Legislature(2015 - 2016)CAPITOL 120
03/25/2015 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HCR1|| HJR3 | |
| HCR1 | |
| HJR3 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 75 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HCR 1 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HJR 3 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 147 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HCR 1-GOVERNOR: TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY AND JURIS.
HJR 3-CONGRESS: NATIVE TRIBAL JURIS. & AUTHORITY
1:04:03 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 1, Urging the Governor to
acknowledge officially the sovereignty of Alaska tribal
governments, to create clear and consistent policies for
increased state collaboration and partnership with tribes, and
to direct the attorney general to conduct a complete review of
the state's litigation against Alaska Native tribes; urging the
Governor to acknowledge the inherent criminal jurisdiction of
Alaska tribal governments over tribal members within the
boundaries of their villages; urging the Governor to cooperate
with tribes' efforts to transfer Native land to trust; and
urging the Governor to support multilateral negotiations between
tribal governments, nontribal municipalities, and the state
government to delineate clearly tribal geographical
jurisdictions, and HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 3, Urging members
of the Alaska delegation to the United States Congress to
introduce substantially similar legislation to the Alaska Safe
Families and Villages Act of 2013; urging the United States
Congress to affirm the criminal jurisdiction of Alaska tribal
governments over tribal members within the boundaries of their
villages; urging the United States Congress to cooperate with
tribes' efforts to transfer Native land to trust; and supporting
multilateral negotiations between tribal governments, nontribal
municipalities, and the state and federal governments to
delineate clearly tribal geographical jurisdictions. [The
committee continued its specific discussions on HCR 1 and HJR 3
later in the meeting.]
1:04:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BRYCE EDGMON, Alaska State Legislature, stated
that the two resolutions [HCR 1 and HJR 3] before the committee
are being put forward in tandem because they essentially are the
same vehicles with HCR 1 being delivered to Governor Bill
Walker, and HJR 3 being delivered to the United States
Congressional Delegation. The intent of the resolutions is to
bring attention to the increased role that tribal entities in
the State of Alaska can provide in terms of better law
enforcements and criminal justice services at the local level,
and also to recognize the fact that the current system of highly
centralized being provided through state agencies in large
measure has in many instances failed to succeed. He pointed out
that by recognizing that Alaska tribes can play a greater role
in providing criminal justice services in Alaska has merit and
deserves the attention of the legislature, executive branch, and
Congressional Delegation. He noted that in a number of Alaska
communities per se are still facing severe problems related to
poverty, alcoholism, drug abuse, domestic violence, sexual
assault, suicides and a number of other social ills that in some
communities are moving forward at an epidemic level. He opined
that these two resolutions, and the fact that Alaskan tribes can
play a larger role in committing to criminal justice services
fits in that category. He pointed to the State of Texas that
has taken a number of measures to instill "smart justice"
policies, and in doing so reduced the recidivism rate by 25
percent, save approximately $3 billion in building new prisons,
reduced its prison rates by 10 percent, and crime rate by
approximately 20 percent. He said in arguing that Alaska tribes
deserve more recognition, clearer and more consistent policies
with Alaska State agencies, deserve attention at the
Congressional level the Women and Safe Families Act would have
provided had it been approved, are very worthy of the
legislature's consideration. He pointed out that in the last 25
years there have a number of studies from various commissions,
boards, and entities that have all essentially pointed to the
same thing - if Alaska had more culturally sensitive law
enforcement measures at the village level, that in looking
through the eyes of reformative justice created not only just
the offenders but also the victims and community itself. In
that manner, recidivism could be brought down and reduce the
high percentage of young Alaska Native males that enter into
Alaska's criminal justice system. He suggested that at the
misdemeanor level with minor offenses and then graduate up into
felony offenses that end up populating the Department of
Corrections (DOC) primarily at the rate of $158 per day or
almost $60 thousand a year.
1:09:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON explained that the two resolutions have a
lot of merit in promoting criminal justice measures at the
tribal level in small Alaskan communities. He further explained
that in downsizing state government to offer Alaskan tribes a
greater role in misdemeanor cases and minor offenses at the
local level, the legislature can reduce the amount of outflow of
villages into the criminal justice arena. He noted that at the
same time save the State of Alaska money and help to get rural
Alaska directly on the pathway to reformative justice. He said
it includes rural Alaska and the rest of the state
notwithstanding.
1:10:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked whether these resolutions relate to
two separate systems of justice, one for Alaska Natives and one
for everyone else.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON responded that the resolutions are non-
binding, and that HCR 1 calls for better communication and
recognition between the state agencies and the tribal entities
that are providing "circle sentencing" or tribal court services
at the local tribal community level. He stated that in no
manner do the resolutions suggest that tribal court services
associate itself with felony offenses, of which are under the
purview of the Alaska State Troopers and the law of the land.
He suggested that tribes be active in terms of more minor
offenses at the community level. He remarked that CSHCR 1, asks
that the state take engaging state agencies in working with the
tribes on a community-by-community basis to have a better
relationship and recognition. Possibly, he related, some of the
minor offenses could be dealt with in a culturally sensitive
manner in the local village that arrests certain behavior. He
used the example of the 14-year old young man in Togiak who shot
a dog and was deported almost immediately to the McLaughlin
Youth Center Facility. Subsequently, he offered, six weeks
later the boy was allowed to go home. Fortunately, that
individual did not go down the pathway of the "broken window
theory" of engaging in a more serious offenses only to become a
felon in the criminal justice system doing no one any good and
costing the state a lot of money. He said the two resolutions
entertain a better dialogue for better communication between
Alaska tribes and state agencies and that possibly at the
Congressional level there could be a bill similar to the bill
offered a couple of years ago that provided for recognition of
more criminal jurisdiction for Alaska tribes. He said the
resolutions are not providing answers or saying that they
provide the framework that might be in place between DOC or the
Department of Public Safety and a local village. He reiterated
that the resolutions encourage the Department of Public Safety
to work more closely with local villages to employ measures
regarding minor offenses that could be dealt with at the local
tribal level.
1:14:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN referred to the sponsor's comments regarding
tribal government and asked whether he meant the city councils
in various villages.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON responded that Alaska has 229 federally
recognized tribes which is approximately 40 percent of all of
the tribes in the United States. He related that these tribes
function at various levels as some have active tribal courts,
some are just forming tribal courts, and some have no tribal
courts at all. He explained that communities like Kake, and
other communities with more active tribal courts, have seen
positive results in the engagement of local tribal entities
regarding misdemeanor and minor offenses which do not involve
felonies.
1:15:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN referred to non-Natives living in primarily
Native areas and asked about cultural sensitivity for them. He
further asked if non-Natives are subject to the tribal
government.
HJR 3-CONGRESS: NATIVE TRIBAL JURIS. & AUTHORITY
2:08:53 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 3, Urging members of the Alaska
delegation to the United States Congress to introduce
substantially similar legislation to the Alaska Safe Families
and Villages Act of 2013; urging the United States Congress to
affirm the criminal jurisdiction of Alaska tribal governments
over tribal members within the boundaries of their villages;
urging the United States Congress to cooperate with tribes'
efforts to transfer Native land to trust; and supporting
multilateral negotiations between tribal governments, nontribal
municipalities, and the state and federal governments to
delineate clearly tribal geographical jurisdictions.
2:09:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked a threshold question in that HJR
3 appeared to be directed at a particular bill introduced in the
last Congress that did not pass, but he did not have a copy.
2:09:59 PM
TIM CLARK, Staff, Representative Bryce Edgmon, Alaska State
Legislature, advised the bill reference in its entirety is part
of the bill packet. He advised it is United States Senate Bill
1474.
2:10:45 PM
MR. CLARK pointed out that the two resolutions before the
committee are very closely related as the Preambles are nearly
identical. He noted the goals are also closely related in terms
of trying to address devastating social strife in rural
communities, it is the Resolves that differ. He said HJR 3, is
directed toward Congress and asks it to introduce legislation
substantially similar to the Alaska Safe Families and Villages
Act of 2013. The federal legislation, he explained, would
establish a pilot project of which will provide a number of
tribal communities with increased federal funding. He further
explained that the federal funding would be for their tribal
courts and law enforcement needs, enhanced authority over
domestic violence and child abuse neglect, greater local law
enforcement responsibilities to combat drug and alcohol abuse,
and improve coordination between federal, state, tribal, and
local law enforcement agencies. He related that it comes back
to the recommendations of a task force and commission after
another over a 25-30 year period. Wherein many concluded over
and over again that greater control, greater responsibility at
the local level would lead to swifter response to violence and
criminal activity, increased crime prevention, and sentencing
models more culturally appropriate and more rehabilitative as
opposed to punitive in some but not all cases, he pointed out.
2:13:02 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX opened public testimony
2:13:08 PM
RON SUMMERVILLE, said that Mary Bishop testified to a concern of
many people which is the fragmenting of the state's jurisdiction
in creating some sort of an anomaly which exists primarily in
reservations outside. He remarked that having grown up in a
small Native community, he appreciates efforts to bring issues
to light as there are serious problems. The problems in the
villages are problems the legislature and various communities
have and remarked that the question is how much recognition of
tribal jurisdiction is the answer. He pointed out that
Representative Keller asked whether other options are available
and he said he would support obtaining additional jurisdiction
to tribal governments if they demonstrate they can handle it.
He related that he comes from Craig and that the cities of Craig
and Klawock have offered examples of tribal government and
courts issuing proclamations. However, he remarked, that the
conflict with the Alaska State Constitution is what concerns him
when looking at HJR 3 which is asking Congress to pass something
to provide more jurisdiction and authority to the tribal courts.
He expressed that he lived through D2, subsistence, and the
unintended consequences that occurred with the federal
government passing legislation that Alaska had no control over.
He related that the legislature requires that the State of
Alaska must concur in any action by Congress in giving the
authority as it must be concurred upon by the state. The
passage of the subsistence provision in federal law was a
horrible mistake in many cases, as there is now an unwanted
fragmented system in the court systems, however, jurisdiction is
given to the tribal courts.
2:18:44 PM
MARY BISHOP, referred to an article in the committee packets
entitled Tribal Jurisdiction in Alaska, and read "In years to
come the trend in Alaska appears to be moving toward increased
collaboration between the state, tribes, and respective courts.
The (indisc.) have much to share with each other. Ultimately,
the more access to justice Alaska's tribal members have,
especially in the remote villages, the better for our state's
health and safety overall." She encouraged the committee to go
slow and (indisc.) HJR 3.
2:19:59 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX closed public testimony after ascertaining no one
further wished to testify.
2:20:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG commented that the resolution appears
to specifically urge Alaska's delegation to introduce something
similar to a federal bill entitled The Alaska Safe Families and
Villages Act of 2013. He said apparently the [federal] bill was
"reported with an amendment," and asked whether the bill in the
packet contains the amendment, or whether it was in the form of
a committee substitute, and what happened to the bill.
2:21:26 PM
MR. CLARK advised that the act was originally introduced in
2011, and by the time it reached the 113th Congress, second
session, work had been performed on it. He said he does not
know specifically what the changes were going forward.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG requested the exact text of the bill
and the committee report, as those reports often include
arguments for the bill, minority views, and the bill's status.
MR. CLARK pointed back to the language of the resolution which
requests legislation substantially similar, to what can be
interpreted as a bill, including the major provisions. He asked
for clarification as to whether Representative Gruenberg was
requesting a more specific definition ...
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG interjected that the lawyers and
members on the House Judiciary Standing Committee need to see
more specifics.
2:23:17 PM
MR. CLARK added that some of the public comments had expressed
worries that in endorsing federal legislation the state would
somehow be run roughshod over it. He pointed to the Alaska Safe
Families and Villages Act of 2013, which has provisions that it
is a demonstration project being put forward by federal
legislation ... conceivably a handful of villages. He offered
that every step along the way a village's eligibility would
depend upon it having first negotiated an agreement over these
exact issues with the State of Alaska. He explained that no
village would be eligible for the demonstration project that did
not first have an agreement with the State of Alaska, as the
state comes first in this legislation. In terms of Mr.
Summerville's misgivings over the capacities of these tribal
institutions, the federal legislation also addresses each
village's eligibility with the capacity of its specific
institution, quality and thoroughness of its tribal
constitution, quality and thoroughness of its ordinances and
laws, and the fact that all of those institutions and capacities
would be reviewed by the Department of Justice before allowed
into the program.
2:25:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that the key language in HJR 3 is
found on page 3, lines 1-12, as regardless of whatever else is
in the federal bill, the interests the sponsor has are certain
provisions involving the establishment of a demonstration
project. He asked if that is all the sponsor is asking the
committee to endorse it may be all the information needed in
front of the committee. He said that part of the problem,
highlighted in Senator Dan Sullivan's address, is that few votes
were taken on the Senate floor last year. He opined that the
United States Senate is either combining bills or limiting to
appropriation, he was not sure.
2:27:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN posited that the 2013 act was supported by
Senators Lisa Murkowski and Begich.
MR. CLARK answered that the initial bill was amended by Senator
Lisa Murkowski on the United States Senate floor to exclude
Alaska Natives, but later changed her position and co-sponsored
a similar bill with then Senator Begich.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN assumed that Senator Lisa Murkowski would
continue to support the bill and asked where Senator Sullivan is
on this bill.
MR. CLARK said he does not have any idea as he has not had
correspondence with Senator Sullivan. He explained that the
jurisdiction issues in general in Congress and treatment of the
jurisdictional issues with Alaska tribes has been a struggle.
Clearly, he noted that under Venetie, where the United States
Supreme Court unanimously said that under ANCSA (1971) it
transfers 4-5 million acres and 1 billion dollars to the State
of Alaska in exchange for all title and all sovereignty to their
land. He noted that the United States Supreme Court said
emphatically that Indian Country does not exist in Alaska. The
bill Senators Begich and Lisa Murkowski supported attempted to
work around that distinction in addressing the epidemic problems
of social issues with Alaska Natives, while recognizing that
Indian Country largely did not exist in Alaska. He opined that
the request for Senators Sullivan and Lisa Murkowski to take
additional time to consider the issue is justified as it is a
complicated issue from that standpoint.
2:30:39 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX asked for clarification as to whether there is one
place in Alaska where it is Indian Country.
MR. CLARK responded Metlakatla.
CHAIR LEDOUX asked if this idea had been tried in Metlakatla as
it seems like a great place to start things out where there
wouldn't be the problem with Indian Country versus non-Indian
Country.
MR. CLARK responded that the resolution addresses the other 228
or so tribes and their systemic problems with providing criminal
justice services and the attendant social problems at epidemic
levels. He opined that he does not think Metlakatla experiences
the same level of social disruption and violence as other Alaska
villages.
CHAIR LEDOUX held HJR 3 in committee.
2:32:09 PM