Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/13/2004 03:25 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL NO. 484
An Act imposing a correctional facility surcharge on
persons convicted of a crime under state law, and on
persons whose probation is revoked; relating to fees
and expenses for interstate transfer of probation or
parole; and providing for an effective date.
PORTIA PARKER, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, stated that HB 484 would impose a surcharge on
persons convicted of an offense and on persons whose
probation was revoked. The bill also requires that a person
under State probation or parole supervision to pay an
application fee for a requested transfer of that supervision
to another state.
She added that Alaska has an urgent need to mitigate the
cost of the correctional facilities. The bill would impose
a surcharge on a person who pleads guilty, nolo contendere,
or is convicted of a crime if that person was arrested and
taken to a correctional facility or sentenced to a term of
imprisonment. The amount of the surcharge depends on the
seriousness of the crime. Ms. Parker added that the bill
would also impose a surcharge on a person placed on
probation after conviction of a crime. The surcharge is
collected only if the defendant's probation was revoked for
a probation violation and that person was either arrested
and taken to a correctional facility for the violation, or
sentenced to prison for it.
Ms. Parker stated that Alaska participates in the Interstate
Compact for Adult Offender Supervision, which regulates the
transfer of supervision for persons under State probation
and parole. HB 484 would establish an application fee for
persons under active probation or parole supervision who
request an interstate transfer of supervision under the
Compact. According to the Department of Corrections, the
majority of other states already impose a fee for similar
services. The legislation would require the applicant to
post bond or deposit cash, which would be forfeited if the
State has to escort the person back to Alaska for confined
supervision.
Vice Chair Meyer questioned how the dollar amount had been
determined. Ms. Parker replied that the middle ground was
chosen for booking fees. Some states charge a daily fee,
with many other administrative charges imposed. The highest
found was $250 dollars, so the Department believed that
$100 dollar should be reasonable.
Vice Chair Meyer asked how people with no income could be
charged. Ms. Parker requested that someone else address the
collection process and that there are people on line who
could address that concern. She pointed out that wages can
be garnished.
TAPE HFC 04 - 81, Side A
Ms. Parker added that housing and medical needs are paid for
by the State general fund and that working in the facilities
could help pay for the $100 fine in the correctional
facilities.
Vice Chair Meyer asked if work in the facility was optional.
Ms. Parker replied that it is.
Representative Chenault pointed out that the Court System
currently assesses charges for just about everything. He
asked about the transferring process and how the fee was
determined. Ms. Parker responded that the offender would
have to make a request for a transfer to another state to be
charged the fee and they would then be under the probation
through an interstate contract.
Representative Foster referenced the 32,000 yearly arrests.
Ms. Parker explained that is the number of bookings.
Representative Foster pointed out that there are only
600,000 people in the entire state. That amount would be a
huge percent of the State's population. Ms. Parker advised
that many are the same individual being rebooked.
Representative Croft asked if the transfer would be charged
for only one way. Ms. Parker clarified that there would be
a charge for processing when they request to transfer out of
state. That is the manner in which most other states handle
it. If they were charged on entering into Alaska, they
would be charged both an exiting from the other state and
then again an entering fee. The $100 dollar fee would cover
the request for processing and needs to be a bond, a $200
dollar bail bond. If the individual does not need to be
retrieved, then the $200 dollars is refundable.
Representative Croft recommended it would be better to
charge them coming into state. In effect, there would be a
double charge when transferring back to Alaska.
Representative Foster believed it would be cheaper to get
them out of the State.
DIANE WENDLANDT, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ASSISTANT
ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, ANCHORAGE, offered to
answer questions of the Committee.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CS HB 484 (JUD) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 484 (JUD) was reported out of Committee with
"individual" recommendations and with a new zero note by the
Alaska Court System, a new fiscal note by the Department of
Corrections and fiscal note #1 by the Department of Law.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|