SENATE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
March 01, 2005 Hearing Room 343
1:00 P.M. Tapes 51 - 52
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sen. Ginny Burdick, Chair
Sen. Charles Starr, Vice-Chair
Sen. Roger Beyer
Sen. Floyd Prozanski
Sen. Charlie Ringo
Sen. Vicki Walker
Sen. Doug Whitsett
STAFF PRESENT: Joe O'Leary, Counsel
Dale Penn, Committee Assistant
MEASURES/ISSUES HEARD:
SB 332 – Public Hearing & Work Session
SB 89 – Public Hearing
SB 333 – Public Hearing
These minutes are in compliance with Senate and House Rules. Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact words. For complete contents, please refer to the tapes.
|
TAPE/# |
Speaker |
Comments |
|
TAPE 51, A |
||
|
003 |
Chair Burdick |
Calls the meeting to order at 1:13 p.m. and opens a public hearing on SB 332. |
|
SB 332 – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
|
008 |
Joe O’Leary |
Counsel. Describes SB 332 relating to confidential communications between patients and dentists. |
|
022 |
Robert W. Staley |
Dentist, Attorney. Submits testimony and testifies in support of SB 332 (EXHIBITS A & B). Discusses a patient questionnaire form (Exhibit B). |
|
055 |
Chair Burdick |
Commends Dr. Staley on the submission of the questionnaire form. |
|
065 |
Tom Gallagher |
Newspaper Publishers. Testifies in support of SB 332. |
|
074 |
Chair Burdick |
Submits written testimony from April Love in support of SB 332 (EXHIBIT P). Closes the public hearing and opens a work session on SB 332. |
|
SB 332 – WORK SESSION |
||
|
076 |
Sen. Starr |
MOTION: Moves SB 332 to the floor with a DO PASS recommendation. |
|
|
|
VOTE: 6-0-1 EXCUSED: 1 - Walker |
|
079 |
Chair Burdick |
Hearing no objection, declares the motion CARRIED. SEN. RINGO will lead discussion on the floor. |
|
082 |
Chair Burdick |
Closes the work session on SB 332 and opens a public hearing on SB 89. |
|
SB 89 – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
|
083 |
Joe O’Leary |
Counsel. Describes SB 89 relating to custodial sexual misconduct in the first and second degree. |
|
100 |
Stan Czerniak |
Assistant Director of Operations, Oregon Department of Corrections (DOC). Submits testimony and testifies in support of SB 89 (EXHIBITS C & D). |
|
125 |
Stan Czerniak |
Talks about how Oregon and Vermont are the only two states who do not have a felony statute on this issue. Describes the effects of the passage of SB 89. |
|
165 |
Jason Barber |
Assistant Director, Crime Victims Assistance Section, Department of Justice. Testifies in support of SB 89. |
|
169 |
John Powell |
Oregon State Sheriff’s Association. Testifies in support of SB 89. |
|
185 |
Mike Wilkerson |
Under-Sheriff, Marion County Sheriff’s Office. Testifies in support of SB 89. Explains a recent case involving sexual misconduct in the correctional facility. |
|
205 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Asks if there is any duty to report among the DOC staff. |
|
210 |
Wilkerson |
Replies that there is a mandatory reporting law. |
|
216 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Inquires if there are any cross-departmental methods of reporting such abuses. |
|
220 |
Greg Olson |
Under-Sheriff, Marion County Sheriff’s Office. Responds that the Department of Public Safety Standards and Training would be notified if such an abuse has occurred and the officer would have their certification revoked. |
|
228 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Wonders if there are any protections from retaliation for employees that report such an action. |
|
233 |
Olson |
States that there are protections, but it would be an expected aspect of their job to report. |
|
236 |
Chair Burdick |
Inquires as to where the duty to report originates. |
|
239 |
Wilkerson |
Explains an ethics oath officers must take before serving. |
|
250 |
Chair Burdick |
Wonders what the repercussions are of breaking that oath. |
|
251 |
Wilkerson |
Replies that termination is a common result. |
|
253 |
Chair Burdick |
Inquires if there is anything in the statutes that relates to a mandatory reporting clause. |
|
254 |
Wilkerson |
Affirms there is not anything he is aware of in the statutes. |
|
260 |
Olson |
Testifies in support of SB 89 and discusses the departmental process taken after an act of sexual abuse occurs. |
|
282 |
Chair Burdick |
Inquires about implementing a mandatory reporting statute. |
|
285 |
Olson |
States that they would support such an action. |
|
290 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Raises the issue of labor contracts conflicting with such a law. |
|
315 |
Heidi Evans |
Volunteer, Amnesty International, USA. Submits testimony and testifies in support of SB 89 (EXHIBITS E & F). |
|
344 |
Chair Burdick |
Asks if a contract conflicted with the mandatory reporting clause, would Amnesty International support a protection clause for reporting a crime instead. |
|
356 |
Evans |
Replies that she would support such an action. Cites examples of sexual misconduct within the DOC, including some high-profile cases. |
|
410 |
Dena Marshall |
State Coordinator, Stop Violence Against Women Campaign. Testifies in support of SB 89. Advises that same-sex search rules be statutorily enacted. |
|
448 |
Sen. Walker |
Expresses her horror over the cases discussed in the recent testimony (Exhibit F). |
|
466 |
Mary Botkin |
American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). Testifies in opposition to SB 89. |
|
TAPE 52, A |
||
|
025 |
Mary Botkin |
Explains the DOC’s stance on sexual conduct between a staff and an inmate. Testifies in opposition to Amnesty International’s amendment requiring a mandatory reporting clause. |
|
058 |
Botkin |
Raises the issue of officers needing to search inmates in order to remove any weapons they might have. Explains the role of officers in a body search, and the precautions taken in order to observe safety protocols. |
|
091 |
Chair Burdick |
Inquires about collective bargaining agreements that would stop a mandatory reporter clause. |
|
094 |
Botkin |
Replies that there is no writing that would stop a mandatory reporting clause. Stresses that a peace officer is already a mandatory reporter if they witness a criminal occurrence. Discusses the occurrence of hearsay. |
|
115 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Explains that his earlier question related to reporting outside of their statutory requirements. Discloses his hesitance to dictate the requirements of mandatory reporting to an outside agency. |
|
132 |
Botkin |
Expresses the importance of making choices relating to sexual relationships involving parties who supervise each other. |
|
141 |
Chair Burdick |
Inquires about protection from reporting. |
|
146 |
Botkin |
States that the AFSCME would represent anyone who reported a grievance. |
|
150 |
Botkin |
Details that they file several claims when a grievance is brought to their attention so that it will not get ignored. |
|
160 |
Sen. Walker |
Brings up the issue of conflicting drafting in SB 89. |
|
170 |
Czerniak |
Discusses the Code of Conduct that all staff in the DOC must take. Clarifies the search policy. |
|
201 |
Sen. Walker |
Wonders about the mandatory reporting law relating to inmates. |
|
208 |
Botkin |
Articulates their desire for tighter drafting language relating to SB 89’s relation to mandatory reporting. |
|
212 |
Sen. Walker |
Compares the child abuse mandatory reporting law with the mandatory reporting law in SB 89. |
|
229 |
Czerniak |
Details the actions taken by the DOC relating to the mandatory reporting law. |
|
240 |
Botkin |
Explains that mandatory reporting applies to other classes than just children, and it is part of the DOC’s policy to report abuses. |
|
262 |
Sen. Beyer |
Talks about the criminalization of mandatory reporting for all crimes. |
|
274 |
Chair Burdick |
Wonders about the application of SB 89 towards inmates under custody, not just in a facility (including transport, etc.). |
|
298 |
Terrie Quinteros |
Program Director, Crime Survivors for Community Safety, Western Prison Project. Submits testimony and testifies in support of SB 89 (EXHIBIT G). |
|
337 |
Quinteros |
Expresses that this is not an issue of love between two people, but one of dominance and exerting power over an individual. |
|
364 |
Theresa Huggins |
Volunteer, Crime Survivors for Community Safety. Submits testimony and testifies in support of SB 89 (EXHIBIT H). Details her personal story of being strip searched by male officers. |
|
398 |
Chair Burdick |
Asks how long ago this occurred. |
|
399 |
Huggins |
Replies that it happened 10 years ago. |
|
441 |
Brigette Sarabi |
Executive Director, Western Prison Project. Submits testimony and testifies in support of SB 89 (EXHIBIT I). |
|
458 |
Sen. Walker |
Addresses the issue that Oregon is only one of two states with no custodial sexual misconduct legislation (Exhibit I). |
|
474 |
Andrea Meyer |
American Civil Liberties Union. Raises their concern that the sexual misconduct may occur from a person not in a supervisory role (i.e., janitor, etc.). Advises that the language be tightened. |
|
TAPE 51, B |
||
|
033 |
Meyer |
Addresses section 3 of the bill discussing roles within and outside the institutions or agencies. Brings up the issue of marriage defense in relation to SB 89. |
|
053 |
Chair Burdick |
Inquires as to the DOC’s policy on officers guarding their spouse. |
|
060 |
Czerniak |
Discusses the policy on relationship within the DOC. |
|
066 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Brings up the scenario of marriage between an inmate and an officer. |
|
072 |
Czerniak |
Talks about the DOC’s policy that forbids any relationship between an inmate and the staff. |
|
086 |
Botkin |
Addresses the scenario raised by Sen. Prozanski, relating to relationships between inmates and staff. |
|
098 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Asks about the protocol of staff marrying inmates. |
|
104 |
Czerniak |
Reiterates the DOC’s policy on relationships between staff and inmates. |
|
115 |
Jeff Van Valkenburg |
Department of Justice. Discusses the drafting decision to keep the section dealing with marriage in the bill. |
|
132 |
Botkin |
Talks about a similar bill two years ago relating to this issue. |
|
140 |
Chair Burdick |
Expresses the desire to structure the wording a little better before passing this bill. |
|
136 |
Heather Huhtanen |
Director, Sexual Abuse Training Institute. Submits testimony and testifies in support of SB 89 (EXHIBIT J). Expresses their support of the amendments from Amnesty International with some small reservations. |
|
189 |
Chair Burdick |
Closes the public hearing on SB 89 and opens a public hearing on SB 333. |
|
SB 333 – PUBLIC HEARING |
||
|
195 |
Joe O’Leary |
Counsel. Describes SB 333 relating to certain tort actions. |
|
211 |
Cheryl Albrecht |
Hearings Referee, Multnomah County. Testifies in support of SB 333. Details how the bill allows for easier access to justice for all citizens. |
|
247 |
Mark Ginsberg |
Oregon Trial Lawyers. Submits testimony and testifies in support of SB 333 (EXHIBIT K). Discusses lawyer costs for small cases and how SB 333 would allow more citizens the access to justice. |
|
275 |
Ginsberg |
Discusses the scenarios and court cases in his testimony (Exhibit K). |
|
316 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Asks about attorney fees in these types of cases. |
|
327 |
Ginsberg |
Responds with information on attorney fees. |
|
353 |
Sen. Charlie Ringo |
Senate District 17. Submits testimony and testifies in support of SB 333 (EXHIBIT L). Details the plight of an individual being abused by the insurance companies and how SB 333 addresses these occurrences. |
|
397 |
Sen. Ringo |
Discusses examples of insurance cases in his testimony (Exhibit L). |
|
438 |
Sen. Ringo |
Talks about page 3 of his testimony (Exhibit L). |
|
450 |
Chair Burdick |
Asks how long the current penalty limit has been in effect. |
|
452 |
Sen. Ringo |
Replies that he will address that question. Continues discussing the third example in his testimony (Exhibit L). |
|
490 |
Sen. Ringo |
Comments on the chart on the final page of the testimony (Exhibit L). |
|
TAPE 52, B |
||
|
034 |
Sen. Beyer |
Inquires about section 2 of SB 333, relating to the date the bill would go into effect. |
|
046 |
O’Leary |
Describes section 2 of SB 333. |
|
051 |
Sen. Ringo |
Replies that he believes this applies to the date after the statute would go into effect. |
|
057 |
Chair Burdick |
Offers clarification on the issue. |
|
060 |
O’Leary |
Addresses the confusion on the effective date of the bill. |
|
067 |
Sen. Beyer |
Raises a scenario dealing with a claimant going back to court to recover extra money due to SB 233. |
|
071 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Replies that it is impossible, and offers an explanation as to why. |
|
078 |
Sen. Beyer |
Raises another scenario dealing with a claimant attempting to retrieve more money from a past adjudicated court decision. |
|
084 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Addresses the issue under discussion. |
|
090 |
O’Leary |
Defines the section of SB 333 which resolves the issue. |
|
095 |
Sen. Whitsett |
Asks about situations dealing with both parties’ attorney fees being charged to a claimant. |
|
109 |
Sen. Ringo |
Replies that the increased fees are important in court cases. Addresses the scenario that the claimant could be charged the attorney fees for both parties. |
|
151 |
John Powell |
State Farm Insurance Company. Testifies in opposition to SB 333. |
|
154 |
Steve Murrell |
State Farm Insurance Company. Testifies in opposition to SB 333. Expresses his belief that SB 333 will eventually encourage increased litigation which will raise insurance costs. |
|
197 |
Murrell |
Addresses the fees that could be levied against the plaintiff. |
|
211 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Inquires about early property payments. |
|
215 |
Murrell |
Discusses early payments, especially those involved with property or vehicular damage. |
|
221 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Asks about a scenario where the legislature would require both personal and property damage be dealt with at one time, and would the insurance companies support such an amendment. |
|
227 |
Murrell |
States that it would not be the best solution, but it would be helpful. |
|
230 |
Chair Burdick |
Wonders about existing statutes dealing with payment on a claim. |
|
233 |
Murrell |
Details the situations facing the insurance companies where two sets of claims will be brought against them for one accident. |
|
240 |
Sen. Ringo |
Raises the issue of non-economic damages. |
|
249 |
Murrell |
Explains their stance on the scenario of non-economic damages and other claims. |
|
255 |
Sen. Ringo |
Cites personal examples of where the insurance companies have denied allocations to individuals he represented. |
|
272 |
Bill Sime |
Oregon Association of Defense Counsel. Submits testimony and testifies in a neutral stance on SB 333 (EXHIBIT M). |
|
318 |
Sime |
Talks about the demands letter from the lawyer, and how more often than not there is little to no documentation or proof to support the claim. |
|
363 |
Sen. Prozanski |
Asks about the issues relating to the insurance claim brought up by the witness. |
|
371 |
Sime |
Clarifies his testimony on those issues. |
|
379 |
Sen. Ringo |
Comments on his tentative support for the amendments being discussed, and his willingness to cooperate to resolve claims for the individual. |
|
423 |
Chair Burdick |
Submits testimony on SB 333 from Robert Dorband and Shawn Miller (EXHIBITS N & O). |
|
449 |
Chair Burdick |
Submits Oregon Rules of Appellate Procedure (EXHIBIT Q) |
|
452 |
Chair Burdick |
Closes the public hearing on SB 333 and adjourns the meeting at 3:02 p.m. |
|
|
|
|
EXHIBIT SUMMARY