Legislature(2019 - 2020)ADAMS ROOM 519

05/06/2019 09:00 AM 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.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as
Download Video part 1. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ HB 68 LABOR STDRS/SAFETY; WORKER COMPENSATION TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
+ HB 75 INTERNET FOR SCHOOLS; FUNDING TELECONFERENCED
<Bill Hearing Canceled>
-- Public Testimony --
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
+= HB 49 CRIMES; SENTENCING;MENT. ILLNESS;EVIDENCE TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSHB 49(FIN) Out of Committee
                   HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE                                                                                      
                         May 6, 2019                                                                                            
                          9:01 a.m.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
9:01:32 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CALL TO ORDER                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson called the House Finance Committee meeting                                                                      
to order at 9:01 a.m.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Neal Foster, Co-Chair                                                                                            
Representative Tammie Wilson, Co-Chair                                                                                          
Representative Jennifer Johnston, Vice-Chair                                                                                    
Representative Dan Ortiz, Vice-Chair                                                                                            
Representative Ben Carpenter                                                                                                    
Representative Andy Josephson                                                                                                   
Representative Gary Knopp                                                                                                       
Representative Bart LeBon                                                                                                       
Representative Kelly Merrick                                                                                                    
Representative Colleen Sullivan-Leonard                                                                                         
Representative Cathy Tilton                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
None                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
ALSO PRESENT                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Nancy  Meade, General  Counsel,  Alaska  Court System;  John                                                                    
Skidmore,  Director, Criminal  Division, Department  of Law;                                                                    
Grey Mitchell, Director,  Division of Workers' Compensation,                                                                    
Department    of    Labor   and    Workforce    Development;                                                                    
Representative Lance  Pruitt; Representative  David Eastman;                                                                    
Senator Lora Reinbold.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
SUMMARY                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
HB 49     CRIMES; SENTENCING;MENT. ILLNESS;EVIDENCE                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
          CSHB 49(FIN)  was REPORTED  out of  committee with                                                                    
          five  "do  pass"   recommendations,  five  "amend"                                                                    
          recommendations,   and  one   "no  recommendation"                                                                    
          recommendation;  and two  new fiscal  impact notes                                                                    
          from  the Department  of  Administration, two  new                                                                    
          fiscal  impact   notes  from  the   Department  of                                                                    
          Corrections,  four  new indeterminate  notes  from                                                                    
          the  Department  of  Corrections, one  new  fiscal                                                                    
          impact note  from the Alaska Judicial  System, one                                                                    
          new  fiscal impact  note  from  the Department  of                                                                    
          Public Safety,  and with one  previously published                                                                    
          zero impact  note: FN1  (DHS); and  one previously                                                                    
         published fiscal impact note: FN6 (LAW).                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
HB 68     LABOR STDRS/SAFETY; WORKER COMPENSATION                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
          HB 68 was HEARD and  HELD in committee for further                                                                    
          consideration.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson reviewed the agenda for the morning.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 49                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     "An  Act  relating  to   criminal  law  and  procedure;                                                                    
     relating   to   controlled  substances;   relating   to                                                                    
     probation; relating to  sentencing; relating to reports                                                                    
     of  involuntary  commitment;  amending Rule  6,  Alaska                                                                    
     Rules  of  Criminal  Procedure; and  providing  for  an                                                                    
     effective date."                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
9:01:32 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Johnston MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1, 31-                                                                             
GH1029\E.3 (Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Page 27, line 10:                                                                                                          
     Delete "or"                                                                                                                
     Insert "[OR]"                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Page 27, line 13:                                                                                                          
     Delete "VA, or VIA controlled substance."                                                                                  
     Insert "or VA[,OR VIA] controlled substance; or                                                                            
     (5)  under   circumstances  not  proscribed   under  AS                                                                    
     11.71.030(a)(3),  11.71.040(a)(3), 11.71.040(a)(4),  or                                                                    
     11.71.060(a)(2),  possesses any  amount  of a  schedule                                                                    
     VIA controlled substance."                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Johnston explained that the amendment modernized                                                                     
the states marijuana statutes.                                                                                                  
Representative Josephson asked  for further clarification of                                                                    
the amendment.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Wilson  offered  that the  amendment  brought  the                                                                    
statutes in line with the legalization initiative.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Johnston  added that the  language was  offered and                                                                    
vetted in the Senate.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Representative Foster WITHDREW his OBJECTION.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 1 was ADOPTED.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative  LeBon  MOVED  to   ADOPT  Amendment  2,  31-                                                                    
GH1029\E.4 (Marx/Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Page 32, line 29, following "convictions":                                                                                 
     Insert "and any pending criminal charges"                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative LeBon  indicated that the  amendment  simply                                                                     
added   pending criminal  charges   to the  factors a  judge                                                                    
could  consider during  the  pretrial  process. He  recalled                                                                    
testimony regarding  a revolving door of  arrest and release                                                                    
and hoped the amendment would rectify the problem.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair  Ortiz  asked  the sponsor  to  explain  how  the                                                                    
amendment would affect  the judicial system and  the role of                                                                    
judges.  Representative   LeBon  thought  that   adding  the                                                                    
language  would offer   a complete  picture  of any  issues                                                                     
that attributed to the process.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster withdrew his OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 2 was ADOPTED.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
9:05:19 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative  LeBon  MOVED  to   ADOPT  Amendment  3,  31-                                                                    
GH1029\E.5 (Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Page 33, line 4:                                                                                                           
     Delete "and"                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Page 33, line 6, following "community":                                                                                    
     Insert "; and                                                                                                              
     (12) the pretrial risk assessment provided by the                                                                          
     commissioner of corrections."                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Page 34, lines 6 - 7:                                                                                                      
     Delete all material.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative   LeBon    explained   the    amendment.   He                                                                    
communicated that the amendment  would add the pretrial risk                                                                    
assessment  tool  into  the  criteria  that  a  judge  shall                                                                    
consider   when  determining   conditions   of  release   in                                                                    
subsection (c),  deleting the language  that  the  court may                                                                    
consider the  pretrial risk assessment   on page 34  lines 6                                                                    
and 7. The assessment tool  was intended to help ensure that                                                                    
lowest  risk individuals  were released  pretrial to  reduce                                                                    
the  size of  the pretrial  prison population  and gave  the                                                                    
court system a standardized  approach when dealing with bail                                                                    
decisions.  The  tool  ensured  that  individuals  were  not                                                                    
unfairly discriminated against.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
9:06:08 AM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:08:00 AM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Josephson  was   trying  to  understand  the                                                                    
amendments   impact.  He  deduced  that  the  pretrial  risk                                                                    
assessment was given a  shall   standard that the court must                                                                    
consider and deleted the "may"  language. He understood that                                                                    
currently,  the   pretrial  risk  assessment  had   a  shall                                                                    
standard  and the  present  version of  HB  49 authorized  a                                                                    
 may posture and the amendment returned it to shall.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Representative  LeBon  replied   that  the  amendment  added                                                                    
criteria  to  the pretrial  risk  assessment  tool that  the                                                                    
judge   shall   consider  when  determining  conditions.  He                                                                    
ascertained  that reliance  on the  tool contributed  to the                                                                    
revolving  door   because  the  scoring  system   failed  to                                                                    
consider the  right  factors  like drug and  alcohol use and                                                                    
recent  arrests.  He  judged   that  someone  who  had  been                                                                    
arrested could be released quickly  because the prior arrest                                                                    
would not  be considered in  the current scoring  system. He                                                                    
hoped  the  amendment  would  end  the  revolving  door  and                                                                    
preempt pretrial release when necessary.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair  Ortiz  pointed  out that  the  language  stated,                                                                    
 shall consider versus shall adopt.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson  interjected that  the risk  assessment tool                                                                    
was a work  in progress. She explained  that the amendments                                                                     
use of  shall consider  left the  ultimate discretion  up to                                                                    
the judge.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carpenter  inquired about  the use  of "shall                                                                    
consider." He  wanted  to understand  the difference between                                                                    
 may consider   and  shall consider   and the impact  of the                                                                    
word  consider. Representative  LeBon  thought that   shall                                                                     
acted as  a must  and  may  left  it open  to consideration.                                                                    
Representative Carpenter  asked what  resulted with  the use                                                                    
of the word consider.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Wilson interjected  that  the word  was sending  a                                                                    
message  to the  courts regarding  the legislatures   wishes                                                                    
but how  it was interpreted  was up  to the courts.  She was                                                                    
unsure how to legislate the definition.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Representative LeBon  voiced that he wanted  to  tighten up                                                                     
the  statute  and  expand  the  consideration  for  pretrial                                                                    
factors to include prior or out of state records.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
9:12:56 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Sullivan-Leonard referenced  prior committee                                                                    
discussion  regarding  returning   discretion  back  to  the                                                                    
judges  and thought  that the  pretrial risk  assessment was                                                                    
part  of  the   correlation    to  provide  discretion.  She                                                                    
thought   may    provided  the  discretion.  She   asked  if                                                                    
Representative LeBon   would allow  a separate  amendment to                                                                    
change from shall to may.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson requested to hear from the Court System.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
9:13:58 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
NANCY MEADE, GENERAL COUNSEL,  ALASKA COURT SYSTEM, answered                                                                    
that the existing  statute on page 32, beginning  on line 22                                                                    
included all the factors that  the court shall consider when                                                                    
deciding   whether  a   person   could   be  released.   She                                                                    
communicated that  the court currently did  consider all the                                                                    
factors. She furthered that the  process meant the attorneys                                                                    
on both sides would  present information that was considered                                                                    
because the  statute mandated consideration of  the factors.                                                                    
She  explained that  the amendment  eliminated the  existing                                                                    
provision that  the risk assessment  was optional  and would                                                                    
include  the  risk  assessment  score that  as  one  of  the                                                                    
factors  for  consideration. Due  to  the  provision in  the                                                                    
current committee  substitute (CS), the court  was no longer                                                                    
bound by the risk assessment tool.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Representative Sullivan-Leonard  deduced that  the amendment                                                                    
was  unnecessary. She  thought that  discretion was  already                                                                    
available  in the  bill.  She asked  for  comment. Ms.  Mead                                                                    
cited page  34, lines  6 and 7,  subsection (f)  and related                                                                    
that without  the amendment subsection  (f) would  remain in                                                                    
the  bill.  She  detailed  that the  provision  offered  the                                                                    
choice  to the  court of  whether to  consider the  pretrial                                                                    
risk assessment by using the  word  may,.  The court was not                                                                    
bound by the  assessment and could ignore  it. The amendment                                                                    
did not bind  the court, but the court did  have to consider                                                                    
the risk assessment score.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
9:16:40 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Knopp  stated  that  because  of  the  shall                                                                    
consider language  mandating the courts to  employ the tool,                                                                    
he wondered  whether a  delay in receiving  the tool  was an                                                                    
issue.  He referenced  prior testimony  regarding delays  in                                                                    
receiving the  risk assessment. Ms. Mead  disclosed that the                                                                    
Pretrial  Enforcement  Division  (PED)  had  an   excellent                                                                     
track record of providing the  risk assessment to the courts                                                                    
for arraignments in a timely  manner. She was unaware of any                                                                    
delays.  Representative  Knopp  had  recalled  testimony  in                                                                    
recent  days  that  sometimes  the   tool  was  not  readily                                                                    
available but was unsure who the testifier was.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson reminded the committee  that the time period                                                                    
was changed in  the CS from the  24 hour period to  up to 48                                                                    
hours [the  amount of time  a person  could be held  in jail                                                                    
after  arrest].  She  maintained   that  the  change  should                                                                    
address the concern.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair  Johnston  remembered  that two  risk  assessment                                                                    
tools were in  use: pretrial and one used  by the Department                                                                    
of  Corrections (DOC).  She  recalled  that the  committees                                                                     
concern was related to how to  retain the data from the risk                                                                    
assessment  tool  to  make  the   tool  more  relevant.  She                                                                    
wondered whether  the amendment  was a way  to build  in the                                                                    
data  in order  to improve  the tool.  Ms. Mead  agreed that                                                                    
with  the CS  providing that  the court   may  consider  the                                                                    
assessment the data pertaining  to pretrial release relative                                                                    
to the assessment would be lost.  She judged that the use of                                                                    
the word  shall  in the  amendment ensured that the tool was                                                                    
considered, and the effect could be quantified.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Merrick spoke  in strong  opposition to  the                                                                    
amendment.  She  wanted  to eliminate  the  risk  assessment                                                                    
tool.   She   announced   that  returning   to   shall   was                                                                    
unacceptable.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative LeBon  provided wrap up on  the amendment. He                                                                    
emphasized that the  risk assessment tool would  be added to                                                                    
the list of factors to  be considered balanced against other                                                                    
factors utilizing the professional expertise of the judge.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
A roll call vote was taken  on the motion to adopt Amendment                                                                    
3.                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
IN FAVOR: Ortiz, Knopp, LeBon, Johnston, Foster, Wilson                                                                         
OPPOSED:   Merrick,  Sullivan-Leonard,   Tilton,  Carpenter,                                                                    
Josephson                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
The MOTION  PASSED (6/5). There being  NO further OBJECTION,                                                                    
Amendment 3 was ADOPTED.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
9:21:22 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative  LeBon  MOVED  to   ADOPT  Amendment  4,  31-                                                                    
GH1029\E.6 (Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Page 5 3, following line 21:                                                                                               
     2 Insert a new subsection to read:                                                                                         
     "(k)  In  establishing the  program  under  U) of  this                                                                    
     section,   the  commissioner   shall  approve   a  risk                                                                    
     assessment instrument that  is objective, standardized,                                                                    
     and developed  based on analysis of  empirical data and                                                                    
     risk  factors   relevant  to  pretrial   failure,  that                                                                    
     evaluates the  likelihood of  an offender's  failure to                                                                    
     appear  in court  and the  likelihood of  an offender's                                                                    
     rearrest  during  the  pretrial  period,  and  that  is                                                                    
     validated  on  the  state's  pretrial  population.  The                                                                    
     commissioner  shall  periodically   reassess  the  risk                                                                    
     assessment   instrument   for  its   effectiveness   in                                                                    
     determining the likelihood of  an offender's failure to                                                                    
     appear  in  court  or   rearrest  during  the  pretrial                                                                    
     period."                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Sullivan-Leonard    and   Co-Chair   Foster                                                                    
OBJECTED.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Representative  LeBon   stated  that  HB  49   proposed  the                                                                    
elimination of the PED and  integrated the divisions  duties                                                                    
within  probation   and  parole.  He  delineated   that  the                                                                    
provision added  the unintended consequence by  deleting the                                                                    
language in AS 33.07.020.  The language specified the design                                                                    
criteria for the pretrial risk  assessment tool and required                                                                    
that   the  criteria   was   objective,  standardized,   and                                                                    
developed  based  on  analysis  of  data  and  risk  factors                                                                    
relevant  to pretrial  failure. The  amendment carried  over                                                                    
the original language regarding  the objective and empirical                                                                    
design  of the  tool.  In addition,  the amendment  required                                                                    
that  the  commissioner  reassess the  tools   effectiveness                                                                    
periodically. The  provision ensured  that data  would still                                                                    
be  collected regarding  the effectiveness  of the  pretrial                                                                    
tool  and enable  the  tool to  become  more predictive  and                                                                    
reliable  for judges  when engaging  in  bail decisions.  He                                                                    
asked for the committees support.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
9:22:37 AM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:24:26 AM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Josephson stated  his  understanding of  the                                                                    
amendment. He  was trying  to locate  the language  in Title                                                                    
33.                                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
9:25:12 AM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:25:33 AM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson asked to hear from the Department of Law.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
JOHN  SKIDMORE, DIRECTOR,  CRIMINAL DIVISION,  DEPARTMENT OF                                                                    
LAW, directed  members to AS  33.07.020 subsection  (5) that                                                                    
contained the amendments language.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
9:26:05 AM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:31:52 AM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Wilson provided  a  comment  about the  amendment.                                                                    
She maintained  that the amendment was  merely attempting to                                                                    
build  a  risk  assessment instrument  that  was  objective,                                                                    
standardized, and  developed based on analysis  of empirical                                                                    
data  and risk  factors.  She read  the amendment  [included                                                                    
above].  She emphasized  the  commissioners  requirement  to                                                                    
reevaluate the  tool for   effectiveness in  determining the                                                                    
likelihood of  an offender's failure  to appear in  court or                                                                    
rearrest  during  the  pretrial   period.   She  pointed  to                                                                    
testimony regarding  pretrial releases where  the individual                                                                    
reoffended. She  noted that updated data  regarding the tool                                                                    
was  due   in  June   2019.  The  amendment   validated  the                                                                    
legislatures  concern regarding  the issues  importance. She                                                                    
supported the amendment.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
9:33:24 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster WITHDREW his OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
There being  NO further OBJECTION, Amendment  4 was ADOPTED.                                                                    
[Note:    Representative   Sullivan-Leonard    requested   a                                                                    
reconsideration of  Amendment 4  at 9:53 a.m.  The amendment                                                                    
was voted on and adopted (7/4).]                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative  LeBon  MOVED  to   ADOPT  Amendment  5,  31-                                                                    
GH1029\E.7 (Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Page 36, lines 13 - 22:                                                                                                    
     Delete all material and insert:                                                                                            
     "(1) has completed at least                                                                                                
     (A) two years on probation  if the person was convicted                                                                    
     of a                                                                                                                       
     class A  or class B  felony that  is not a  crime under                                                                    
     (5) of this  subsection; or (B) 18  months on probation                                                                    
     if the  person was convicted of  a crime that is  not a                                                                    
     crime                                                                                                                      
     (i) under (a) of this paragraph; or                                                                                        
     (ii) under (5) of this subsection;                                                                                         
     (2) has completed all treatment  programs required as a                                                                    
     condition of probation;                                                                                                    
     (3) [HAS NOT  BEEN FOUND IN VIOLATION  OF CONDITIONS OF                                                                    
     PROBATION BY THE COURT FOR  THE PERIOD SPECIFIED IN (1)                                                                    
     OF                                                                                                                         
     THIS SUBSECTION;                                                                                                           
     (4)] is currently in compliance  with all conditions of                                                                    
     probation for all of the  cases for which the person is                                                                    
     on probation; and                                                                                                          
     (4)[(5)]  has not  been  convicted  of an  unclassified                                                                    
     felony  offense,  a  sexual felony  as  defined  in  AS                                                                    
     12.55.185, or  a crime  involving domestic  violence as                                                                    
     defined in AS 18.66.990."                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Page 54, lines 16 - 17:                                                                                                    
     Delete "consider recommending [RECOMMEND]"                                                                                 
     Insert "recommend"                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     Delete all material and insert:                                                                                            
     "(3) is currently in compliance  with all conditions of                                                                    
     parole for all of the cases  for which the person is on                                                                    
     parole  and   has  not  been  found   in  violation  of                                                                    
     conditions  of parole  by the  board for  at least  one                                                                    
     year; and"                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carpenter OBJECTED.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Representative  LeBon   immediately  offered   a  conceptual                                                                    
amendment to correct errors.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative LeBon  MOVED to ADOPT Conceptual  Amendment 1                                                                    
to Amendment 5. He cited page  1, line 5 and moved to change                                                                    
 5  to  4,  on page 1 line  8 to change the lowercase  a  to                                                                    
a capital  A,  and  on page 1, line 9, to  change the  5  to                                                                    
 4.  In addition, he cited page  1, lines 21 through 23 that                                                                    
deleted  all   material.  He   reported  that   the  changes                                                                    
corrected a  drafting error. He delineated  that paragraph 5                                                                    
was deleted;  hence the change to  4 and  the  lowercase  a                                                                     
would  indicate a  reference to  a  subsection whereas;  the                                                                    
reference  should   refer  to  capital   A    identifying  a                                                                    
subparagraph indicating the qualifying crimes.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Josephson  requested   that  Representative                                                                    
LeBon  repeat the  amendment. Representative  LeBon reviewed                                                                    
the amendment.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson WITHDREW his OBJECTION.                                                                                
There being NO further  OBJECTION, Conceptual Amendment 1 to                                                                    
Amendment 5 was ADOPTED.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson asked for an at ease.                                                                                  
9:36:54 AM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:37:16 AM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative  LeBon  reviewed  Amendment 5.  He  indicated                                                                    
that  the   amendment  offered  a  review   period  for  the                                                                    
recommendation   of   early   termination  of   parole   and                                                                    
probation.  He  elaborated that  SB  91-Omnibus  Crim Law  &                                                                    
Procedure;  Corrections [CHAPTER  36  SLA  16 -  07/11/2016]                                                                    
mandated  early termination  of  parole and  probation if  a                                                                    
person  had  been  on  parole  for at  least  one  year  and                                                                    
probation  for at  least two  years,  completed a  treatment                                                                    
program, and had not been  in violation of conditions of the                                                                    
probation or parole.  The result of the  statute removed the                                                                    
professional judgement  of probation or parole  officers and                                                                    
forced  them  to recommend  early  termination  even if  the                                                                    
offender  required additional  supervision.  The current  CS                                                                    
corrected the  issue by changing   shall  to   may  allowing                                                                    
the   probation  or   parole  officer   to  exercise   their                                                                    
professional judgement  when determining  early termination.                                                                    
He summarized that the amendment  retained the language that                                                                    
the officers   may  consider recommending  early termination                                                                    
but included  the current statutory  language that  in order                                                                    
to be  considered for early  termination, the  offender must                                                                    
complete 18  months of probation  or two years  if convicted                                                                    
of a  non-domestic violence non  sexual Class A or  B felony                                                                    
and one year of parole.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:38:59 AM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:42:11 AM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Wilson understood  that members  needed time,  but                                                                    
she  wanted any  questions  or answers  discussed during  an                                                                    
ease on the record.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Josephson  requested   to  hear   from  Mr.                                                                    
Skidmore.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson  reviewed his understanding  of the                                                                    
amendment.  He  surmised  that  the goal  was  to  keep  the                                                                    
discretion with  the probation and parole  officer regarding                                                                    
early  termination of  probation and  parole but,  hold onto                                                                    
language to  that established timelines for  compliance with                                                                    
conditions of probation and parole.  He asked whether he was                                                                    
correct.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Mr.  Skidmore  answered that  the  amendment  left in  place                                                                    
"may" versus  "shall" on  page 36, line  11, which  made the                                                                    
provision a mandate and not  a recommendation. The amendment                                                                    
would include  sideboards on  the recommendation  allowing a                                                                    
probation  officer  to make  a  recommendation  only if  the                                                                    
person had completed 2 years  of probation if convicted of a                                                                    
Class A  or B  felony and  18 months  if the  individual was                                                                    
convicted  of a  crime  that  was neither  a  Class  A or  B                                                                    
felony. The amendment included an  addition of the timeframe                                                                    
and was more  restrictive than the prior  provision in terms                                                                    
of  when  an  early  release  recommendation  was  possible.                                                                    
Representative  Josephson  wondered  whether  the  timelines                                                                    
existed prior to  SB 91. Mr. Skidmore would have  to look at                                                                    
the  statute as  written  prior  to SB  91.  The bill  would                                                                    
reverse the statute from SB 91.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
9:46:28 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson  asked Representative Josephson to  stick to                                                                    
discussions regarding  the amendment and not  comparisons to                                                                    
laws prior to SB 91.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson  believed he  had been  speaking to                                                                    
the amendment.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Representative Knopp  surmised that without the  amendment a                                                                    
probation  officer  may  recommend  to the  court  that  the                                                                    
probationary  period be  terminated and  with the  amendment                                                                    
the  same  provision  applied  but   the  defendant  had  to                                                                    
complete conditions  set to a timeline  before early release                                                                    
could  be  considered.  He   concluded  that  the  amendment                                                                    
prohibited  early  release  unless certain  conditions  were                                                                    
met. He asked  whether he was correct.  Mr. Skidmore replied                                                                    
in the affirmative.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Representative Merrick pointed  to page 54, lines  16 and 17                                                                    
of  the  bill. She  asked  about  the ramifications  of  the                                                                    
change.                                                                                                                         
Co-Chair    Wilson    asked   Representative    LeBon    for                                                                    
clarification.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Representative LeBon replied  that on page 54,  lines 16 and                                                                    
17 the amendment deleted the  word  recommend  and the words                                                                    
 consider recommending were added.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
9:49:16 AM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:50:18 AM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative LeBon  replied that  the lines cited  on page                                                                    
54 would not be deleted.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson read the subsection as follows:                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     (7)  upon  determining  that a  probationer  under  the                                                                    
     supervision of  the officer  meets the  requirements of                                                                    
     AS 12.55.090(g),  consider recommending  [RECOMMEND] to                                                                    
     the court  [AS SOON  AS PRACTICABLE] that  probation be                                                                    
     terminated,  and  the  probationer be  discharged  from                                                                    
     probation;                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Wilson   asked  whether  the   language  reflected                                                                    
Representative   LeBons     intent.   Representative   LeBon                                                                    
responded in the affirmative.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Sullivan-Leonard  pointed   out  that   the                                                                    
language in Amendment 5 should be removed.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Knopp answered  that the  language had  been                                                                    
deleted in the  conceptual amendment and did  not change the                                                                    
language on page  54 of the CS. Co-Chair  Wilson agreed with                                                                    
Representative Knopps assessment.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
9:51:38 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Foster WITHDREW  his OBJECTION  to Amendment  5 as                                                                    
amended.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Sullivan-Leonard OBJECTED.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Representative  LeBon  provided   closing  comments  on  the                                                                    
amendment. He  reiterated his previous  statements regarding                                                                    
the amendment.  He added that the  early termination program                                                                    
provided an  incentive for the probationer  or parolee under                                                                    
the  given timeframe  but was  balanced by  the professional                                                                    
judgement of the probation and parole officers.                                                                                 
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
IN FAVOR: Ortiz, Josephson, Johnston,  Knopp, LeBon, Wilson,                                                                    
Foster                                                                                                                          
OPPOSED: Merrick, Sullivan-Leonard, Tilton, Carpenter                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
The MOTION  PASSED (7/4). There  being NO  further OBJECTION                                                                    
Amendment 5 was ADOPTED as AMENDED.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
[Note: Representative Tilton  requested a reconsideration of                                                                    
Amendment  5  at  11:00  a.m.   The  amendment  was  adopted                                                                    
unanimously.]                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
9:53:04 AM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Sullivan-Leonard  requested  reconsideration                                                                    
for her vote on Amendment 4.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
There  being  NO  OBJECTION,  a  new  vote  was  called  for                                                                    
Amendment 4.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
IN FAVOR: Ortiz, Josephson, Johnston,  Knopp, LeBon, Foster,                                                                    
Wilson                                                                                                                          
OPPOSED: Merrick, Carpenter, Sullivan-Leonard, Tilton                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
The MOTION PASSED (7/4).                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson  MOVED to  ADOPT Amendment  6, 31-GH1029\E.8                                                                    
(Marx/Radford, 5/5/19) [note: due  to length of amendment it                                                                    
is not included here - see copy on file for details].                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson explained that the  amendment was a response                                                                    
to  concerns   regarding  post   release  of   inmates.  The                                                                    
amendment required  that the management plan  [reentry plan]                                                                    
for each prisoner  begin at least 90 days  before release on                                                                    
furlough or  probation or parole.  The amendment  included a                                                                    
provision  that   DOC  coordinate  with   community  reentry                                                                    
coalitions  or  other  providers   of  reentry  services  if                                                                    
available.  She read  from page  4 of  Amendment 6,  lines 3                                                                    
through 12:                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     (12) provide to the legislature, by electronic means,                                                                      
     by January 10 preceding the first regular session of                                                                       
     each legislature, a report summarizing the findings                                                                        
     and results of the program established under (7) of                                                                        
     this subsection; the report must include:                                                                                  
     (A) the number of prisoners who were provided with                                                                         
     written case plans under (8) of this subsection;                                                                           
     (B) the number of written case plans under (8) of this                                                                     
    subsection initiated within the preceding year; and                                                                         
     (C) the number of written case plans under (8) of this                                                                     
   subsection that were updated in the preceding year."                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson  indicated that she had  visited Lemon Creek                                                                    
Correctional  Center [Juneau]  and spoke  with many  inmates                                                                    
within  18 months  of their  release and  none of  them were                                                                    
aware of a reentry plan.  She furthered that the fiscal note                                                                    
for the provision was zero.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster WITHDREW his OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Representative Sullivan-Leonard OBJECTED.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
9:56:32 AM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
9:59:11 AM                                                                                                                    
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Wilson restated  her previous  explanation of  the                                                                    
amendment.  She read  from the  amendment [page  2, lines  7                                                                    
through 8]:                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     (7) establish a program to conduct assessments of the                                                                      
     risks and needs of offenders sentenced to serve a term                                                                     
     of incarceration of 90 (30] days or more                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Wilson indicated  that the  amendment required  90                                                                    
days after an individual had  been sentenced versus 30 days.                                                                    
In addition,  DOC was required  to provide the case  plan to                                                                    
the prisoner within 90 days after sentencing.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Carpenter remarked  that  the amendment  was                                                                    
substantial. He  requested a 30  minute at ease  for further                                                                    
discussion. Co-Chair  Wilson denied the request  but offered                                                                    
 a few more minutes.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Josephson  supported   the  amendment.   He                                                                    
believed in the benefits of reentry programs.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
10:01:07 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster WITHDREW his OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carpenter OBJECTED.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
IN FAVOR: Tilton,   Josephson,   Johnston,   Knopp,   LeBon,                                                                    
Merrick, Ortiz, Wilson, Foster                                                                                                  
OPPOSED: Sullivan-Leonard, Carpenter                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
The MOTION  PASSED (9/2). There being  NO further OBJECTION,                                                                    
Amendment 6 was ADOPTED.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson  MOVED to  ADOPT Amendment  7, 31-GH1029\E.9                                                                    
(Radford, 5/5/19)  [note: due to  length of amendment  it is                                                                    
not included here - see copy on file for details].                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson explained that the  amendment related to the                                                                    
collection  and testing  of rape  kits and  was a  technical                                                                    
fix. The provisions  were from a bill [HB  20 SEXUAL ASSAULT                                                                    
EXAMINATION KITS]  that was  previously heard  in committee.                                                                    
She  relayed  that  the original  bill  excluded  provisions                                                                    
regarding testing  the kits.  She emphasized  the importance                                                                    
of  testing the  kits, which  included provisions  regarding                                                                    
the  victim's ability  to opt  out of  testing. She  did not                                                                    
want  the  backlog of  testing  to  continue. The  amendment                                                                    
clarified the legislatures intent regarding the kits.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster WITHDREW his OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carpenter  OBJECTED. He  wanted more  time to                                                                    
consider the amendment.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson explained that the  amendment pertained to a                                                                    
past bill HB 20 and had been previously discussed.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.                                                                                       
IN FAVOR: Josephson, Johnston, Knopp,  LeBon, Ortiz, Foster,                                                                    
Wilson                                                                                                                          
OPPOSED: Tilton, Carpenter, Merrick, Sullivan-Leonard                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
The MOTION  PASSED (7/4). There being  NO further OBJECTION,                                                                    
Amendment  7  was  ADOPTED.  [Note:  Representative  Merrick                                                                    
requested  a reconsideration  of Amendment  7 at  11:11 a.m.                                                                    
The amendment was adopted unanimously.]                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Representative    Sullivan-Leonard     and    Representative                                                                    
Carpenter requested an at ease.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
10:03:59 AM                                                                                                                   
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
10:06:23 AM                                                                                                                   
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Carpenter MOVED  to ADOPT  Amendment 8,  31-                                                                    
GH1029\E.18 (Wallace/Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Page 35, line 1:                                                                                                           
     Delete "or"                                                                                                                
     Insert "[OR]"                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Page 35, line 2, following "AS 11.46.400":                                                                                 
     Insert"; or                                                                                                                
     (7) a theft offense under AS 11.46.100"                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carpenter explained  the amendment that would                                                                    
add theft to  a list of offenses that  would restrict credit                                                                    
for pretrial confinement.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson requested to hear from Mr. Skidmore.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Mr.  Skidmore  answered  that   AS  11.46.100  included  the                                                                    
definition of  theft and  was not specific  to the  types of                                                                    
theft crimes.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Knopp asked  about including  the definition                                                                    
of theft.  He surmised that  the definition did  not specify                                                                    
the type of offense and  classification of crime. He deduced                                                                    
that  if the  amendment passed  the details  of the  offense                                                                    
would not be known to the judge when restricting credit.                                                                        
Mr.  Skidmore  reviewed  the  definition   of  theft  in  AS                                                                    
11.46.100. He delineated that the statute referenced the                                                                        
crimes found throughout the chapter  on theft and identified                                                                    
the  specific  statutes:  AS  11.46.160,  AS  11.46.180,  AS                                                                    
11.46.190,  AS   11.46.200,  AS  11.46.210.  He   cited  the                                                                    
following:                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
          (2) the person commits theft of lost or mislaid                                                                       
          property under AS 11.46.160;                                                                                          
      (3) the person commits theft by deception under                                                                           
           AS 11.46.180;                                                                                                        
      (4) the person commits theft by receiving under                                                                           
           AS 11.46.190;                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Skidmore  elaborated that none  of the  theft categories                                                                    
included the  value of  the property.  He was  uncertain how                                                                    
the  courts  would  interpret   the  amendment  that  lacked                                                                    
specificity  regarding  which  theft crimes  a  judge  would                                                                    
revoke  pretrial  electronic  monitoring  (EM)  credit.  The                                                                    
other  subsections  of  statute  in  HB  49  referenced  the                                                                    
specific crime and the elements associated with it.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
10:09:25 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Josephson   MOVED   to   ADOPT   Conceptual                                                                    
Amendment  1  to  Amendment  8.   He  moved  to  delete  the                                                                    
amendment and insert only vehicle  theft in the first degree                                                                    
AS .11.46.360.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carpenter requested an at ease.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
10:10:24 AM                                                                                                                   
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
10:11:30 AM                                                                                                                   
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Josephson   MOVED  to   withdraw  Conceptual                                                                    
Amendment 1.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative Knopp OJBECTED to Amendment 8.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carpenter provided wrap  up on the amendment.                                                                    
He  surmised  that  currently  the  crimes  that  restricted                                                                    
pretrial confinement  credit were   serious.  He  listed the                                                                    
crimes:  Felony crime  against  a  person; crimes  involving                                                                    
domestic   violence  and   sexual   offenses;  delivery   of                                                                    
controlled substances;  and burglary and arson  in the first                                                                    
degree. He believed that the  public was being victimized by                                                                    
theft  and was  left with  the  message that  theft was  not                                                                    
taken  seriously.  He  wanted  all  forms  of  theft  to  be                                                                    
included in the list  of crimes restricting pretrial credit.                                                                    
He believed  that the amendment  reflected the   relief  the                                                                    
public demanded.                                                                                                                
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
IN FAVOR: Merrick,   Tilton,  Sullivan-Leonard,   Carpenter,                                                                    
Johnston, Wilson                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
OPPOSED: LeBon, Ortiz, Josephson, Foster                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
The MOTION  PASSED (7/4). There being  NO further OBJECTION,                                                                    
Amendment 8 was ADOPTED.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
10:14:00 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carpenter MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 9, 31-                                                                        
GH1029\E.19 (Marx/Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Page 35, line 1:                                                                                                           
     Delete "or"                                                                                                                
     Insert "[OR]"                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Page 35, line 2, following "AS 11.46.400":                                                                                 
     Insert"; or                                                                                                                
     (7) vehicle theft under AS 11.46.360 or 11.46.365"                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carpenter explained that  Amendment 9 was the                                                                    
same as Amendment 8 but was specific to vehicle theft.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair  Ortiz understood  that all  forms of  theft were                                                                    
added  under   the  previous  amendment.  He   thought  that                                                                    
included  vehicle  theft. Representative  Carpenter  replied                                                                    
that  vehicle theft  was listed  separately  from the  other                                                                    
theft statutes.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Sullivan-Leonard  spoke  in support  of  the                                                                    
amendment. She  remarked that vehicle theft  was the highest                                                                    
rate of crime in her district.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson WITHDREW her OBJECTION.                                                                                         
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 9 was ADOPTED.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carpenter  MOVED to  ADOPT Amendment  10, 31-                                                                    
GH1029\E.20 (Marx/Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Page 34, line 31:                                                                                                          
     Delete "to a person under 19 years of age"                                                                                 
     Insert "[TO A PERSON UNDER 19 YEARS OF AGE]"                                                                               
Co-Chair Wilson OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carpenter explained  that the amendment would                                                                    
remove the  age restriction,   under 19  years of  age  from                                                                    
statutes  pertaining   to  the  delivery  of   a  controlled                                                                    
substance  and  included  the  provision   on  the  list  of                                                                    
pretrial credit  restrictions. He believed that  age was not                                                                    
a factor that should be considered.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
10:16:25 AM                                                                                                                   
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
10:18:32 AM                                                                                                                   
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson invited  Representative Carpenter to further                                                                    
clarify the amendment.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Representative Carpenter  clarified that the  amendment only                                                                    
applied  to  electronic  monitoring   and  not  to  pretrial                                                                    
confinement.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Josephson  commented that  certain  offenses                                                                    
might be  captured that was  undesirable such  as marijuana,                                                                    
which was legal.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson WITHDREW her OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 10 was ADOPTED.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
10:20:11 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson MOVED to  ADOPT Amendment 11, 31-GH1029\E.22                                                                    
(Marx/Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                                          
     Page 63, line 18, following "l l.71.030(a)(8)":                                                                            
     Insert", 11.71.030(c), 11.7I.030(e), 11.71.040(a)(11)"                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Johnston OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Wilson requested  to hear  from the  Department of                                                                    
Law  (DOL).   She  relayed  that  the   amendment  contained                                                                    
corrections identified by DOL.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Skidmore  reviewed the amendment. He  explained that the                                                                    
amendment  was a   cleanup to  the repealer  section,  which                                                                    
necessitated the repeal of  three additional subsections. He                                                                    
identified  AS Sec.  11.71.030.(E) and  elucidated that  the                                                                    
statute  referred  to  precursors for  methamphetamines  for                                                                    
distribution or  manufacture that  were reduced to  a  lower                                                                    
level  and the  CS returned them to a  higher crime. Without                                                                    
the repealer, the provisions would  be duplicated in statute                                                                    
at two levels of crime.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Johnston WITHDREW her OBJECTION.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Sullivan-Leonard  OBJECTED.  She  asked  for                                                                    
additional clarity.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Skidmore  restated his  explanation and  emphasized that                                                                    
the  repealer  related  to  the lower  level  of  crime.  He                                                                    
referred to  page 63, line 18  of the CS that  contained the                                                                    
repeler. He  noted that  out of  the three  statutes listed,                                                                    
the  first two  related  to methamphetamines  and the  third                                                                    
pertained   to  distribution   by   weight  categories.   He                                                                    
clarified that  the repealer  accomplished the  same concept                                                                    
for  weight categories  and eliminated  them completely.  He                                                                    
indicated that the repealers  accomplished the completion of                                                                    
a  return  to  pre-SB  91  laws  for  drug  distribution  or                                                                    
dealing.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Sullivan-Leonard MAINTAINED her OJBECTION.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
IN FAVOR: Knopp,  LeBon,  Merrick, Ortiz,  Sullivan-Leonard,                                                                    
Tilton, Carpenter, Josephson, Johnston, Wilson, Foster                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
OPPOSED: None                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
The MOTION PASSED (11/0). There  being NO further OBJECTION,                                                                    
Amendment 11 was ADOPTED.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
10:24:44 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson MOVED to  ADOPT Amendment 12, 31-GH1029\E.24                                                                    
(Radford, 5/5/19)  [note: due to  length of amendment  it is                                                                    
not included here - see copy on file for details].                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson relayed that the  amendment had been brought                                                                    
to her by the Department of Law.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Mr.  Skidmore explained  the amendment.  He elucidated  that                                                                    
the  first page  corresponded to  adjusted section  numbers.                                                                    
Beginning  on page  2, the  amendment  changed the  language                                                                    
regarding   the   availability   and  use   of   third-party                                                                    
custodians    during   pretrial.    Currently,   third-party                                                                    
custodians  were  only  available  in a  community  where  a                                                                    
pretrial   enforcement  officer   was  not   available.  The                                                                    
amendment  included third-party  custodians to  the list  of                                                                    
options  the  court  could  consider  for  pretrial  release                                                                    
regardless  of whether  a pretrial  enforcement officer  was                                                                    
available  to   the  community.   He  emphasized   that  the                                                                    
provision  was in  the governors   bill  and was  essential,                                                                    
allowing the  courts to  have as many  tools as  possible to                                                                    
change the bail system.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster WITHDREW his OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 12 was ADOPTED.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
10:26:25 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson MOVED to  ADOPT Amendment 13, 31-GH1029\E.25                                                                    
(Marx/Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Page 27, line 12, following "11.71.040(a)(4),":                                                                            
     Insert "11.71.040(a)(12),"                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Johnston OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson relayed that the  amendment had been brought                                                                    
forward by the Department of Law.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Skidmore  explained that the  amendment would  insert an                                                                    
additional  reference   to  a  drug  statute   into  another                                                                    
proposed  drug  statute.  The action  conformed  to  changes                                                                    
proposed  to  drug  laws  and  without  the  change  it  was                                                                    
impossible to amend  the statute. The omission was  due to a                                                                    
drafting error.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Johnston WITHDREW her OBJECTION.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 13 was ADOPTED.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson MOVED to  ADOPT Amendment 14, 31-GH1029\E.26                                                                    
(Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
    Page 40, line 22, following "AS 11.41.455(c)(l),":                                                                          
     2Insert "indecent viewing or production of a picture                                                                       
     under AS 11.61.123(0(1),"                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     Page 41, line 4, following "degree,":                                                                                      
     Insert "sexual abuse of a minor in the third degree                                                                        
     under AS 11.41.438(c),"                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
     Page 41, line 5, following "degree,":                                                                                      
     Insert "indecent viewing or production of a picture                                                                        
     under AS 11.61.123(0(2),"                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Mr.  Skidmore explained  that  the  amendment contained  the                                                                    
specific  references  to  statutes  pertaining  to  indecent                                                                    
viewing. The  amendment was necessary to  correct a drafting                                                                    
error and the sentences could not be changed without it.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson  noted that the  amendment had  been brought                                                                    
forward by the administration.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster WITHDREW his OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 14 was ADOPTED.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson MOVED to  ADOPT Amendment 15, 31-GH1029\E.27                                                                    
(Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Page 54, line 31, following "conditions":                                                                                  
   Insert "when a petition to revoke probation is filed"                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Wilson  asked  to  hear   from  Mr.  Skidmore  and                                                                    
indicated the amendment was  offered on the administrations                                                                     
behalf.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Mr.  Skidmore reviewed  the amendment.  He  voiced that  the                                                                    
purpose of the amendment clarified  when the report that was                                                                    
associated  with  a revocation  of  probation  was due.  The                                                                    
amendment was necessary to correct a drafting error.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster WITHDREW his OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 15 was ADOPTED.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
10:30:24 AM                                                                                                                   
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
10:32:28 AM                                                                                                                   
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson  MOVED to  ADOPT Amendment  16, 31-                                                                    
GH1029\E.12 (Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Page 23, line 15:                                                                                                          
     Delete "schedule IV A, VA, or VIA"                                                                                         
     Insert "schedule IV A or VA (IV A, VA, OR VIA]"                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     Page 26, line 20:                                                                                                          
     Delete "or"                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Page 26, line 26, following "paragraph":                                                                                   
     Insert"; or                                                                                                                
     (13) violates AS 11.71.050(a)(l) and, within the                                                                           
     preceding five years, has been convicted of a crime                                                                        
     under                                                                                                                      
     (A) this paragraph; or                                                                                                     
     {B) a law or ordinance of this or another jurisdiction                                                                     
     with   elements   similar   to   a   crime   under   AS                                                                    
     11.71.050(a)(l)."                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson explained  the amendment. He shared                                                                    
that he  had discovered  many issues  of concern  related to                                                                    
marijuana in the bill. He  maintained that the bill returned                                                                    
the current  proposed felony to  a misdemeanor act.  The act                                                                    
provided pertained  to anyone with any  amount marijuana who                                                                    
was 18 years  old or older and at least  three years younger                                                                    
than the person delivering the  substance. He cited page 23,                                                                    
line 15  of the  CS and  indicated that  it was  currently a                                                                    
Class  B  felony to  share  any  amount  of a  scheduled  6A                                                                    
controlled substance  or marijuana. He exemplified  that the                                                                    
effect was if a 21 year  old offered a drag of marijuana off                                                                    
a pipe  or joint to an  18 year old,  the act was a  class B                                                                    
felony  for  the  older individual.  He  believed  that  the                                                                    
penalty was  drastic. The amendment turned  the offense into                                                                    
a  misdemeanor  and  paralleled  the  Title  4  statutes  on                                                                    
providing alcohol to a minor.  The provision made it a Class                                                                    
C felony  for a  second offense.  The amendment  reduced the                                                                    
penalties to be more consistent with other law.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson  asked to hear  from the Department  of Law.                                                                    
She asked whether the bill was recriminalizing marijuana.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Skidmore replied in the negative.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
10:34:55 AM                                                                                                                   
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
10:35:30 AM                                                                                                                   
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Skidmore  pointed to  page 23,  line 15  of the  CS. The                                                                    
subsection  on line  15 cited  "schedule IV  A, VA,  or VIA"                                                                    
specifying   the delivery  of  a controlled  substance to  a                                                                    
person under  the age  of 19  years of age  who is  at least                                                                    
three  years   younger  than   the  person   delivering  the                                                                    
substance.    He  commented   that  the   statute  did   not                                                                    
recriminalize  marijuana  and  verified that  marijuana  was                                                                    
legal over the age of  19 regarding possession and clarified                                                                    
that  the  crime  applied  to   providing  marijuana  to  an                                                                    
underaged  individual.  He  understood  that  the  amendment                                                                    
eliminated the age requirement and  was condoning  providing                                                                    
marijuana for someone underage.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson  asked if what  Mr. Skidmore had  stated was                                                                    
Representative Josephsons intent.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Josephson   replied,   not   exactly.    He                                                                    
clarified that it  would still be illegal  to provide anyone                                                                    
a  schedule   VI  A  controlled  substance   but  eliminated                                                                    
language that  allowed for any amount  of marijuana provided                                                                    
to someone who was three years  younger and under the age of                                                                    
21  by an  adult 21  or  older to  be considered  a Class  B                                                                    
felony. He  corrected Mr. Skidmores   statement that  19 was                                                                    
the legal age  for marijuana possession; the age  was 21. He                                                                    
believed  the  penalty  was  extreme.   He  noted  that  the                                                                    
amendment  lessened the  offense  to a  Class A  misdemeanor                                                                    
comparable to  the Title  4 law of  furnishing alcohol  to a                                                                    
minor.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
10:38:33 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative Knopp felt that one  ounce of marijuana was a                                                                    
substantial amount. He  asked for Representative Josephsons                                                                     
thoughts.  Representative Josephson  answered that  an ounce                                                                    
was unacceptable and  would be a Class  A misdemeanor, which                                                                    
was  the current  law.  He wanted  to  eliminate the  higher                                                                    
penalty for a provision with a lesser amount of marijuana.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson believed that the  state's high schools were                                                                    
dealing  with  the issue.  She  did  not  want to  send  the                                                                    
message that it was okay to provide marijuana to minors.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair  Ortiz   clarified  that  the  sponsor   was  not                                                                    
claiming it was   okay.  He determined that the  goal of the                                                                    
amendment  was to  change the  offense  to the  same as  the                                                                    
delivery to alcohol. He indicated  that the facts were clear                                                                    
that alcohol had greater negative  impacts on the population                                                                    
versus marijuana.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Wilson  would be  amenable  to  making changes  to                                                                    
alcohol laws as well.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Skidmore  clarified that the  amendment did not  make it                                                                    
legal  to  provide  marijuana  to  underage  individuals.  A                                                                    
higher  level   statute  found  on   page  23,   dealt  with                                                                    
misconduct  involving  controlled  substances in  the  third                                                                    
degree that was classified as  a Class B felony. He reported                                                                    
that it was a class B  felony to provide marijuana under the                                                                    
age of  19. He agreed that  21 was the legal  age related to                                                                    
marijuana. He pointed  to page 25, that  established the act                                                                    
of  providing  marijuana  to   another  person  outside  the                                                                    
regulatory  regime,  which  was   a  Class  C  felony  under                                                                    
misconduct involving  a controlled  substance in  the fourth                                                                    
degree.  He pointed  out that  the two  laws related  to the                                                                    
issue  and  noted   that  the  current  CS   drew  a  strong                                                                    
distinction  about  when  it   was  legal  or  illegal  when                                                                    
providing  marijuana to  someone under  the age  of 19.  The                                                                    
amendment  would  eliminate  the   higher  penalty  for  the                                                                    
distribution  under  the  age  of  19  and  meant  that  any                                                                    
distribution  would  be  dealt   with  in  the  same  manner                                                                    
regardless of age.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
10:42:36 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Ortiz asked about the  system and how things were                                                                    
prosecuted  or not  prosecuted. He  asked whether  there was                                                                    
merit  to  changing  the  amendment   from  a  felony  to  a                                                                    
misdemeanor. Mr.  Skidmore responded that he  was present as                                                                    
a  representative  of the  administration.  He  had his  own                                                                    
personal views  on marijuana that  he could not speak  to at                                                                    
present.  He observed  that from  a prosecutors   standpoint                                                                    
the CS  established a harsher  penalty to  someone providing                                                                    
marijuana  to persons  under the  age of  19 versus  selling                                                                    
marijuana  outside of  the regulatory  scheme. He  could not                                                                    
comment on whether the amendment was a good or bad idea.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Merrick  opposed the amendment.  Her district                                                                    
had  been clear  that it  wanted to  be tough  on crime  and                                                                    
drugs. She did not support lessening the offense.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster WITHDREW his OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Representative Merrick OBJECTED.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson provided wrap  up on the amendment.                                                                    
He reiterated that presently, the  offense of providing even                                                                    
one drag off  a marijuana cigarette to someone aged  18 by a                                                                    
21 year old  was a Class B  felony that equated to  up to 10                                                                    
years in  jail and was  comparable to punishment  for sexual                                                                    
assault. He believed the statute was extreme.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
IN FAVOR: LeBon, Ortiz, Josephson, Johnston, Foster                                                                             
OPPOSED:   Merrick,  Sullivan-Leonard,   Tilton,  Carpenter,                                                                    
Knopp, Wilson                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
The MOTION to adopt Amendment 16 FAILED (5/6).                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson  MOVED to  ADOPT Amendment  17, 31-                                                                    
GH1029\E.10 (Marx/Radford, 5/5/19):                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     Page 64, line 4:                                                                                                           
     Delete "2011"                                                                                                              
     Insert "1981"                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Josephson  explained   the  amendment.   He                                                                    
disclosed  that  conservatives  who  had  stated  they  were                                                                    
protective   of  gun   rights   like   the  National   Rifle                                                                    
Association  (NRA) and  the administration  wanted to   dial                                                                    
back  the number of  years information regarding involuntary                                                                    
commitment  or  mental  illness must  be  submitted  to  the                                                                    
Department of Public Safety (DPS).                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
10:47:57 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative LeBon  asked about  the fiscal impact  of the                                                                    
amendment.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson  replied that someone had  sent him                                                                    
a note that it was in  the range of $150,000. He stated that                                                                    
Ms. Mead had  testified that the court  system would require                                                                    
two  additional  staff  to  comply   with  the  statute.  He                                                                    
believed a federal grant would be forthcoming.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson  was uncomfortable  with the  amendment. She                                                                    
informed  the committee  that she  chose the  extended date.                                                                    
She was unaware of any  federal grant dollars and the fiscal                                                                    
note was reflective of the that.  She had not heard from the                                                                    
NRA regarding the matter. She  was not supportive of placing                                                                    
the length of time in statute.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Sullivan-Leonard  asked  to  hear  from  Ms.                                                                    
Mead.  She  asked  whether  there  would  be  difficulty  in                                                                    
obtaining information back  to 1985 or 1990.  She noted that                                                                    
the information existed, but it  was on microfiche. Ms. Mead                                                                    
replied that  the reason the  Chair chose 2011 was  to align                                                                    
with  the date  all the  court's records  subsequent to  the                                                                    
date were  available electronically. The court  could do the                                                                    
electronic search with existing  staff. However, for records                                                                    
before 2011,  the courts  information  was mixed,  with some                                                                    
information electronic and on  CourtView and some not. Prior                                                                    
to 2002,  nothing was  available electronically  which would                                                                    
mean  reviewing paper  files and  microfiche. She  estimated                                                                    
that around  21,000 files could  have a mental  issue order.                                                                    
She  concurred  that they  would  need  additional staff  to                                                                    
perform the review.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Representative Sullivan-Leonard  asked if the  compiled data                                                                    
would  have to  be put  into the  system under  CourtView or                                                                    
merely  available to  those  seeking  information. Ms.  Mead                                                                    
answered  the  court  would provide  information  about  the                                                                    
individuals  to  DPS   in  order  to  upload   it  to  their                                                                    
databases   and  work   with  the   federal  database.   The                                                                    
individuals  with   mental  issue  adjudications   would  be                                                                    
included  in  a database  and  ultimately  be excluded  from                                                                    
purchasing a firearm.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
10:52:29 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair Johnston  heard from  DPS that  there could  be a                                                                    
great number  of federal funds  coming to the state  for the                                                                    
purpose  under  discussion.  She  asked  whether  the  court                                                                    
intended to compile  records prior to 2011  if federal funds                                                                    
were forthcoming.  Ms. Mead  answered that  the availability                                                                    
of  federal  funds  was  tentative  and  would  not  warrant                                                                    
canceling   a  fiscal   note.   She   elucidated  that   the                                                                    
information desired  was confidential by law.  Therefore, if                                                                    
the  proposed  2011 law  was  adopted  it  would act  as  an                                                                    
exception to  the confidentiality  law and the  court system                                                                    
will  comply, but  prior to  that date  the court  would not                                                                    
have  the  authority to  do  so.  Vice-Chair Johnston  asked                                                                    
whether the 2011 date made  the state compliant with federal                                                                    
law. Ms.  Mead answered she  was uncertain what  the federal                                                                    
law was. She  offered that it was illegal  under federal law                                                                    
for a person that had  been mentally committed to purchase a                                                                    
firearm. The  federal government wanted the  state to supply                                                                    
the information to them. She  was uncertain whether the 2011                                                                    
date made  the state compliant. Vice-Chair  Johnston thought                                                                    
the  law was  in  response to  the  Virginia Tech  [Virginia                                                                    
Polytechnic Institute  and State University,  commonly known                                                                    
as Virginia  Tech] shooting [April  16, 2007]. Ms.  Mead did                                                                    
not know why the feds had passed the law.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
10:54:58 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative Merrick supported  the amendment. She thought                                                                    
it was  irrelevant how difficult  and time consuming  it was                                                                    
to compile  the information, if  it meant that it  saved one                                                                    
person from a violent crime.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Carpenter pointed  to the  date of  December                                                                    
31, 2019  for completion of  the data transfer.  He wondered                                                                    
if the  completion date  granted enough  time to  finish the                                                                    
task  if looking  back to  1981.  Ms. Mead  answered in  the                                                                    
negative.  She  stated that  the  fiscal  note specified  it                                                                    
would  take  one  year. Representative  Carpenter  suggested                                                                    
offering  a conceptual  amendment to  change the  completion                                                                    
date if the 1981 date was adopted.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson asked Ms. Mead  how much more time the Court                                                                    
System would need to compile  the information from 1981. Ms.                                                                    
Mead discerned that  a completion date of  December 31, 2020                                                                    
was adequate.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Carpenter   MOVED   to   ADOPT   Conceptual                                                                    
Amendment 1  to Amendment  17. He moved  to change  the date                                                                    
from December  31, 2019 to  December 31,  2020 on line  2 of                                                                    
the amendment.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
There  being  NO  OBJECTION,   Conceptual  Amendment  1  was                                                                    
ADOPTED.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Foster  WITHDREW his OBJECTION  to Amendment  17 as                                                                    
amended.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
There being  NO further OBJECTION, Amendment  17 was ADOPTED                                                                    
as AMENDED.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
10:57:46 AM                                                                                                                   
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
11:00:39 AM                                                                                                                   
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Tilton requested  a  reconsideration on  her                                                                    
vote for Amendment 5.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
11:01:03 AM                                                                                                                   
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
11:02:18 AM                                                                                                                   
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair  Wilson   explained  that  they   would  reconsider                                                                    
Amendment 5.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Josephson questioned  the interpretation  of                                                                    
Amendment 5.  He pointed to  subsection 3, lines  12 through                                                                    
14 of  the amendment and  noted that the language  was being                                                                    
deleted.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     (3) [HAS NOT BEEN FOUND IN VIOLATION OF CONDITIONS OF                                                                      
     PROBATION BY THE COURT FOR THE PERIOD SPECIFIED IN (I)                                                                     
     OF THIS SUBSECTION;                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Josephson  interpreted   the  language   in                                                                    
subsection  3.  He  surmised  that  if  the  probationer  or                                                                    
parolee  had  violated  conditions,   a  decision  on  early                                                                    
termination would be delayed.  He indicated that eliminating                                                                    
the  subsection  left  subsection 4  intact.  He  underlined                                                                    
[subsection 4] lines 15 through 16 that stated:                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
     4)] is currently in compliance with all conditions of                                                                      
     probation for all of the cases for which the person is                                                                     
     on probation; and                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson  interpreted that the  two concepts                                                                    
were  different. He  deduced that  deleting the  language in                                                                    
subsection 3 was  significant.   He asked for Mr. Skidmores                                                                     
point of view.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson  reminded Representative Josephson  that the                                                                    
action was a  policy call and Mr. Skidmore  could inform the                                                                    
committee only on the effects of the amendment.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Mr. Skidmore  responded that Amendment  5 would  delete what                                                                    
was  currently  in the  bill  on  lines  13 through  22  and                                                                    
replaced  it   with  the   amendment.  He   elaborated  that                                                                    
Amendment 5,  lines 3  through 11  were the  only provisions                                                                    
that  were  different from  the  bill.  The amendment  would                                                                    
affect  the CS  on page  36, lines  13 through  20. Lines  3                                                                    
through  11  of the  amendment  were  added  to the  CS.  He                                                                    
interpreted  the provision  to  mean that  when a  probation                                                                    
officer    wanted   to    exercise   discretion    regarding                                                                    
recommending early  termination the sideboard  or limitation                                                                    
meant that  the offender had  to serve 2 years  of probation                                                                    
for Class A  or B felonies and at least  18 months for other                                                                    
crimes.  He determined  that that  was the  only significant                                                                    
change in the proposal.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
There being NO further OBJECTION, Amendment 5 was ADOPTED.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
11:06:26 AM                                                                                                                   
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
11:07:12 AM                                                                                                                   
RECONVENED                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson  MOVED to  ADOPT Amendment  18, 31-                                                                    
GH1029\E.13 (Wallace/Radford, 5/5/19) (copy on file):                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Page 42, line 31:                                                                                                          
     Delete "30 [10]"                                                                                                           
     Insert "IO"                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Page 43, lines 2 - 6:                                                                                                      
     Delete all material and insert:                                                                                            
   "(2) 90 days if the conviction is for a violation of                                                                         
     (A) AS 11.61.116(c)(l) and the person is 21 years of                                                                       
     age or                                                                                                                     
     older; [OR]                                                                                                                
     10 (B) AS 11.61.l20(a)(6) and the person is 21 years                                                                       
     of age or older; or                                                                                                        
     (C) AS 11.61.220(a)(4)(B) or (C); or"                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Josephson   MOVED   to   ADOPT   Conceptual                                                                    
Amendment 1  to Amendment 18  to delete the top  three lines                                                                    
of the amendment.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson OBJECTED for discussion.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair  Ortiz asked  about  the impact  of the  proposed                                                                    
deletion.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Representative Josephson  explained that  the intent  of the                                                                    
amendment was to increase two  types of Class B misdemeanors                                                                    
to 90  day penalties and the  top lines did not  reflect his                                                                    
intent.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson clarified that it  was not the intent of the                                                                    
sponsor to include lines 1 through 3.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson WITHDREW her OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
There being NO further  OBJECTION, Conceptual Amendment 1 to                                                                    
Amendment 18 was ADOPTED.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Representative   Josephson   explained  the   amendment   as                                                                    
amended. He  reported that  in SB  91, most  of the  Class B                                                                    
misdemeanors were decreased  from 90 days to  10 days except                                                                    
for harassment in the second  degree and sending an explicit                                                                    
image of  a minor.  He delineated  that the  amendment added                                                                    
bringing a  gun to  a courthouse.  He alerted  the committee                                                                    
that the court system lacked  an adequate security system in                                                                    
single  judge  sites.  He  was   alarmed  about  the  policy                                                                    
perception the state was taking.  In addition, the amendment                                                                    
included  bringing a  gun to  a  domestic violence  shelter,                                                                    
which  he characterized  as  sacred  places.  He  maintained                                                                    
that if a  person inadvertently forgot they  had a concealed                                                                    
weapon  it would  mitigate  the offense.  He  felt that  the                                                                    
statement was that  the state was nine  times less concerned                                                                    
about  bringing a  gun to  a domestic  violence shelter.  He                                                                    
shared that the  amendment had been offered in  the House in                                                                    
the  fall  of  2017  and  had failed  20-20.  He  asked  the                                                                    
committee to consider the serious nature of the crimes.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson  asked members to  be careful  about stating                                                                    
other's intent.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
11:11:50 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Co-Chair Wilson WITHDREW her OBJECTION.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
There  being  NO  OBJECTION, Amendment  18  was  ADOPTED  as                                                                    
AMENDED.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Merrick asked for  reconsideration on vote to                                                                    
Amendment 7. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 7 was ADOPTED.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
11:15:17 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Vice-Chair  Johnston MOVED  to  REPORT CSHB  49(FIN) out  of                                                                    
committee   with   individual    recommendations   and   the                                                                    
accompanying fiscal  notes with the ability  for Legislative                                                                    
Legal Services to make technical and conforming changes.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Representative Sullivan-Leonard OBJECTED.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Representative  Josephson  announced  his  support  for  the                                                                    
bill.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
IN FAVOR: Carpenter,  Josephson,   Johnston,  LeBon,  Ortiz,                                                                    
Knopp, Tilton, Foster, Wilson                                                                                                   
OPPOSED: Merrick, Sullivan-Leonard                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
The MOTION  PASSED (9/2). There being  NO further OBJECTION,                                                                    
it was so ordered.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CSHB 49(FIN)  was REPORTED  out of  committee with  five "do                                                                    
pass"  recommendations,  five "amend"  recommendations,  and                                                                    
one "no  recommendation" recommendation; and two  new fiscal                                                                    
impact notes from the Department  of Administration, two new                                                                    
fiscal  impact notes  from  the  Department of  Corrections,                                                                    
four  new   indeterminate  notes  from  the   Department  of                                                                    
Corrections,  one new  fiscal impact  note  from the  Alaska                                                                    
Judicial  System,  one  new  fiscal  impact  note  from  the                                                                    
Department  of  Public  Safety,   and  with  one  previously                                                                    
published zero  impact note: FN1  (DHS); and  one previously                                                                    
published fiscal impact note: FN6 (LAW).                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 68                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     "An  Act relating  to the  division of  labor standards                                                                    
     and  safety;  relating  to  the  division  of  workers'                                                                    
     compensation;  establishing  the division  of  workers'                                                                    
     safety   and  compensation;   and   providing  for   an                                                                    
     effective date."                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
11:17:04 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
GREY MITCHELL, DIRECTOR,  DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION,                                                                    
DEPARTMENT  OF LABOR  AND WORKFORCE  DEVELOPMENT, introduced                                                                    
the bill. He  explained that HB 68 would  merge the Division                                                                    
of Labor Standards and Safety  with the Division of Workers'                                                                    
Compensation as of  July 1, 2019. The new  division would be                                                                    
called  the Division  of Workers'  Safety and  Compensation.                                                                    
The merger would decrease costs and improve efficiencies.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
HB  68  was   HEARD  and  HELD  in   committee  for  further                                                                    
consideration.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
11:17:40 AM                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
The meeting was adjourned at 11:18 a.m.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
02.19.19 Speaker Edgmon TL DOLWD Division Merger.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 68
HB 68 Sectional.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 68
HB075 Additional Documents-032619_Doc4_1page slide Federal Disparity Test 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Additional Documents-DEED fy2018-disparity-test 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Additional Documents-DEED fy2018-disparity-test_Attachment-A 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Additional Documents-DEED fy2018-disparity-test_Attachment-B 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Additional Documents-DEED fy2018-disparity-test_Explanation 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Additional Documents-Districts Under 25mbps 2017-2018.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Additional Documents-EducationSuperHighway - Alaska Snapshot 2018 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Supporting Documents-Letters of Support 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Sponsor Statement ver M 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Sectional Analysis ver M 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Explanation of Changes - ver A to ver M 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Additional Documents-School BAG Flyer 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Additional Documents-FY2019 Districts and Schools Awarded BAG Funds 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Additional Documents-FY2015-FY2018 School BAG Statistics 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Additional Documents-FY19 Internet Costs by School 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
HB075 Additional Documents-FCC-Household Broadband Guide 5.1.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 75
SB66 support.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 68
SB 66
HB 68 NEW FN DLWD OSH 5.3.19.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 68
HB 68 CS WORKDRAFT FIN v.U.pdf HFIN 5/6/2019 9:00:00 AM
HB 68