►
From YouTube: Senate Standing Committee on Judiciary (2-23-23)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Thank
you
chairman,
as
you
correctly
noted,
we're
here
to
talk
about
lasers,
but
no,
it's
actually
a
very
serious
subject,
because,
unfortunately,
as
we've
seen
with
the
riots
across
the
country,
some
of
the
brigands
and
criminals
are
getting
ever
more
creative
in
the
harm
that
they
can
do
to
other
people,
including
the
use
of
lasers
that
can
be
purchased
readily
across
the
internet,
to
cause
eye
injuries
and
other
types
of
harm
to
law
enforcement,
to
Pilots
to
to
our
First
Responders
folks
that
are
actually
there
trying
to
keep
the
public
safe.
B
In
fact,
I
mean
if
you
just
Google
the
term
lasers
and
law
enforcement.
You'll
see
that
in
the
Portland
riots
that
occurred
during
2020,
there
were
over
113
serious
eye
injuries
as
a
result
of
lasers
that
were
being
purchased
on
the
internet
as
a
son
of
an
ophthalmologist
who's
practiced
for
37
years.
You
know
eye
safety
is
something
that
is
very
important
for
me
and
when
the
ophthalmological
association
came
to
me
and
asked
me
to
carry
this
bill,
I
was
greatly
honored
to
do
so
again.
B
I
think
it's
a
what
what
Senate
Bill
97
does
is.
It
adds
the
light,
the
the
the
definition
of
laser
to
dangerous
instruments
so
that
when
they
are
used
against
law
enforcement
and
other
folks
with
the
intention
to
harm
that
that
they
can
be
appropriately
prosecuted,
just
like
anybody
that
uses
a
rock
a
club
or
other
deadly
weapon,
so
very
simple,
Bill,
Dr,
Ben
Mackey,
the
president
of
the
Kentucky
Academy
of
eye
physicians
and
surgeons,
had
a
short
statement.
B
It
just
says
that
the
Kentucky
Academy
of
eye,
physicians
and
surgeons,
strongly
supports
this
legislation,
but
make
which
makes
it
explicitly
clear
that
using
a
laser
to
harm
another
person
is
illegal
in
the
Commonwealth
of
Kentucky
and
can
be
prosecuted.
Our
physicians
are
increasingly
seeing
patients
whose
eyes
have
been
harmed
by
the
inappropriate
use
of
lasers.
We
believe
this
legislation
is
a
step
is
a
step
forward
for
the
general
assembly
to
that
they
can
take
towards
preventing
those
injuries.
B
I
would
hope
that
my
colleagues
here
would
agree
with
me
that,
as
as
as
assault
and
other
crimes
evolved,
that
we
can
also
appropriately
craft
the
definition
of
our
statutes
to
meet
you
know,
increasing
threats
actually
have
a
committee.
A
Substitute
motion
from
Senator
schickel,
second
from
Senator
Berg
any
questions
on
the
committee
substitute
seeing
none
all
those
in
favor
of
adopting
it.
Please
vote
by
saying:
aye
aye
those
opposed
Subs
adopted
motion
from
Senator
schickel,
second
from
Senator
danine
beachy
that
time
on
the
bill,
as
amended
by
the
sub.
Any
other
remarks,
senator
no
sir!
Any
questions
Madam
Secretary,
please
call
the
roll.
E
A
A
Aye
bill
passes
with
favorable
expression.
Thank
you
Senator.
Unfortunately,
we're
gonna
have
to
pass
over
Senate
Bill
120.
I.
Had
some
people
raise
some
objections,
just
kidding
y'all.
A
F
Morning,
my
name
is
Richard
Horning.
B
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
Senate,
Bill
120
is
a
planned
Community
act.
I'm,
presenting
this
bill
today
to
carry
on
the
legacy
of
our
former
colleague,
Senator
Ralph
Alvarado
I
would
note
that
Ralph
brought
this
bill
for
the
fast
floor
four
years
and
could
never
get
an
agreement
of
the
interesting
parties
to
get
it
passed.
Looks
like
it
took
Ralph
moving
to
Tennessee
to
get
something
done
on
this
matter.
B
Wow
all
getting
aside.
I
want
to
thank
Senator
Alvarado
for
his
leadership
on
the
on
this
issue.
I
think
had
it
not
been
for
his
efforts
that
we
wouldn't
be
where
we
are
here
today.
B
This
is
a
compromise
bill
with
all
the
interested
parties
in
agreement,
the
bankers,
the
Realtors,
the
home
builders
and
the
homeowners
association.
As
with
all
good
compromises,
nobody
is
getting
everything
they
want,
but
I
did
reach
out
to
Ralph.
I
shared
the
language
of
this
bill
with
him
he's
very
supportive
of
this
bill
and
he's
very
glad
to
see
that
the
parties
working
together
to
get
something
done.
A
couple
of
points
I'd
like
to
make
about
Senate
Bill
120.
B
This
issue
has
been
well
vetted,
as
has
been
stated,
we've
been
discussing
this
for
the
last
four
years.
Senator
Alvarado
brought
this
issue
before
the
interim
Judiciary
Committee
back
in
November
and,
as
I
stated
before,
previous
versions
have
been
vetted
multiple
times.
Citibel
120
provides
a
statutory
framework
for
homeowners
associations
that
will
allow
them
to
better
function
and
self-govern.
B
In
addition,
the
bill
has
significant
consumer
protections
for
its
members
of
the
homeowners
association
and
provides
greater
transparency,
for
example,
in
previous
testimony
on
this
bill.
We
heard
about
situations
where
homeowners
associations,
like
the
golf
course
community
of
Mount
Sterling,
that
have
poor
documents
and
didn't
provide
for
financial
transparency.
B
A
Got
a
motion
on
the
bill
from
Senator
schickler
I'll
make
the
second
I
know:
I,
don't
interrupt
your
remarks.
Does
anybody
have
any
questions
on
the
bill?
Yeah
Senator,
the.
G
Center
I
just
have
a
comment:
if
I
may
Mr
chairman,
you
may
I
got
constituents
on
both
sides
of
this
issue,
and
here
lately
last
year
or
so
on.
The
side
of
the
home
owners
very
much
so,
and
so
I'm
really
glad
that
we
have
this
bill
and
I
want
to
thank
you
for
putting
it
together,
because
I've
been
receiving
a
lot
of
traffic
on
especially
the
last
couple
years.
B
D
And
this
is
basically
a
holdover
from
last
year.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
as
I'm
reading
through
this,
that
this
is
clarified.
Some
of
the
concerns
last
year
was
that
the
developers
were
getting
a
free
pass.
I
mean
they
were
selling
properties
to
buyers,
with
a
vision
that
they
had
no
intention
of
completing
and
leaving,
basically,
the
homeowners
associations
responsible
for
what
I
would
think
is
you
know
false
advertising
and
and
that
the
developers
are
the
people
that
are
responsible
for
making
sure
that
they
have
met
their
commitments
to
the
homeowners.
B
What
this
bill
does
and
again
this
is
a
compromised
bill
in
for
as
I
compromise,
it
does
not
go
as
far
as
what
Senator
Alvarado's
bill
went,
but
what
it
does
do
is
it
provides
a
basic
statutory
framework
wherein,
if
a
homeowners
association
does
not
have
an
operative
document
that
is
being
complied
with,
it
provides
a
statutory
backup
that
sets
standards
as
to
what
a
homeowner's
association
going
forward
should
adhere
to,
and
you
know
that
this
is
a
consumer
protection
bill.
B
I
mean,
like
I,
said
when
I,
when
I
heard
Ralph's
testimony
about
the
golf
course
Community
in
Mount,
Sterling
I
mean
I
was
horrified,
I
mean
the
fact
that
someone
would
abscond
with
several
hundred
thousand
dollars
down
to
Florida
and
these
people
are
left
holding
the
bag.
You
know
a
lot
of
these
people
have
mortgages.
They
a
lot
of
people
put
their
life's
investment
life
savings,
and
so
you
know
this
bill
is,
is
basically
about
putting
some
basic
Provisions.
B
F
I,
if
I
may
add,
Senator,
Berg,
Richard,
horning
again
I'm
a
practicing
attorney
in
Louisville
for
any
of
you
that
haven't
heard
from
me
before
represent
over
600
communities
over
the
years.
F
Typically,
in
those
kinds
of
scenarios
we
have
found
that's
a
contractual
remedy
that
we
find
assuming
what
you
are
intimating
as
far
as
the
background
on
a
developer
promise.
Typically,
if
that's
not
in
the
contract
or
it's
not
something
mandated
and
approved
as
part
of
the
approved
development
plan
and
Zoning
agencies.
Typically,
there's
remedies
to
the
residents
for
that
and
we've
we've
actually
had
cases
like
that.
F
So
as
as
Senator
wheeler
alluded,
we
really
didn't
probably
get
that
legislation
that
far
into
this
piece
of
legislation
due
to
the
negotiation
process,
so
it
has
been
removed.
It
was
that
that
piece
has
never
been
in
the
bill
to
my
knowledge
as
far
as
required,
developer
responsibility
as
far
as
improvements,
but
it.
D
A
H
Turner,
thank
you.
Mr,
chairman
and
mine's.
More
of
a
is
a
question.
My
problem
with
Alvarado's
build.
It
would
allowed
one
individual
to
basically
undo
an
association
and
I
understand
that
subsection.
Two
of
this
clarifies
that
so
that
all
those
documents
they
have
that
are
in
place
now
that
that
association's
got
to
follow
that
it's
group
controlled,
are
going
to
stay
in
effect
and
that
issue
is
no
longer
I
just
want
that
out
for
the
public,
because
that
was
an
issue
that
people
were
calling
me
about.
Yeah.
B
H
G
You
this
is
for
your
guest,
Senator,
wheeler
question.
When
you
say
you
represent
communities,
do
you
represent
the
developers
or
you
represent
the
homeowners
homeowner.
F
Typically,
I
have,
in
the
past,
represented
a
few
developers,
but
probably
95,
plus
percent
of
my
my
representations
are
post
developer
control,
communities.
A
D
D
A
Aye,
how
about
that
bill
passes
with
favorable
expression
unanimously
I
want
to
commend
all
the
parties,
all
of
you
for
working
and
finding
some
common
ground
I.
Think
Senator.
You
were
right,
then
everybody
got
what
they
wanted,
but
that's
sometimes
the
art
of
compromise.
That's
what
that
means,
and
and
now
you've
got
a
bill
that
just
pass
unanimously
that
never
could
get
past
committee
or
couldn't
get
from
the
committee
to
the
floor.
Well,.
B
You
know
I,
like
I,
said
it's
amazing.
What
moving
Route
300
miles
away
can
get
done.
A
Thank
you,
Mr
chair,
he's,
probably
watching
the
live
stream
right
now,
all
right
Senator
how
I'm
going
to
take
yours
up
next,
if
that's,
okay,
since
Senator
Dineen,
is
a
captive
audience
as
a
member
of
the
committee,
so
come
on
up.
D
A
I
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman,
thanks
for
your
difference,
Senator
Dineen
and
I
just
wanted
to
note
that
apparently
Senator
wheeler
is
the
man
that
can
get
things
done
between
bringing
this
and
the
library
Bill.
He
he
he
he.
He
is
the
person
to
take
things
over
the
edge
when
apparently
nobody
else
can
so.
Thank
you.
Mr
chairman.
I
This
is
Senate
bill,
126.,
it's
a
simple
Cleanup
in
addition
to
the
bill
we
passed
last
year
about
jurisdiction
for
constitutional
cases,
as
you
all
recall
that
bill
allowed
allowed
someone
who
was
going
to
make
a
constitutional
challenge
in
the
narrowly
defined
areas
to
bring
a
case
in
the
jurisdiction
in
which
they
lived
rather
than
in
Franklin,
and
this
is
kind
of
the
other
side
of
that.
This
allows
either
party
to
have
one
change
of
venue
if
they
so
choose,
but
the
changing
venue
is
done
by
random
selection.
I
D
E
A
D
A
I
A
All
right,
Senator,
Senate,
Bill,
119
and
acts
relating
to
sex,
offenses
and
members.
You've
got
a
committee
substitute
in
your
folder
I'll
direct
your
attention
to
that
good.
To
see
you
that's
Rochelle.
J
You
Mr
chairman
committee,
I'd,
like
to
introduce
my
guest
I,
have
with
me
Carolyn
Rochelle,
with
the
Children's
Advocacy
Center
of
Kentucky
and
Meg
Savage,
the
chief
legal
officer
for
the
Kentucky
Coalition
against
domestic
violence.
As
many
of
you
know,
Kentucky
continues
to
rank
poorly
in
the
field
of
domestic
violence
and
in
many
cases
that
is
also
involving
sexual
abuse
or
those
types
of
trauma.
So
Senator.
J
I
want
to
get
into
the
bill.
Senate
Bill
119
simply
clarifies
the
language
of
sexual
contact
and
removes
definition
of
sexual
abuse,
so
I
want
to
get
into
what
it
does
do.
The
bill
amends
the
definition
of
sexual
contact
in
krs-510
.010.
J
It
removes
the
term
sexual
abuse
from
the
dvo
statute
found
in
krs-403
720,
and
it
adds
the
term
sexual
assault
to
krs-403
720
and
defines
it
in
definition,
in
the
section
of
403
720.,
we
looked
at
how
this
came
about
was
a
constituent
of
mine
in
my
district
was
involved
in
a
sexual
assault
case
and
through
that
they
asked
me
to
look
into
the
wording
of
how
we
defined
these
terms
in
the
law
and
I
contacted
a
family
court
judge
in
my
district
and
asked
them
if
they
saw
issues
with
how
we
had
defined
sexual
assault
and
sexual
abuse.
J
However,
if
you
compare
dvos
and
IPOs,
you
can
see
in
KRS
chapter
456
that
the
general
assembly
used
a
different
term
sexual
assault
and
then
stated
that
it
referred
to
sex
crimes
and
KRS
chapter
5
10.,
an
incest
in
KRS
chapter
530..
So
there
seemed
to
be
some
confusion,
I
guess,
on
the
clarity
of
how
these
terms
were
defined
in
the
course
of
creating
this
bill,
we
looked
at
Best
Practices
and
how
the
state
of
Michigan
and
the
state
of
Wisconsin
Define
these
terms
and
I
believe
even
the
State
of
Arizona.
J
To
get
some
clarity,
this
bill
avoids
having
two
different
definitions
for
sexual
abuse:
it
broadens
the
term
sexual
contact,
so
it
is
less
ambiguous
and
better
captures
what
sexual
contact
really
is.
This
will
help
both
child
and
adult
victims
of
this
type
of
behavior.
J
It
brings
the
dvo
statutes
in
line
with
the
IPO
statutes
and
uses
uniform
language.
Sexual
assault
will
be
defined
the
same
way
in
both
sets
of
statutes
by
adding
sexual
assault
to
the
dvo
statute
and
defining
it
and
deleting
the
term
sexual
abuse.
It
clarifies
that
the
behavior
of
which
a
dvo
could
be
granted
is
far
more
broad
than
just
sexual
abuse,
as
defined
in
the
criminal
code
in
which,
because
it
has
never
been
defined
in
the
dvo
statutes,
has
caused
some
confusion.
J
We
believe
that
this
will
Aid
judges
in
protective
order
cases
and
juries
in
criminal
cases
to
better
identify
what
is
and
what
is
not
sexual
contact,
regardless
of
the
age
of
the
victim.
So
I
believe
that
this
is
really
just
clearing
up
some
murky
waters
on
definitions,
as
it
relates
to
sexual
assaults.
A
I'm
going
to
take
that
gentlemen
as
a
motion,
the
second
on
the
committee
sub,
if
that's
all
right,
all
those
in
favor
of
adopting
this,
please
vote
by
saying:
aye
aye
those
opposed
okay,
the
subs
before
us
miss
Savage,
Miss
Rochelle.
If
you
have
remarks
you're
free
to
share
them
now
go.
J
K
Okay
I'll
go
first,
am
I
am
I.
On
there
there
we
go
okay,
okay,
so
again,
I'm
Caroline,
Rochelle
I'm,
the
chief
executive
officer
at
the
Children's
Advocacy
centers
of
Kentucky
I.
Think
a
lot
of
you
know
who
we
are,
but
we
serve
7,
500,
plus
children
a
year
there
are
15
Children's,
Advocacy
centers,
one
in
every
area:
development
District.
We
provide
forensic
interviews,
mental
health
services,
medical
exams,
advocacy
and
more
services
for
child
victims
and
their
families.
K
The
majority
of
the
cases
that
we
see
are
child
sexual
abuse
cases
and
the
component
of
the
bill
that
I
think
I
can
speak
to
the
most
is
the
the
aspect
of
child
of
sexual
contact
and
the
issue
that
we
are
concerned
about
is
the
where
the
laws
currently
states
that
sexual
gratification
is
required
to
to
show
sexual
contact,
and
there
are
a
couple
challenges
with
that
from
our
perspective
and
the
first
one
is
that
that
we
don't
always
know
why
a
perpetrator
abuses
as
a
child.
K
The
research
shows
that
there
could
be
sexual
gratification
or
there
could
be
other
reasons
like
humiliation
or
power,
or
you
know
other
other
intent.
We
may
never
know
the
intent
behind
why
someone
abuses
a
child.
So
that's
that's
one
issue.
The
other
issue
is
the
majority
of
our
children
that
we
see
are
ages,
12
and
under,
and
so
the
way
this
plays
out
is
a
is
a
you
know.
K
K
You
know
that
kind
of
thing,
but
you
can
imagine
it's
very
difficult
for
a
child
or
anyone
to
articulate
that
there
was
sexual
gratification
on
the
part
of
their
perpetrator,
and
so
that's
the
other
challenge
with
this,
and
why
we're
supportive
of
legislation
that
removes
that
requirement.
We
appreciate
Senator
danine,
taking
up
this
issue
and
ural's
consideration.
L
Again,
I'm
Meg
Savage
Chief
legal
officer
with
the
Kentucky
Coalition
against
domestic
violence,
so
I'll
speak
more
to
section
one
of
the
bill
which
refines
the
definitions
under
the
krs-403
700
series,
which
is
our
process
for
obtaining
a
domestic
violence
order
and
just
quickly,
of
course,
in
Kentucky.
There
are
basically
two
types
of
protective
orders:
the
domestic
violence
orders
and
the
interpersonal
protective
orders.
The
dvo
has
been
around
since
early
1990s
and
then
the
IPOs
came
online
in
2016,
I,
believe
and
so
those
series
of
statutes
very
closely
mimic
one
another.
L
But
there
are
some
differences
and
the
case
that
Senator
danine
has
already
mentioned
Castle
versus
Castle,
which
I
think
was
a
2018
or
2019
case
it.
It
showed
that
there
was,
you
know,
perhaps
a
need
for
some
clarity
and
bringing
some
parity
between
the
two
series
of
statutes,
especially
when
it
comes
to
specifically
any
sort
of
sexual
violence
that
is
going
on,
and
so
you
know
it
goes
without
saying
that
sexual
violence
can
be
part
of
a
domestic
violence
situation.
L
In
fact,
it's
a
a
lethality
indicator
and
also
our
dvo
statutes
cover
the
parent-child
relationships
step.
Parents
step
child
relationship
as
well,
and
so
people
who
are
experiencing
that
type
of
violence
within
that
family
setting
would
go
to
court
and
they
would
be
looking
at
getting
a
domestic
violence
order,
not
an
interpersonal
protective
order.
L
So
by
bringing
the
definitions
in
line
with
both
sets
of
statutes,
we
hope
that
that
will
give
Clarity
to
judges,
practitioners,
survivors
and
anybody
who
is
wondering
you
know
like
what
type
of
a
protective
order
do
I
need
what
type
of
protective
order
is
going
to
be
entered.
What
needs
to
be
proven
during
that
hearing
Etc.
So
again,
we
also
thank
senator
danine
for
bringing
this
issue
forward.
A
A
D
Sir,
you
know
as
I
I
briefly
let
you
know
beforehand.
D
This
is
really
more
of
a
question,
but
on
page
three
line
25
after
the
word
manner,
I
think
we
need
the
word,
including
because
I
feel
like
the
language
as
it
is,
may
actually
remove
sexual
gratification
from
what
falls
under
sexual
contact,
because
it's
not
always
for
exacting
Revenge
humiliation
or
punishment.
Sometimes
it
is
actually
for
sexual
gratification
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure.
We
include
that.
J
Thank
you
for
your
question,
Senator
I.
Think.
If
you
look
up
above
that
in
line
24,
you
will
find
that
it
says
for
the
person
that's
being
for
the
purpose
of
sexual
arousal
or
gratification,
so
that
is
still
in
there
and
it
says
done
for
sexual
purpose
or
in
a
sexual
manner
for
the
purpose
of,
and
then
it
lists
those
things.
But
I
do
appreciate
that
wording,
Edition
that
we
could
add
that
including.
A
Aye
bill
passes
with
favorable
expression
unanimous
once
again,
I,
don't
know
that
that's
that
might
be
unprecedented
four
bills
for
unanimous
votes,
that
Trend
will
break
anytime
now,
I
appreciate
it.
Thank
you,
ladies
for
your
input
on
the
bill,
Senator
thanks
for
bringing
it
forward,
seeing
no
other
business
to
come
before
this
committee.
Astonishingly,
thank
you,
Senator
Smith.