Legislature(1993 - 1994)
01/29/1993 09:02 AM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
JOINT SENATE AND HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
January 29, 1993
9:02 a.m.
TAPE HFC 93-14, Side 1, #000 - end.
TAPE HFC 93-14, Side 2, #000 - end.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Pearce called the Joint House and Senate Finance
Committee meeting to order at 9:02 a.m. in the Senate Fiance
Committee Room, State Capitol Building.
PRESENT
HOUSE MEMBERS SENATE MEMBERS
Co-Chair Larson Co-Chair Pearce
Vice-Chair Hanley Co-Chair Frank
Representative Brown Senator Kelly
Representative Foster Senator Rieger
Representative Hoffman
Representative Grussendorf
Representative Parnell
Representative Therriault
The following Senate and House Finance members were not
present: Senator Sharp, Senator Kerttula, Senator Jacko,
Co-Chair MacLean and Representative Martin and
Representative Navarre.
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Ulmer; Senator Lincoln; Senator Adams; Mike
Greany, Director, Legislative Finance Division; Lloyd G.
Rupp, Commissioner Designee, Department of Corrections;
Charles Cole, Attorney General, Department of Law; Bruce
Botelho, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law;
William Cotton, Executive Director, Alaska Judicial Council;
James V. Gould, Chair, Alaska Sentencing Commission; Philip
R. Volland, Vice-Chair, Hon. Beverly W. Cutler, Alaska
Sentencing Commission; JoAnn Holmes, Alaska Sentencing
Commission; Hon. Warren W. Matthews, Alaska Sentencing
Commission; Gigi Pilcher, Alaska Sentencing Commission;
Duane S. Udland, Alaska Sentencing Commission; Dean J.
Guaneli, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division,
Department of Law; Alan McKelvie, Staff, Alaska Sentencing
Commission.
SUMMARY INFORMATION
1
PRESENTATION BY THE ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION
Co-Chair Pearce noted that Senator Frank and Representative
Ulmer are members of the Alaska Sentencing Commission.
The Alaska Sentencing Commission provided members with
"Recommendations Concerning Statutory Changes and Agency
Budgets" (Attachment 1). The Commission also provided
members with "Recommendations Affecting Criminal Justice
Agencies" (Attachment 2).
JAMES GOULD, CHAIR, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION noted that
the Commission began by considering whether there should be
major changes in the State's sentencing laws, processes and
structures. The Alaska Sentencing Commission concluded that
the structure of the sentencing system in the State of
Alaska is good. Suggestions were made to the Commission by
personnel within the Department of Corrections that some
inmates could be safely released. The Commission began to
look at alternative punishments or sanctions. The
Commission's recommendations do not include specific
legislation.
DEAN J. GUANELI, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CRIMINAL
DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW discussed the Commission's
recommendation that the Alaska criminal justice system
increase the use of alternative punishments. He gave
examples of alternative sanctions; halfway house, community
residential centers (CRC), substance abuse centers and day
reporting centers. He emphasized the need to sufficiently
fund alternative sanctions. He stressed the need to support
rehabilitative programs within the Department of
Corrections. He interjected that substance abuse should be
the primary rehabilitative program. He asserted that the
best investment the State of Alaska can make is in substance
abuse programs. He stressed that programs must be designed
to meet the needs of Native offenders.
Mr. Guaneli emphasized that most Alaskan prisoners will
eventually be released. Studies show that prison has
harmful affects on individuals unless offenders are given
rehabilitative treatment. He noted that rehabilitative
programs are among the first to receive budget cuts. He
underscored the long term detrimental affects of cuts to
rehabilitation.
Mr. Guaneli stated that the Alaska Sentencing Commission
also recommends the continuation and support of the Village
Public Safety Officer (VPSO) program. He emphasized that
the VPSO program is an effective law enforcement presence in
villages. He noted that continuation of the VPSO program
would not result in significant new expenditures.
2
Mr. Guaneli stressed that early and effective intervention
with juvenile offenders is crucial. He suggested support
for juvenile intervention programs in the Department of
Health and Social Service's budget.
Mr. Guaneli counseled that the Alaska Judicial Council
produce a guide of presumptive sentencing for the general
public.
Mr. Guaneli briefly discussed data collection. He noted the
need for coordinated data collection. Representative Brown
asked if a specific plan for a coordinated data base has
been designed. Mr. Guaneli replied that a specific plan has
been developed.
Representative Ulmer spoke about alternatives to
incarceration. She began with a brief history of the Alaska
Sentencing Commission's creation. She noted that the
Legislature has been concerned about prison overcrowding and
the high cost of prisons in the State of Alaska. She
stressed that the Alaska Sentencing Commission began by
looking at sentence length and prison population. She
concluded that there is no quick fix or easy answer. The
Commission concluded that a small percentage of the prison
population could be in an alternative punishment setting.
Representative Ulmer noted that alternative punishment
programs are costly but emphasized that they are less costly
than hard prison beds. A hard prison bed in the State of
Alaska costs approximately $100 dollars a day. A community
correctional facility (CRC) bed costs $50 dollars a day.
Intensive supervision by parole officers cost approximately
$20 - $30 dollars a day. She noted that other programs such
as alcohol treatment, community service and electron
monitoring are less expensive. She stressed that 10 of the
12 prisons in the State of Alaska are at maximum capacity.
Representative Ulmer emphasized that the State cannot remain
above the prison ratio caps instituted by the Cleary
settlement. The State is currently in contempt of court.
She stressed that if the State does not find alternatives,
or release prisoners mandatory releases could be ordered by
the court. She asserted that alternative sanctions will
avoid additional prison construction and result in a long-
term savings to the State.
Representative Ulmer discussed front versus back end
alternative sanctions. She clarified that front end
alternative sanctions are instigated by the judge at the
time of sentencing. Back end alternative sanctions can be
instituted by the Department of Corrections once the
3
prisoner is in custody. She noted that in the State of
Alaska judges have restricted ability in terms of front end
sanctions. She emphasized that the Alaska Sentencing
Commission is recommending that judges have more flexibility
in placing front end sanctions.
DUANE S. UPLAND, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION spoke on the
perception that alternative sanctions will indicate that the
State of Alaska is soft on crime. He noted that law
enforcement agencies generally support long prison terms.
He stressed the importance of jail time for a prisoner. He
emphasized that jail time is not the only way to sanction
adverse behavior. He underscored the importance of the
integration of prisoners back into society. He spoke in
support of programs at the end of sentence to integrate
prisoners back into society.
Senator Rieger noted that other industrial countries do not
have the same prison population problems as the United
States. He asked if the Commission had researched how other
countries handle prison populations. Representative Ulmer
replied that their data shows a greater rate of
incarceration in American than other industrial countries.
The United States of America is surpassed only by the
Republic of South Africa in the rate of incarceration. She
noted that the sanction of choice in Europe is fines.
Representative Ulmer discussed day fines. Day fines are a
percentage of the daily income of a defendant. The
Commission recommends the increased use of day fines.
Representative Brown referred to page 8, section 2,
Attachment 2. She asked if the Alaska Sentencing Commission
recommends that persons in the community correction system
pay for the cost of their sanctions. Representative Ulmer
noted that the Gastineau shelter in Juneau requires, that
those that have the ability to pay their board and room.
She emphasized that there is no statutory prohibition for
reimbursement of cost by individuals in the community
corrections system.
Representative Grussendorf referred to page 7, items 19 and
20, Attachment 1. He asked if the Alaska Sentencing
Commission has proposals for effective intervention for
juvenile offenders. Representative Ulmer replied that the
Commission did not concentrate on the juvenile system. The
juvenile system is not under the Department of Corrections.
JOANN HOLMES, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION addressed
recommendations by the Alaska Sentencing Commission
concerning Alaskan Natives. She noted that Natives
constitute 32 percent of the State's inmate population.
4
Natives compose 16 percent of the entire population. Forty-
one percent of Natives incarcerated are interned due to
probation or parole violations. She stressed that Alaskan
Natives are not receiving appropriate treatment or probation
follow-up.
Ms. Holmes stressed that the Commission recognizes the
connection between alcohol abuse and crime in Alaska. The
Commission's first recommendation, in regards to Native
offenders, is that the Department of Corrections develop
alcohol treatment programs sensitive to the needs of Native
offenders. She pointed out that Natives are not generally
violent while incarcerated.
GIGI PILCHER, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION stressed that
village councils, village courts and tribal courts can be
used to resolve conflicts. The Commission recommends that
the State of Alaska cooperate with tribal and village boards
and councils.
Ms. Pilcher stressed that VPSO officers have often been the
only ones that victims can consult for assistance and help.
She noted that the behavioral health aide program has added
another alternative.
Ms. Pilcher observed that the Alaska Juvenile Justice
Advisory Board will be reporting to the Governor on juvenile
justice in the State of Alaska. She stressed that many of
the Commission's recommendations for adult offenders have
been instigated for juvenile offenders in other states.
Co-Chair Pearce asked what sanctions are commonly used by
tribal courts. Ms. Holmes gave examples of sanctions used
by the Metlakatla tribal council. She noted that severe
offenses result in expulsion from the community.
Restitution, public apologies and community service are also
used as sanctions.
Mr. Gould noted that presumptive sentencing was initiated in
1978, when the criminal code was revised. Presumptive
sentencing was designed to prevent parole eligibility for
second or subsequent felonies. The Legislature expanded
non-parole eligibility to some first offenses.
HONORABLE WARREN W. MATTHEW, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION
reiterated that 10 of 12 of the State's prisons are at
emergency capacity. He emphasized that the population of
the State of Alaska is growing. He stressed that crime
increases proportionally to population growth. He asserted
that the State must start building new prisons now or change
its sentencing structure.
5
Hon. Warren W. Matthews suggested that parole eligibility be
granted for class A first offenders, except for manslaughter
and sex offenders. The Commission recommends that these
prisoners must first serve at least half of their sentence
time. If the prisoner has be directed by the court to
receive alcohol rehabilitation or other rehabilitation the
prisoner must first complete the program or go directly into
a program upon release. The Commission estimates that this
recommendation would result in a savings to the State of
approximately $600.0 -$700.0 thousand dollars a year. He
felt that the public safety risk would be minimal. He noted
that the rate of repeated offense among those released on a
discretionary parole basis is 3 percent for felonies the
first year and an additional 3 percent for misdemeanors.
Hon. Warren W. Matthews stated that the Commission
recommends a system of parole for terminally ill prisoners.
He noted that AIDS and an aging prison population will
result in increased medical costs.
HONORABLE BEVERLY W. CUTLER, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION
spoke on the expansion of discretionary parole. The
Commission recommends a statutory change to expand immunity
for the State of Alaska and state employees relating to
parole, probation or release of offenders. She discussed
the Neakok case which the State of Alaska settled for $5
million dollars. The Commission emphasizes that this
"should help individual officers who currently take an
unnecessarily conservative approach to release because of
concerns about personal or departmental liability"
(Attachment 1).
Co-Chair Larson asked if the Governor could not pardon or
parole terminally ill prisoners. Hon. Warren W. Matthews
replied that he does have the power to parole or pardon
prisoners.
Co-Chair Larson asked what action could be taken under the
Cleary settlement if state prisons remain at over capacity.
Hon. Warren W. Matthews stated that the most drastic action
is that the courts could order the Department of Corrections
to release prisoners because of overcrowding. Hon. Beverly
Cutler clarified that prison overcrowding would not be a
proper factor in establishing sentencing. She noted that
the situation results in the question of whether a early
release for a prisoner serving a 15 year sentence should be
allowed to make room for an offender serving a 90 day
sentence. She noted that an alternative would be for the 90
day prisoner to enter an alternative sanction situation or
for prisoners approaching release to be released early into
a half way house or other situation.
6
Co-Chair Larson noted that prison costs are increased by
allowing rooms with television, access to law libraries,
access to families and other privileges.
Representative Parnell asked if precedents exist in other
states to allow discretionary function exceptions to apply
to probation officers' decisions.
(Tape Change, HFC 93-14, Side 2)
Hon. Beverly Cutler felt that the precedent may exist in the
State of Alaska. She added that there are not enough facts
to ascertain the answer. She noted that the law states that
if a governmental officer is acting in his or her
discretionary capacity that they are immune from that
decision. Hon. Warren W. Matthews added that no state has
been able to define consistently or well what is a
discretionary action. He suggested that some states have
detailed specific actions that should or should not be the
subject of a law suit.
Representative Therriault observed that Alaska Statutes,
Sec. 28.35.030 (c), require that, "not less than 72
consecutive hours and a fine of not less than $250 dollars"
be impossed upon DWI offenders. He noted that a CRC costs
$60 dollars a day. He asked if DWI offenders should be
paying the cost of their incarceration. He noted that the
statute further states that, "The execution of sentence may
not be suspended nor may probation be granted except on
condition that the minimum imprisonment provided in this
section is served." He discussed day fines. He questioned
if CRC units could be paid for through day fines. Hon.
Beverly Cutler emphasized that the Commission would like to
see the concept of day fines studied further and applied.
Hon. Warren W. Matthews added that the Commission is not
recommending that DWI jail fines be substituted for jail
time. Representative Therriault discussed community work
service with Hon. Warren W. Matthews.
Representative Foster spoke on village self determination.
He referred to the Commission's recommendation on page 4,
item 3, Attachment 2. In discussing tribal courts, village
courts and village councils the Commission states that,
"State criminal justice agencies should work more closely
with such local organizations to exchange sentencing
information and to coordinate enforcement of probation
conditions." He asked if the Commission recommends a
broader range of authority than villages other than
Metlakatla could use in treating their residents. Hon.
Beverly Cutler responded that the Commission would promote a
broader ranger of authority consistent with peaceful
coexistence with tribal courts.
7
Representative Foster referred to page 5, item 5, Attachment
2, regarding Native hire. He asked for statistics on Native
employees within the correction system. Statistics were not
available.
Senator Rieger asked if the Commission is recommending
legislation which addresses specific actions as opposed to
general qualitative standards. Hon. Warren W. Matthews
stated that, as a model, California law does not give
specific examples of negligence. California law states that
the parole board and state are immune to suits resulting
from parole violations. Hon. Beverly Cutler further
discussed the Neakok case. She emphasized that the State of
Alaska did not try the case.
PHILIP R. VOLLAND, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION discussed
general recommendations by the Alaska Sentencing Commission.
He noted the importance of action. He stressed that
declining revenues and increased defendant population are on
a collision course. He asserted that the State of Alaska
must plan for the impact of five years from now when the
situation will most likely be worse. He underscored the
need for coordination and creativity by criminal justice
agencies.
Mr. Volland accentuated that the impact of actions need to
be considered for their long term effect. He asked the
Legislature to keep in mind the repercussions on the
criminal justice system of statutory changes.
LLOYD G. RUPP, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
addressed the issue of cost benefits. He stressed that the
Legislature has the opportunity to invent the future of the
State of Alaska. He observed that it costs the State of
Alaska over $100.0 thousand dollars to construct a hard bed.
Existing projections indicate the need for between 500 - 700
hard beds by 1996.
Commissioner Rupp discussed problems and ramifications of
overcrowding of prison populations. He discussed the
problem of parole officers in determining when technical
parole violations should result in incarceration. He noted
that viable alternatives exist as a substitute to reentering
an expensive corrections environment. He noted that parole
officers are reluctant to utilize alternatives for fear of
litigation.
Commissioner Rupp commented on the possibility of attaching
permanent fund dividend payments of CRC offenders to pay for
their maintenance.
8
Co-Chair Larson interjected that the current economy of the
State of Alaska contributes to the overcrowding of the
state's prisons. Mr. Volland agreed that there is a
correlation between criminal offenders and the unemployment
rate.
Senator Lincoln observed that similar recommendations have
been brought before past Legislatures by other Commissions
and advisory groups. She emphasized that VPSO's do not
exist in every rural community. She spoke in support of the
behavioral health aide program. She stressed the need for
preventive programs. She emphasized that the majority of
Native offenders are easy to control and nonviolent. She
concluded that many Native offenders would benefit from
alternative sanctions, such as spirit camps or community
service. She stressed that abused children are more likely
to be offenders. She underscored the importance of
employment. She asked how the Department of Corrections is
coordinating with other agencies.
Commissioner Rupp agreed with Senator Lincoln concerning the
importance of prevention programs. He referred to Operation
Hope. He noted that five different state agencies are
involved.
WILLIAM COTTON, DIRECTOR, ALASKA JUDICIAL COUNCIL spoke on
data collection. He noted that there has been a lack of
information from which the Alaska Sentencing Commission
could base policy decisions. He observed that the
Department of Corrections, Department of Public Safety,
Alaska Court System and Department of Law have data
collection systems. He stressed that each agency
concentrates on the need of their agency. He interjected
that the Alaska Judicial Council is concentrating on
compiling a data system that will allow policy making. He
discussed the need of data coordination between agencies.
Mr. Cotton stated that the Alaska Sentencing Commission
recommends that the computer programmer under the Alaska
Judicial Council be retained to continue development of a
comprehensive data base. The position costs $90.0 thousand
dollars per year.
Representative Brown expressed her support for a coordinated
data base. She suggested that the Legislature mandate a
single core entry approach. She observed that once separate
incompatible systems are running the task of reconciling the
systems is more difficult and expensive. She noted that the
Department of Corrections and Alaska Court System are
beginning their data systems.
9
Representative Brown asked why the Commission has
recommended that the Alaska Judicial Council maintain a
separate data base. She expressed her preference for a
single data base used by all the agencies. Mr. Cotton
replied that the agencies would focus on their individual
needs and not the system as a whole.
Representative Brown recommended that the House Finance
Committee insist that there is a unified plan before further
development of data bases within agencies.
ALAN MCKELVIE, STAFF, ALASKA JUDICIAL COUNCIL clarified, in
response to a question by Senator Rieger, that a personal
computer with 500 megabytes is sufficient for maintaining
the data base.
Members discussed the need to act on the recommendations of
the Alaska Sentencing Commission. Senator Kelly spoke in
support of the recommendations of the Alaska Sentencing
Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 10:35 a.m.
10
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|