Legislature(2019 - 2020)ADAMS 519
03/19/2020 09:00 AM House FINANCE
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 | |
| SB120 | |
| SB137 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 120 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 137 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 23 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 187 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SENATE BILL NO. 137
"An Act extending the termination date of the Board of
Parole; and providing for an effective date."
9:40:16 AM
SENATOR PETER MICCICHE, SPONSOR, indicated that his bill
would extend the termination date of the Alaska Parole
Board from June 30, 2020 to June 30, 2025 with an immediate
effective date.
MICHAEL WILLIS, STAFF, SENATOR PETER MICCICHE, relayed the
bill extended the Board's termination date to June 30,
2025, for 5 years. He reviewed the auditor's opinion that
the Board was serving in the public's interest by
effectively evaluating prisoners' likelihood of recidivism
and whether they pose a threat to the public. The auditor
recommended that the legislature extend the Board's
termination date 5 years instead of the maximum 8 years
because of recent changes to the Board's statutes and
responsibility revisions. The legislative auditor and the
director of the Alaska Parole Board were available for
questions. He thanked members for their consideration of
the bill.
Representative Knopp asked about the personnel services
line of the fiscal note in the amount of $1.7 million which
equated to approximately $144,000 per individual. He asked
if the monies were for full-time staff. Senator Micciche
deferred to Jeff Edwards.
9:43:23 AM
JEFF EDWARDS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA PAROLE BOARD,
responded that the board members were considered part-time
non-state employees. They received an honorarium. If they
worked a half day, they were paid for a half day. If they
worked a full day, they were paid for a full day. They were
not full-time state employees.
Representative Knopp asked if the monies were for support
staff rather than the Board. Mr. Edwards responded that
himself and his staff were included in the personnel
services line.
Representative Carpenter asked how many staff Mr. Edwards
had. Mr. Edwards responded, "Eleven."
Representative Carpenter asked why the Board needed eleven
staff plus the director. Mr. Edwards replied that the Board
added staff as a result of the passage of SB 91. It was
well documented in the audit what occurred in terms of the
number of hearings. The review and preparation for hearings
was very concentrated and the Parole Board conducted
thousands of hearings per year. The Alaska Board of Parole
rotated through every correctional facility four times per
year. In some of the remote locations hearing were done
telephonically. The Board went to each of the prisons on
the road system to interview inmates. The workload was
intensive. Every review for individual cases was immense.
His office had to review an individual essentially since
birth until the events of the crime, their institutional
conduct, their release plan, and more. Putting all of the
information together for the Board to consider was
extensive.
9:46:34 AM
Representative Wool noted Mr. Edwards comments about
thousands of hearings occurring per year and the labor-
intensive preparation work. He supposed board members were
working close to full-time. Mr. Edwards thought they worked
about three-quarters of the time. He indicated board
members worked a lot from home reviewing case files. In
addition, they did preliminary hearings, which could be
equated to a bail hearing, throughout the months. Board
members worked close to full-time.
Representative Knopp commented that he had an acquaintance
on the Board. He sat with the person after the passage of
SB 91 and was applaud there was not a full-time workforce.
Vice-Chair Ortiz announced that amendments were due by the
end of the day at 5:00 p.m.
9:49:00 AM
AT EASE
9:49:02 AM
RECONVENED
KRIS CURTIS, LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, ALASKA DIVISION OF
LEGISLATIVE AUDIT, indicated the audit could be found in
members' packets and was dated May 8, 2019. The statutory
changes that happened after May 9, 2019 were not included
in the audit. She reported that there was a background
information section that described an overview of parole.
She drew attention to the bottom of page 8 of the audit
report which discussed how SB 91 changed the parole
statutes and how it impacted the Board's workload and
procedures. She read from the audit report:
Senate Bill 91 significantly changed the statutes
effective January 2017. First, it expanded
discretionary parole for all offenders except for
unclassified offenders and for class A sex offenders.
Prior to SB 91 offenders who committed their first
class B felony and up to their second class C felony
were eligible for discretionary parole after serving
25 percent of their sentences. Post SB 91, generally
any offenders who committed a number of A, B, or C
felonies were eligible for discretionary parole after
serving one-quarter of their sentences broadening who
was eligible. Secondly, SB 91 removed the
discretionary parole application requirement which
meant that prior to SB 91 a prisoner initiated the
parole process by filing an application. Not all
eligible Prisoners would file an application. Post SB
91, the application requirement was removed, and a
mandate was established that all eligible prisoners
would be subject to consideration of parole and would
have a hearing. The changed significantly altered how
the Board approached the parole hearings. Thirdly, SB
91 shortened the technical revocation hearing timeline
providing less time to conduct the hearings.
Ms. Curtis turned to the report conclusions on page 11 of
the audit. Legislative Audit concluded that the Board
responded in an effective and efficient way to significant
changes in the parole laws. The Board conducted meetings,
made parole decisions, set parole conditions, and held
revocation hearings in accordance with state law.
Legislative Audit was recommending a 5-year extension which
was 3 years less than the 8 years allowed in statute solely
in recognition that their statutes continued to change. She
believed it was prudent to have increased oversight during
the period of change.
Ms. Curtis continued that there were several tables in the
report to help communicate the Board's activities during
the audit period. She drew attention to page 12, Exhibit 5.
As discussed in the background information section, SB 91
changed eligibility standards and removed the application
requirement. She pointed out the impact on the number of
discretionary parole hearings conducted. The number ramped
up in 2017 and 2018. The increase in discretionary parole
hearings included a significant number of hearings that
prisoners did not attend, referred to as "no shows." No
shows were the result of eliminating the application
process and mandating that hearings be held for all
eligible prisoners regardless of whether they wanted
parole.
Ms. Curtis relayed that according to the Board's executive
director, a prisoner might not want parole for various
reasons including not wanting to sign the parole conditions
- wanting to leave the facility with no conditions.
Initially, after SB 91 passed, parole officers and the
Board held hearings for no shows in a similar manner as for
prisoners that attended the hearing. It was not an
effective use of resources given that parole was not
granted if a prisoner did not attend a hearing.
Ms. Curtis reported that the Board recognized the
inefficient use of their resources and changed their
procedures in November 2017. The new procedures required
institutional parole officers to complete condensed parole
packets and held abbreviated hearings to facilitate the
process. As shown in Exhibit 6, no shows represented 21
percent of discretionary parole hearings in 2017 and
29 percent in 2018.
Ms. Curtis conveyed that according to Board staff, the
increase in discretionary parole hearings led to an
increase in revocation hearings. She referred to page 14,
Exhibit 7. She pointed to the jump in 2017 which was
partially offset in 2018 by the use of an administrative
sanction and an incentive program that allowed probation
officers to impose sanctions without a hearing for the most
common technical violations based on a guide prepared by
Department of Corrections (DOC) management.
Ms. Curtis continued that the Board effectively coped with
the increase in hearings by traveling to facilities 4 times
per year instead of 2 and hired additional staff. Senate
Bill 91 authorized 5 additional staff members to cope with
the increase.
9:54:24 AM
Ms. Curtis referred to the recommendations on page 18. None
of the recommendations were significant enough to decrease
the auditor's recommended term of extension. The reduced
extension was solely because of their changing statutes.
Recommendation 1 was for the executive director to
improve procedures to ensure final revocation hearings
were performed timely. Legislative Audit conducted
testing and found that 16 percent were not performed
within 120 days after a parolee's arrest. The hearings
were late by 5-12 days.
Ms. Curtis moved to Recommendation 2. The auditor
recommended that the Board's executive director work
with the commissioner of DOC to improve the quality of
telephonic hearings. The auditor found poor quality
telephone systems at 4 of the 13 correctional
facilities including Yukon-Kuskokwim, Wildwood,
Fairbanks, and Highland Mountain. These facilities
accounted for 14 percent of the parole and revocation
hearings for calendar years 2015 through 2018.
Ms. Curtis reviewed Recommendation 3. The Board should
take steps to ensure regulations were properly updated.
During the audit she found two regulations that were
not correctly updated due to human error.
Ms. Curtis moved to the final recommendation on
page 20. Recommendation 4 suggested that the director
of DOC's Division of Administrative Services should
take steps to ensure that the Alaska Correction
Offender Management System complied with the
Information Securities Standards, a national best
practice. She did not include the details of weaknesses
to avoid exploit. The information was communicated to
management in a separate confidential letter.
Ms. Curtis reported that responses to the audit began
on page 31 with the governor's response. The governor
did not comment on whether to extend the Alaska Parole
Board. On page 33, the DOC commissioner agreed with the
recommendations and indicated they were moving forward
with corrective action within the constraints of their
budget. On page 35, the board chair concurred with the
3 recommendations directed to the Board. The report
went on to describe the corrective actions.
Representative Wool asked about the changes made with HB 49
[Legislation passed in 2019 related to crimes, sentencing,
drugs, thefts, and reports] and whether SB 91 undid much of
what was implemented. Ms. Curtis did not know, as the
report was dated May 8, 2019 and the bill was passed after
the date.
Senator Micciche reminded members that the bill was about
extending the Board. The finances associated with the 5 new
positions resulting from SB 91 because there was no longer
a discretionary parole application process which forced the
process. Since then, as a result of HB 49, the provision
had been removed which might reveal that the positions were
no longer needed. He referred to page 1, Exhibit 2 which
showed the positions. Five of them were new because of
SB 91. After the following year through the budget process
it was likely that the costs could be reduced. The issue
should be watched through the next budget process.
Vice-Chair Ortiz indicated that the amendments were due by
5:00 p.m. in the afternoon of the present day. He reviewed
the agenda for the afternoon. He reminded members that the
agenda would be fluid.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 120 Comparison Flowchart 2-26-2020.pdf |
HFIN 3/19/2020 9:00:00 AM SHSS 2/28/2020 1:30:00 PM |
SB 120 |
| SB 120 Sponsor Statement 1.30.2020.pdf |
HFIN 3/19/2020 9:00:00 AM SHSS 2/28/2020 1:30:00 PM |
SB 120 |
| SB 137 Parole-Board Sunset Audit 20-20116-19.pdf |
HFIN 3/19/2020 9:00:00 AM SFIN 3/11/2020 9:00:00 AM SSTA 2/18/2020 3:30:00 PM |
SB 137 |
| SB 137 Sponsor Statement v.M 031720.pdf |
HFIN 3/19/2020 9:00:00 AM |
SB 137 |
| HB 187 Public Testimony Rec'd by 031820 (2).pdf |
HFIN 3/19/2020 9:00:00 AM |
HB 187 |