Legislature(2019 - 2020)BUTROVICH 205
02/18/2020 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
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 | |
| SB137 | |
| SB177 | |
| HB109 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 137 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 177 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 109 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 169 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 137-EXTEND BOARD OF PAROLE
3:31:36 PM
CHAIR REVAK announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 137,
"An Act extending the termination date of the Board of Parole;
and providing for an effective date."
3:32:05 PM
SENATOR PETER MICCICHE, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau,
Alaska, sponsor of SB 137, stated that he stepped forward to
sponsor this board extension because he recognizes the
importance of extending the Board of Parole.
3:32:55 PM
MICHAEL WILLIS, Intern, Senator Peter Micciche, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, introduced SB 137 paraphrasing the
following sponsor statement:
SB 137 extends the Board of Parole termination date of
June 30, 2020 until June 30, 2025.
Upon review of the recent Legislative Audit summary
and the full audit report of the Alaska Board of
Parole, it becomes apparent that in the opinion of our
auditors, the Board of Parole is serving the public's
interest by effectively evaluating prisoners'
likelihood of recidivism and whether a prisoner poses
a threat to the public.
The Board of Parole serves an important role in
guarding the safety of Alaskans by protecting the
general public through the determination of parole-
eligible prisoners' ability to become functioning
members of society. The significance of the board has
increased recently since the passage of HB 49 in 2019.
Despite the repeal of SB 91, there has been a dramatic
increase in the number of parole applicants due to a
requirement that all eligible prisoners be given a
hearing regardless of their own desire to apply for
parole. This situation has strained the Board of
Parole, but it has also revealed our state's reliance
on the work of the Board.
Auditors recommend the Legislature extend the board's
termination date five years, which is three years less
than the eight-year maximum allowed by statute. The
reduced extension allows for review of recent changes
to the board's statutes, impacts and responsibility
revisions related to HB 49 and the need for continued
oversight.
We respectfully request your support for this
important extension to the Alaska Board of Parole.
He noted that Kris Curtis and Jeffrey Edwards were available to
testify and answer questions.
CHAIR REVAK asked Ms. Curtis to review the audit results.
3:35:22 PM
KRIS CURTIS, Legislative Auditor, Legislative Audit Division,
Alaska State Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, reviewed the sunset
audit for the Board of Parole. She directed attention to the May
8, 2019 sunset audit of the Department of Corrections, Board of
Parole that may be found in members' packets. She noted that is
the last date of any field work so any changes to statutes
governing the board after that date are not included in this
audit. She reminded the members that the purpose of a sunset
audit is to determine whether a board or commission is serving
the public's interest and should be extended.
She directed attention to Exhibit 3 on page 2 that depicts a
table of the Schedule of Expenditures and Funding Sources for FY
16 through January 31, 2019. It shows that the expenditures for
this board were primarily for personal services, travel, and
office rental costs. She pointed out the large increase in
expenditures starting in FY 17 and explained that it reflects
the increase in the board's workload that resulted when Senate
Bill 91 passed and became effective in January 2017. Five new
positions were authorized to address the increase in the
workload. She noted that this is discussed in more detail in the
Background Information section that begins on page 5.
3:36:33 PM
MR. CURTIS advised that the first few pages of the Background
Information discuss the basics of parole. She directed attention
to the bottom of page 8 that discusses how Senate Bill 91
changed parole and how that impacted the Board of Parole. She
summarized the changes as follows:
Senate Bill 91 significantly changed the board's
statutes effective January 2017.
First, it expanded discretionary parole for all
offenders except unclassified or class A sex
offenders. Prior to SB 91, offenders who committed
their first class B felony or up to their second class
C felony were eligible for discretionary parole after
serving 25 percent of their sentences. Post SB 91,
generally offenders who committed any number of A, B,
or C felonies were eligible for discretionary parole
after serving a quarter of their sentences.
Secondly, SB 91 removed the discretionary parole
application requirement. Prior to SB 91, prisoners
initiated the parole process by submitting an
application for parole and not all eligible prisoners
submitted applications. SB 91 removed the application
requirement from state law, which changed how the
board approached discretionary parole hearings.
Thirdly, SB 91 shortened the technical revocation
hearing timeline.
3:38:01 PM
MS. CURTIS directed attention to the Report Conclusions on page
11. She paraphrased the following excerpts:
The audit concluded that the board responded in an
effective and efficient manner to significant changes
in parole laws. During the audit period, the board
conducted meetings, made parole decisions, set parole
conditions, and held revocation hearings in accordance
with state law.
[In accordance with AS 44.66.010(a)(2), the board is
scheduled to terminate June 30, 2020.] We recommend
the legislature extend the board's termination date
five years to June 30, 2025, which is three years less
than the eight year maximum allowed for in statute.
The reduced extension is mainly in acknowledgment of
recent changes to the board's statutes as well as
anticipated changes and the need for continued
oversight.
3:38:37 PM
MS. CURTIS directed attention to Exhibits 5, 6, and 7 starting
on page 12. These tables show the significant increase in
discretionary parole hearings in 2017 and 2018, the number of
parole hearing no-shows from 2015 through 2018, and the
revocation parole hearings for that same timeframe. She
paraphrased the following Report Conclusions:
The increase in discretionary parole hearings, as
shown in Exhibit 5, included a significant number of
hearings that prisoners did not attend (no-shows). No-
shows were the result of SB 91 eliminating the
discretionary parole application process and mandating
that hearings be held for all eligible prisoners
regardless of whether a prisoner wanted discretionary
parole. According to the board's executive director,
prisoners may not want discretionary parole for
various reasons including not willing to sign parole
conditions and/or wanting to complete a sentence and
leave with no parole conditions.
Initially, parole officers and the board compiled
parole packets and held hearings for no-shows in the
same manner as conducted for prisoners who attended
the hearings. This was not an effective use of
resources given that parole is not granted if a
prisoner does not attend the parole hearing. The board
recognized the inefficiency and changed the procedures
in November 2017. The new procedures require
institutional parole officers to complete condensed
parole packets (does not include release plans or
parole conditions) for offenders that do not want
discretionary parole and the board holds an
abbreviated hearing. As shown in Exhibit 6, no-shows
represented 21 percent of discretionary parole
hearings in 2017 and 29 percent in 2018.
According to board staff, the increase in
discretionary parole hearings in 2017 led to an
increased number of revocation hearings in 2017 (see
Exhibit 7). This increase in workload was offset in
2018 by the use of an administrative sanction and
incentive program (AS 33.05.020(g)) that allowed
probation officers to impose sanctions without a
hearing for the most common technical violations based
on a decision-making guide created by Department of
Corrections management.
The board effectively coped with the increase in
parole and revocation hearings by traveling to each
correctional facility four times per year instead of
two. The board also hired five new staff positions to
address the increase in workload. The positions
included one criminal justice technician, one hearing
officer IV, and three hearing officer IIIs.
3:41:21 PM
MS. CURTIS turned to the recommendations for improvement,
starting on page 18, that were part of the audit. She
highlighted that the reason for the reduced extension is solely
because the board statutes continue to change and she believes
increased oversight is prudent during this period. She discussed
the following recommendations:
Recommendation No. 1: The board's executive director
should improve procedures to ensure final revocation
hearings are performed timely.
The audit found that 16 percent of the revocation
hearings tested were not performed within 120 days of
the parolee's arrest. The late hearings were between
five and 12 days late.
Recommendation No. 2: The board's executive director
should work with DOC's commissioner to improve the
quality of telephonic hearings.
The audit identified poor quality telephone systems at
four of 13 correctional facilities, including Yukon
Kuskokwim Correctional Center, Wildwood Correctional
Complex, Fairbanks Correctional Center, and Hiland
Mountain Correctional Center. These facilities
accounted for 495 (14 percent) of the parole and
revocation hearings from calendar years 2015 through
11
2018.
Recommendation No. 3: The board's executive director
should take steps to ensure regulations are properly
updated.
The audit identified two sections of regulations were
not properly updated [due to human error].
Recommendation No. 4: DOC's [Division of
Administrative Services] director should take steps to
ensure [the Alaska Correctional Management System]
complies with State information technology security
standards and national best practices.
MS. CURTIS advised that the findings leading to Recommendation
No. 4 were communicated to management in a separate,
confidential letter. They were not included in the audit report
to prevent the weaknesses from being exploited.
3:43:07 PM
MS. CURTIS directed attention to the responses to the audit
report, starting on page 33. The Department of Corrections
commissioner agreed with the four findings and stated that the
department was moving forward with corrective action within the
constraints of its budget. Starting on page 35, the chair of the
Parole Board concurred with the three recommendations directed
at the board and described the planned corrective actions.
CHAIR REVAK asked if there were committee questions.
3:43:47 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked about the timeline between Senate Bill
91, Senate Bill 54, and Senate Bill 49 and whether the rules and
regulations for those pieces of legislation had been
promulgated. He further asked if she anticipates revisiting
these matters during the next audit in five years.
MS. CURTIS responded that there were changes to the parole
statutes the year after Senate Bill 91 passed. There were also
significant statutory changes after May 2019 that this audit did
not review.
CHAIR REVAK noted who was available to answer questions.
3:45:12 PM
SENATOR WILSON expressed interest in asking the Department of
Law representative a question.
3:45:19 PM
At ease
3:45:45 PM
CHAIR REVAK reconvened the meeting and discerned there were no
further questions. He opened and closed public testimony on SB
137 and encouraged the public to submit written testimony to
ssta@akleg.gov. He noted that the fiscal note attached to the
bill was zero.
CHAIR REVAK stated that he would hold SB 137 in committee for
future consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 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 2.6.2020.pdf |
SFIN 3/11/2020 9:00:00 AM SSTA 2/18/2020 3:30:00 PM |
|
| SB 177- Sectional Analysis 2.17.20.pdf |
SSTA 2/18/2020 3:30:00 PM |
SB 177 |
| SB 177-Sponsor Statement 2.6.20.pdf |
SSTA 2/18/2020 3:30:00 PM |
SB 177 |
| HB 109 Statement of Change version M to K 2.6.2020.pdf |
SSTA 2/18/2020 3:30:00 PM |
HB 109 |
| HB 109 Statement of Change version A to M 2.6.2020.pdf |
SSTA 2/18/2020 3:30:00 PM |
HB 109 |