Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 120

03/28/2012 01:00 PM JUDICIARY


Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
01:08:19 PM Start
01:08:47 PM HB343
02:15:08 PM Overview(s): Presentation on Fasd and the Justice System
03:00:17 PM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ Presentation on FASD and the Justice System by TELECONFERENCED
the Alaska FASD Partnership
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
+= HB 343 DISCLOSURE OF CHILDREN'S RECORDS TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSHB 343(JUD) Out of Committee
           HB 343 - DISCLOSURE OF CHILDREN'S RECORDS                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:08:47 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR  THOMPSON announced that  the first order  of business                                                               
would be  HOUSE BILL NO. 343,  "An Act relating to  disclosure of                                                               
records  of   the  Department  of  Health   and  Social  Services                                                               
pertaining to  children in  certain circumstances;  and providing                                                               
for  an  effective  date."     [Before  the  committee  was  CSHB                                                               
343(HSS).]                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR  THOMPSON  indicated  that  the  committee  would  be                                                               
addressing proposed amendments a bit out of order.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:09:51 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER  made  a  motion  to  adopt  Amendment  2,                                                               
labeled 27-LS1394\M.2, Mischel, 3/27/12, which read:                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     Page 2, line 9, following "jurisdiction":                                                                                  
          Insert "that operates under child protection                                                                      
     standards   similar  to   the  standards   for  a   law                                                                
     enforcement agency in this state,"                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 3, lines 1 - 2:                                                                                                       
          Delete "or another jurisdiction"                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Page 3, line 2, following "minors":                                                                                    
          Insert "or another state or municipal agency of                                                                   
     another   jurisdiction   that    is   responsible   for                                                                
     delinquent  minors   and  that  operates   under  child                                                                
     protection standards similar to  the standards for this                                                                
     state or a municipal agency in this state"                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     Page 3, line 23, following "jurisdiction":                                                                                 
          Insert "that operates under child protection                                                                      
     standards   similar  to   the  standards   for  a   law                                                                
     enforcement agency in this state,"                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 4, lines 17 - 18:                                                                                                     
          Delete "or another jurisdiction"                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Page 4, line 18, following "services":                                                                                 
          Insert "or another state or municipal agency of                                                                   
     another  jurisdiction  that  is responsible  for  child                                                                
     protection  services  and  that  operates  under  child                                                                
     protection standards similar to  the standards for this                                                                
     state or a municipal agency in this state"                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR THOMPSON objected for the purpose of discussion.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER, relaying  that  he  would be  withdrawing                                                               
Amendment 2, expressed concern that  HB 343's use of the wording,                                                               
"or another  jurisdiction" in its  Sections 1 and 2  could result                                                           
in  information about  a child  being disclosed  to jurisdictions                                                               
that  don't have  standards for  protecting  children similar  to                                                               
Alaska's standards.   He acknowledged that the  Department of Law                                                               
(DOL) and  the Department  of Health  and Social  Services (DHSS)                                                               
are opposed  to Amendment  2, however,  because it  would require                                                               
the  administration  to  first undertake  an  investigation  into                                                               
whether another jurisdiction's  standards for protecting children                                                               
were sufficiently similar to Alaska's  standards.  In conclusion,                                                               
he reiterated that he would be withdrawing Amendment 2.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR THOMPSON removed his  objection to the motion to adopt                                                               
Amendment 2, and noted that Amendment 2 was withdrawn.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR  THOMPSON then  mentioned  that  public testimony  on                                                               
HB 343 had previously been closed.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:13:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES  made  a  motion  to  adopt  Amendment  1,                                                               
labeled 27-LS1394\M.1, Mischel, 3/26/12, which read:                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     Page 3, line 4, following "safety":                                                                                    
          Insert ", if notice and an opportunity to object                                                                  
      is provided in writing to the child and the child's                                                                   
        guardian ad litem not less than 10 business days                                                                    
     before disclosure"                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER objected for the purpose of discussion.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  HOLMES indicated  that  Amendment 1  would add  a                                                               
stipulation to Section 1's proposed  AS 47.10.093(b)(15) that the                                                               
Office of  Children's Services  (OCS) shall  disclose information                                                               
about a  case to the  Division of  Juvenile Justice (DJJ)  if the                                                               
OCS provides to  the child [that is the subject  of the case] and                                                               
his/her  guardian  ad  litem  (GAL) written  notice  of,  and  an                                                               
opportunity  to  object  to,  the disclosure.    Amendment  1  is                                                               
intended to  address a concern  expressed by the  Public Defender                                                               
Agency  (PDA) during  HB  343's last  hearing  that as  currently                                                               
written,  Section  1   might  have  a  chilling   effect  on  how                                                               
forthcoming a  child is  with the OCS  because he/she  would know                                                               
that the DJJ could obtain  information about him/her from the OCS                                                               
and  then   possibly  use  it   against  him/her  during   a  DJJ                                                               
adjudication.  In conclusion, she urged adoption of Amendment 1.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
1:14:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CATHY MUNOZ, Alaska  State Legislature, sponsor of                                                               
HB 343, expressed  concern with Amendment 1's  proposed change to                                                               
Section 1 of the  bill.  Under current law, the  OCS and the DJJ,                                                               
both agencies of  the DHSS, can [and do]  share information about                                                               
mutual clients, but because of  some misunderstanding, this point                                                               
needs to  be clarified  in statute  [as Sections 1  and 2  are in                                                               
part proposing to  do].  Amendment 1 could  result in information                                                               
[from the  OCS] necessary  to protect the  public and  to provide                                                               
help to  the child not being  disclosed [to the DJJ]  in a timely                                                               
fashion, because Amendment 1 also  stipulates that the notice and                                                               
opportunity to object be provided  not less than 10 business days                                                               
prior to the disclosure occurring.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:15:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
TONY  NEWMAN,  Social  Services   Program  Officer,  Division  of                                                               
Juvenile Justice (DJJ), Department  of Health and Social Services                                                               
(DHSS),   concurred   with   Representative   Munoz's   comments,                                                               
additionally predicting that Amendment  1 would negatively impact                                                               
the  ability of  the OCS  and the  DJJ to  work together  for the                                                               
betterment of Alaska's children.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
1:17:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
QUINLAN  STEINER,  Director,   Central  Office,  Public  Defender                                                               
Agency (PDA), Department of Administration  (DOA), in response to                                                               
a query, relayed that Amendment  1 does address his concern [with                                                               
Section 1  as touched on  earlier by Representative Holmes].   He                                                               
indicated  a  belief that  under  Amendment  1, the  court  would                                                               
become involved whenever  the child and/or his/her  GAL object to                                                               
the OCS disclosing information to the DJJ.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ, in  response  to a  query, reiterated  her                                                               
concern  that  the  adoption  of  Amendment  1  would  result  in                                                               
important information  not being  disclosed in a  timely fashion,                                                               
and that such  delay in disclosure could result in  the child not                                                               
receiving  appropriate  care or  necessary  services  as soon  as                                                               
he/she otherwise would.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MR.  NEWMAN  - pointing  out  that  the  OCS  and the  DJJ,  both                                                               
agencies of  the DHSS, work  together to promote and  enhance the                                                               
health and wellbeing of Alaska's  children, and offering examples                                                               
of such  collaboration - proffered  that delaying the  sharing of                                                               
information by the OCS for at  least 10 days as would be required                                                               
under Amendment 1  could also delay the DJJ's  efforts to provide                                                               
the child with necessary and appropriate assistance.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
1:25:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CRISTY  LAWTON, Director,  Central Office,  Office of  Children's                                                               
Services (OCS), Department of Health  and Social Services (DHSS),                                                               
explained that the  type of information the OCS  compiles about a                                                               
mutual  client   that  the  DJJ   wouldn't  already   have  isn't                                                               
information  that would  have an  impact on  a DJJ  adjudication;                                                               
instead, such  information is helpful  to the DJJ  in determining                                                               
what  type and  level of  service and  placement is  necessary to                                                               
assist  the  child.   Adoption  of  Amendment 1  could  therefore                                                               
result in  [at least a  10-day] delay  in the DJJ  being provided                                                               
the information  it needs  to appropriately help  the child.   In                                                               
response to  comments and  a question,  she mentioned  that under                                                               
the Alaska  Rules of Court,  Rule 9 of the  Child in Need  of Aid                                                               
Rules of Procedure  addresses a GAL's ability  to protect certain                                                               
records in [child in need of aid (CINA) proceedings].                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, in response  to comments and questions,                                                               
observed  that  Section  1  of  HB  343  is  proposing  to  amend                                                               
AS 47.10, the  statute governing the  OCS, and that Section  2 of                                                               
the bill  is proposing to  amend AS 47.12, the  statute governing                                                               
the DJJ.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:37:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
STACIE  KRALY,  Chief  Assistant  Attorney  General  -  Statewide                                                               
Section  Supervisor,  Human   Services  Section,  Civil  Division                                                               
(Juneau), Department of Law (DOL),  concurred, adding that at one                                                               
point  the OCS  and the  DJJ were  one agency  with a  disclosure                                                               
provision  that  referenced  department records,  and  when  that                                                               
agency  was  split into  two  separate  agencies due  to  federal                                                               
legislation  and  funding  issues,  the  resultant  two  separate                                                               
statutes  mirrored   each  other,   but  inadvertently   did  not                                                               
expressly  stipulate that  the  OCS and  the  DJJ would  continue                                                               
sharing information.   Sections 1 and 2 of the  bill are intended                                                               
to  statutorily   clarify  that  point  because   currently  some                                                               
misunderstanding exists.   Section 1, addressing  the OCS, refers                                                               
to the  DJJ in  its proposed AS  47.10.093(b)(15) via  the words,                                                               
"agency ...  responsible for delinquent  minors"; and  Section 2,                                                       
addressing  the  DJJ,  refers  to  the OCS  in  its  proposed  AS                                                               
47.12.310(b)(2)(M)  via the  words, "agency  ... responsible  for                                                       
child protection services".  Furthermore,  the wording in both of                                                           
those provisions - "a state or  municipal agency of this state or                                                           
another  jurisdiction" -  was specifically  included in  order to                                                           
allow  the  sharing  of  information  with  sister  OCS  and  DJJ                                                               
agencies  in other  jurisdictions.    She acknowledged,  however,                                                               
that  perhaps  the   words,  "who  is"  ought  to   be  added  to                                                           
Section 1's  proposed  AS  47.10.093(b)(15) and  to  Section  2's                                                               
proposed   AS   47.12.310(b)(2)(M)   just   before   the   words,                                                               
"responsible for".                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER, characterizing  HB  343 as  a good  bill,                                                               
said  he  opposes  Amendment  1   because  he  didn't  think  the                                                               
legislature wants  there to be [at  least] a 10-day delay  in the                                                               
DJJ's being  provided information by the  OCS.  He added  that he                                                               
is still uncomfortable with [Section  1 and 2's] inclusion of the                                                               
wording, "or another jurisdiction", however.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS.  KRALY,  in  response  to  other  questions,  indicated  that                                                               
because  some misunderstanding  exists regarding  the ability  of                                                               
the OCS  and the DJJ  to share information about  mutual clients,                                                               
the  statutes   themselves  still   need  to  be   clarified,  as                                                               
Sections 1 and 2  of HB 343 are proposing to  do, regardless that                                                               
subsection (b)(3)(F) of  the aforementioned Rule  9 of  the Child                                                               
in Need of Aid Rules of  Procedure addresses a GAL's authority to                                                               
[waive or claim] the psychotherapist-patient  privilege in a CINA                                                               
proceeding.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
1:50:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   HOLMES  said   she's  very   uncomfortable  with                                                               
Section 1   as  currently   written,   but   is  unsure   whether                                                               
Amendment 1 would address her concern.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES therefore withdrew Amendment 1.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER  referred  to   a  proposed  amendment  in                                                               
members'  packets labeled  27-LS1394\M.3,  Mischel, 3/27/12,  and                                                               
indicated that he would not  be offering that proposed amendment,                                                               
which read:                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     Page 5, lines 18 - 22:                                                                                                     
          Delete all material.                                                                                                  
          Insert "the minor has entered a guilty plea to a                                                                      
     delinquent   act  contained   in  a   petition  seeking                                                                    
     adjudication  of  the minor  as  a  delinquent for  the                                                                    
     offense or  has been adjudicated delinquent  by a court                                                                    
     for the offense."                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
1:53:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  made  a  motion  to  adopt  Conceptual                                                               
Amendment  3,  labeled  27-LS1394\M.4,  Mischel,  3/28/12,  which                                                               
read:                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Page 5, line 17, following "if":                                                                                           
          Insert "a court has adjudicated the minor as a                                                                        
       delinquent for an offense contained in a petition                                                                        
     seeking adjudication of the minor as a delinquent for                                                                      
     the offense."                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Page 5, lines 18 - 22:                                                                                                     
          Delete all material.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER objected.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  - expressing  disfavor with  the actual                                                               
wording of Conceptual  Amendment 3 - explained  that it addresses                                                               
Section 4's  proposed AS  47.12.315(b)(3), which  stipulates that                                                               
for certain  minors alleged to  have committed  certain offenses,                                                               
certain  information may  be  disclosed to  the  public only  if,                                                               
after  a petition  has been  filed and  the particular  minor has                                                               
been  arraigned,   a  finding  of  probable   cause  that  he/she                                                               
committed  the alleged  offense has  been entered  by the  court.                                                               
The  concern   that's  arisen  with   regard  to   that  proposed                                                               
subsection (b)(3) as currently written  is that information about                                                               
such a  minor could  be disclosed  to the  public even  if he/she                                                               
isn't  subsequently   adjudicated  delinquent  for   the  alleged                                                               
offense.  Any  such disclosure should only occur if  the minor is                                                               
so adjudicated, he opined, but  again expressed disfavor with the                                                               
actual wording of Conceptual Amendment 3.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
1:55:53 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ  - mentioning  that she  supports Conceptual                                                               
Amendment  3  -  observed  that  another  proposed  amendment  in                                                               
members' packets also addresses that  provision of Section 4, and                                                               
ventured  that  perhaps  that   other  proposed  amendment  might                                                               
alleviate members'  concerns with Section 4  as currently written                                                               
in a much more straightforward  fashion; that proposed amendment,                                                               
labeled 27-LS1394\M.5,  Mischel, 3/28/12, [and later  referred to                                                               
as Conceptual Amendment 4,] read:                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Page 5, line 17, following "if":                                                                                           
          Insert "a court has entered a judgment that the                                                                       
     minor is delinquent."                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     Page 5, lines 18 - 22:                                                                                                     
          Delete all material.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRUENBERG   questioned  whether   the   wording,                                                               
"entered a  judgment" was  the correct  term of  art to  use with                                                               
regard to a DJJ adjudication.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR.  NEWMAN  suggested  that  the  language  to  be  inserted  by                                                               
[Conceptual  Amendment  4]  should  instead read,  "a  court  has                                                               
entered a finding that the minor is delinquent."                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG withdrew Conceptual Amendment 3.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
1:57:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  then made a motion  to adopt Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 4 [text provided previously].                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER objected.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ, in response  to a query, suggested amending                                                               
Conceptual  Amendment 4  such that  the  language being  inserted                                                               
would instead read,  "a court has entered  a finding adjudicating                                                               
the minor as a delinquent."                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  made  a  motion  to  amend  Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 4 [as suggested by  Representative Munoz].  There being                                                               
no objection, Conceptual Amendment 4 was so amended.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER removed  his  objection to  the motion  to                                                               
adopt Conceptual Amendment 4.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR  THOMPSON,  after ascertaining  that  there  were  no                                                               
further  objections, announced  that Conceptual  Amendment 4,  as                                                               
amended, was adopted.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:59:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR THOMPSON  - referring  to the  earlier suggestion  by                                                               
Ms. Kraly regarding a possible change to  Sections 1 and 2 - made                                                               
a motion to adopt Conceptual Amendment  5, to add the words, "who                                                           
is" after  the word,  "jurisdiction" on  page 3,  line 2,  and on                                                       
page 4, line 18.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER objected  for the  purpose of  discussion,                                                               
and expressed favor with Conceptual Amendment 5.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  noted  that  the  drafter  would  have                                                               
leeway to use the most appropriate wording.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER removed his objection to the motion.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR  THOMPSON  ascertained  that there  were  no  further                                                               
objections,  and  announced  that   Conceptual  Amendment  5  was                                                               
adopted.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   HOLMES,  in   response  to   comments  regarding                                                               
withdrawn Amendment 1,  indicated that she would  be objecting to                                                               
moving HB  343 from committee because  [the PDA's aforementioned]                                                               
concern  with Section  1's proposed  AS 47.10.093(b)(15)  has not                                                               
yet been addressed to her satisfaction.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ,  in response to a  question, reiterated her                                                               
disfavor with withdrawn Amendment 1,  opining that it would place                                                               
a tremendous burden on the DJJ and the OCS.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR  THOMPSON noted that  HB 343 had no  further committee                                                               
referrals.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
2:10:41 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report  CSHB 343(HSS), as amended,                                                               
out  of   committee  with  individual  recommendations   and  the                                                               
accompanying fiscal notes.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES objected.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
The committee took a brief at-ease.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
A  roll  call vote  was  taken.   Representatives  Lynn,  Keller,                                                               
Pruitt, and Thompson  voted in favor of  reporting CSHB 343(HSS),                                                               
as  amended, out  of committee.    Representatives Gruenberg  and                                                               
Holmes voted against  it.  Therefore, CSHB  343(JUD) was reported                                                               
from the House Judiciary Standing Committee by a vote of 4-2.                                                                   

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB 343 Amendment M.1.pdf HJUD 3/28/2012 1:00:00 PM
HB 343
CSHB 343 Amend M.2.pdf HJUD 3/28/2012 1:00:00 PM
HB 343
CSHB 343 Amend M.3.pdf HJUD 3/28/2012 1:00:00 PM
HB 343
HB 343 Amendment M.4.pdf HJUD 3/28/2012 1:00:00 PM
HB 343
CSHB 343 Amend 5.pdf HJUD 3/28/2012 1:00:00 PM
HB 343