TAPE/#

Speaker

Comments

TAPE 36, A

003

Chair Burdick

Calls the meeting to order at 1:12 p.m. and opens a public hearing on SB 57, SB 62, SB 63, & SB 65.

SB 57, SB 62, SB 63, & SB 65 – PUBLIC HEARING

009

William E. Taylor

Counsel.  Discusses SB 57, relating to establishing fees for use of Department of Public Safety Standards and Training (DPSST) facilities; SB 62, relating to the authorizing DPSST to provide grants to private entities for certain purposes; SB 63, relating to DPSST denying certification or application for training to any public safety instructor or officer; and SB 65, relating to DPSST imposing civil penalties on public safety agencies.

037

John Minnis

Director, Department of Public Safety Standards and Training (DPSST).  Testifies in support of SB 57 (EXHIBIT A).  Mentions the new facility being constructed for DPSST.

067

Chair Burdick

Asks about the possible fees imposed by DPSST.

073

John Minnis

Announces the need and reasoning for DPSST to introduce more fees for use of their facilities.

094

Minnis

Summarizes testimony in support of SB 62 (EXHIBIT B).  Discusses a grant process that might be able to facilitate training.

132

Minnis

Talks about different training programs available, and how SB 62 would remove obstructions from using these programs.

150

Bob Tartoff

President, Oregon Executive Development Institute.  Gives background on his organization’s creation, and the reasoning behind its need.

180

Minnis

Testifies in support of SB 63 (EXHIBIT C).  Explains the funding of DPSST’s training regimens and the need for passage of SB 63. 

202

Chair Burdick

Wonders about the eligibility under the bill.

205

Minnis

Responds with information on which convictions would be automatic disqualifiers and qualifiers for a career in law enforcement.

226

Sen. Whitsett

Inquires about the wording in line 5 of SB 63.

230

Minnis

Replies that he isn’t sure about the diction and what effects any alteration might have.

250

Chair Burdick

Raises another issue of wording in SB 63, and states that they will seek out Legislative Counsel’s advice.

260

Minnis

Testifies in support of SB 65 (EXHIBIT D).  Provides information on imposing civil penalties on public safety agencies for violation of statutes prohibiting employment of uncertified persons.

299

Chair Burdick

Asks about a blank space in SB 65.

303

Minnis

States that they did not have a final figure for that area, and gives examples of what numbers might work.

321

Sen. Ringo

Wonders about the application of SB 65 under certain certification circumstances.

307

Eriks Gabliks

Deputy Director, Department of Public Safety Standards and Training. Gives information on certification qualifications.

341

Sen. Ringo

Inquires about advanced training and immunity from civil liability.

354

Eriks Gabliks

Gives information on the training cycle under DPSST.

374

Taylor

Inquires if section 2(5) relates to an employment situation in regards to wrongful discharge.

385

Minnis

Responds with clarification on what section 2(5) of SB 65 is focused on accomplishing.

409

Chair Burdick

Wonders about the frequency over the past few years where this problem has come up.

415

Minnis

Cites recent examples as to when this concept was discussed.

426

Sen. Whitsett

Inquires if this bill would cause small areas not to be able to afford certification for their law enforcement officers.

440

Minnis

Replies with information on current standards of police training requirements, and how it is harder for smaller agencies to recruit talent.  Assures the committee that this wouldn’t be too much of a new problem, but that they are paying attention to it.

475

Sen. Whitsett

Desires more information on smaller community safety standards.

481

Minnis

Discusses the DPSST, and expresses that they would work with groups to make sure smaller communities were well represented.

410

Sen. Prozanski

Inquires about the wording of SB 65.

TAPE 37, A

035

Minnis

Comments on the wording.

045

Taylor

Brings up the issue of civil penalties in ORS relating to the question Sen. Prozanski addressed.

053

Sen. Prozanski

Raises a concern with the discretion of the Director for penalty assessment.

067

Taylor

Describes why Legislative Counsel cross-referenced that particular statute.

071

Sen. Prozanski

Expresses concern on the wording of SB 65 and the relation to penalties.

088

Minnis

Discusses the waiver process available for technical glitches or compliance issues.

092

Chair Burdick

Closes public hearings on SB 57, SB 62, SB 63, & SB 65 and opens a public hearing on SB 61.

SB 61 – PUBLIC HEARING

103

William E. Taylor

Counsel.  Describes SB 61, relating to provisions relating to private security providers.

107

John Minnis

Director, Department of Public Safety Standards and Training (DPSST).  Testifies in support of SB 61.

115

Harold Burke-Sivers

Chair, Private Security Policy Committee.  Testifies in support of SB 61 (EXHIBIT E), and expresses the necessity for greater training opportunities for their constituents.

163

Sen. Prozanski

Asks for clarification on who would be affected by the passage of SB 61.

174

Burke-Sivers

Offers information as to the individuals affected by SB 61.

191

Sen. Prozanski

Inquires about certain examples (Safeway contracting security, bouncers at nightclubs, etc.) that might be affected by this bill.

203

Minnis

Points to a certain section in SB 61 that clarifies the individuals who fall under the bill’s jurisdiction.  Discusses how the policy committee has heard many of these issues before, and has taken counsel from the groups behind them while creating this bill.

252

Burke-Sivers

Clarifies the definitions under question by the committee.

295

Gary Oxley

Fred Meyer Stores.  Testifies in opposition to SB 61 and cites apprehension with the ambiguity present in the bill.

350

Oxley

Mentions line 42 on page 2 of SB 61, and gives examples of why his client is against the bill.  Talks about security methods already in place at his client’s business.

400

Oxley

Explains their concerns on the wording of this bill, and who falls under SB 61.  Comments on his client’s security class in comparison to those offered by DPSST.

445

Oxley

Discusses the Oregon Liquor Control Commission methods.

476

Julie Brandis

Associated Oregon Industries and the Oregon Retail Council.  Testifies in opposition to SB 61.  Comments on the role of hired security members in her client’s stores.

TAPE 36, B

042

Brandis

Expresses that her client is at risk when confronting a suspected criminal, and they would like to train their security people in accordance with their own concerns.

074

Bill Perry

Oregon Restaurant Association.  Testifies in opposition to SB 61.  Talks about security methods in the restaurant business.  Expresses that this bill would require drastic changes for the restaurant industry.

122

Sen. Prozanski

Raises concern of going beyond what’s reasonable in physical confrontations with security in the restaurant industry, especially in college towns.

157

Sen. Whitsett

Asks why a cashier detaining someone who steals something is wrong in anyway.

166

Perry

Comments that his industry doesn’t often deal with theft.

184

Brandis

States that in her client’s industry, two staff must witness a theft in order to approach an individual.

203

Chair Burdick

Desires a compromise on this issue between the two sides.

208

Minnis

Reiterates that they are willing to work on this bill.  Discusses the funding of private industry recommendations on this bill.

281

Chair Burdick

Closes public hearing on SB 61 and opens a work session on SB 57.

SB 57 – WORK SESSION

289

Sen. C. Starr

MOTION:  Moves SB 57 to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.

VOTE:  7-0-0

293

Chair Burdick

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

SEN. BURDICK will lead discussion on the floor.

294

Chair Burdick

Closes work session on SB 57 and opens a work session on SB 62.

SB 62 – WORK SESSION

295

Sen. C. Starr

MOTION:  Moves SB 62 to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation.

VOTE:  7-0-0

299

Chair

Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED.

SEN. BURDICK will lead discussion on the floor.

302

Chair Burdick

Closes work session on SB 62 and opens a public hearing on SB 330 and 331.

SB 330 & SB 331 – PUBLIC HEARING

309

William E. Taylor

Counsel.  Describes SB 330, relating to court reporting; & SB 331, relating to stenographic reporting of proceedings.

335

Lara Smith

Oregon Court Reporters Association (OCRA).  Testifies in support for SB 330 and SB 331 (EXHIBITS F & G).  Provides testimony as a representative for the Oregon Trial Lawyers Association (EXHIBIT J).

373

Doug Friend

Oregon Court Reporters Association.  Testifies in support for SB 330 & SB 331.  Describes the grievances that could have been prevented if there were court reporters.

419

Friend

Discusses the -1 amendment for SB 330 and the support from the Court Reporters Association (EXHIBIT H).

464

Sen. Walker

Illustrates the difference between state employees and non-state employees as court reporters.

491

Smith

Expresses the need for a few amendments on this bill for full support.

TAPE 37, B

028

Catherine Teach-Schmitz

President, Oregon Court Reporters Association.  Testifies in support of SB 330 and SB 331.  Talks about litigation tools open to court reporters, and how professionalism is needed.

070

Chair Burdick

Asks about the professional requirements for a court reporter.

073

Teach-Schmitz

States that there are no current mandatory certification qualifications as yet, due to budgetary concerns, but they would like to have such a requirement.

085

Chair Burdick

Inquires if the lawyers hiring the court reporters check their certification.

091

Smith

Responds that the Judicial Department will bring forward an amendment to address that issue.

100

Teach-Schmitz

Expresses that the OCRA is getting the word out among attorneys to use only qualified reporters in the courtroom.

108

Sen. Prozanski

Wonders about real time reporting.

115

Teach-Schmitz

Gives information on real time reporting.

120

Sen. Prozanski

Asks if the judges or the attorneys will determine what type of reporting will be done.

124

Teach-Schmitz

States that the parties in the litigation will approach the judge for authorization on type of reporting before the trial starts.

129

Smith

Reiterates the Judicial Department will bring an amendment dealing with this issue.

146

Scott Crampton

Summarizes testimony in a neutral stance on SB 330 (EXHIBIT I).  Discusses 2 proposed amendments to SB 330.

173

Sen. Walker

Raises concern over not having court reporters in the system.

190

Alex Dunn

Oregon Trial Lawyers Association (OTLA).  Testifies in support of SB 330 & SB 331.  Proposes amendments be made to address certain issues the OTLA has with the two bills.

247

Charlyn Rees

Oregon District Attorney Association.  Testifies in support of SB 330 & SB 331, but raises concern of losing current court reporters due to the passage of this bill.

265

Sen. Walker

States that the issue raised will most likely not happen.

275

Rees

Reiterates that it is a potential concern.

282

Sen. Walker

Discusses how those counties have chosen to stay with court reporting even under budget cuts.

299

Sen. Prozanski

Concurs with Sen. Walker, and reemphasizes that it was a conscious decision in the past by those counties to stick with court reporters.

313

Sen. Beyer

Inquires about the wording in SB 331 on page 1.

349

Taylor

Offers information on the choice of wording for SB 331.

383

Sen. Walker

Addresses the issue raised by stating that such a thing has never really occurred.

394

Chair Burdick

Announces the committee is meeting as a subcommittee.

397

Bill Linden

Circuit Court Judges Association.  Declares that his group will meet with the other groups to address the issues they have with the bill. 

423

Chair Burdick

Closes the public hearing on SB 330 & SB 331 and adjourns the meeting at 3:02 p.m.