to alleviate some of the congestion within the courts by reducing the status the all violations except for the failure to stop a watercraft when ordered to do so by law enforcement.  He stated that a criminal charge, even though it is a misdemeanor criminal charge, tends to make people come to court to try to fight the charge so that they do not get a criminal record. He commented that it is the Department’s supposition that the penalties will not decrease, because most water craft violations within this range, are generally well under the $300 fine.

 

Senator Burns moved H.B. 2230 be returned with a DO PASS recommendation.  The motion CARRIED with a roll call vote of 5-3-0 (Attachment 7).

 

 

Without objection, the meeting was adjourned at 10: 40 a.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

 

 

Tracey Moulton                                                                      Committee Secretary

 

 

(Tapes and attachments on file in the Secretary of the Senate’s Office/Resource Center, Room 115.)

 

 

---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------

                        Committee on Transportation

            10        March 22, 2001

 

---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------