Legislature(2009 - 2010)HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/09/2010 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB70 | |
| SB257 |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 257 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 331 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 70 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 9, 2010
2:08 p.m.
2:08:26 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Stoltze called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 2:08 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Mike Hawker, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Stoltze, Co-Chair
Representative Bill Thomas Jr., Vice-Chair
Representative Allan Austerman
Representative Mike Doogan
Representative Neal Foster
Representative Les Gara
Representative Reggie Joule
Representative Mike Kelly
Representative Woodie Salmon
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Anna Fairclough
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Carl Gatto; Senator Dennis Egan;
Representative Cathy Munoz; Jesse Kiehl, Staff, Senator
Dennis Egan; Meghan Stangeland, Advocate, Juneau Youth
Court.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Franci Havemeister, Director, Division of Agriculture,
Department of Natural Resources; Ginny Espenshade, Kenai
Peninsula Youth Court; Ceezar Martinson, Anchorage Youth
Court; Sharon Leon, Executive Director, Anchorage Youth
Court.
SUMMARY
HB 70 ALASKA GROWN AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
CS HB 70(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee
with no recommendations and with new fiscal
notes from the Department of Education and
the Department of Natural Resources.
HB 331 YOUTH COURTS AND CRIMINAL FINES
HB 331 was SCHEDULED but NOT HEARD.
SB 257 YOUTH COURTS AND CRIMINAL FINES
SB 257 was REPORTED out of Committee with a
"do pass" recommendation and with previously
published fiscal notes: FN 1(CRT),
FN 2(DHS), FN 3(LAW).
2:09:23 PM
HOUSE BILL NO. 70
"An Act establishing the farm-to-school program in the
Department of Natural Resources, the Alaska grown
fresh fruit and vegetable grant program in the
Department of Education and Early Development, the
farmers' market technology improvement pilot program
in the Department of Environmental Conservation, and
the farmers to food banks pilot program in the
Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic
Development."
REPRESENTATIVE CARL GATTO, SPONSOR, presented an overview
of the bill, explaining that HB 70 would help farmers and
children by creating a nexus between children and real food
that children can be exposed too. He noted that people do
not use enough fresh food, especially children. As a
result, 27 percent of high school students in Alaska are
obese or overweight. The legislation would provide students
with opportunities that are not currently available, such
as "agriculture day" in elementary schools, which would
focus on educating children about where food comes from.
The bill focuses primarily on the encouragement phase,
helping students to get excited about dealing with fresh
food with the help of the farmers.
Representative Gara appreciated the work on the Mat-Su
farming issue. He asked for verification that the
legislation reflects current law in regards to price
preference granted to locally grown agricultural products.
Representative Gatto confirmed that is correct.
Representative Gatto also mentioned food security. Root
cellars and farmer's storage help root crops to last
throughout the year. The creation of a farm-to-school
program will help children recognize this and aims at
encouraging farmers to stay with farming.
2:14:05 PM
Representative Austerman asked whether schools are defined
in the bill. Representative Gatto did not have an answer at
that time.
Representative Austerman noted that work programs such as
the Alaska Job Corps that teach culinary plans should be
included in the legislation in addition to traditional
schools. Representative Gatto agreed and noted that it is
possible that the term "schools" in the bill is defined as
all schools overseen by the Department of Education.
2:15:37 PM
Vice-Chair Thomas MOVED to ADOPT proposed committee
substitute, work draft 26-LS0284\P, Bannister, 4/8/10.
Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for discussion.
2:16:01 PM
BEN MULLIGAN, STAFF, CO-CHAIR STOLTZE explained that the
CS, which was drafted in the previous year, was updated to
reflect passage in the current fiscal year. January 25,
2010 was changed to January 25, 2011 on Page 3, line 20.
The sunset date was changed to July 1, 2014, in section 5,
to reflect that the legislature would review the program
after four years.
There being NO further OBJECTION, the CS was adopted.
Co-Chair Stoltze talked of farming and farming regions and
observed that the bill's relevance is not just limited to
the Palmer area.
2:17:45 PM
Vice-Chair Thomas wondered if there is still a significant
amount of farming in Tanana. Representative Kelly replied
that it has grown a lot.
2:19:02 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze mentioned the fiscal note and asked for
any discussion from committee members. Representative
Doogan asked for verification that the fiscal note was to
the Resources Committee version.
Co-Chair Stoltze replied in the affirmative and noted it
would be updated to reflect the Finance CS.
Representative Doogan noted the fiscal note included the
funding for two positions and asked for a brief description
of each of the positions.
2:20:57 PM
FRANCI HAVEMEISTER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF AGRICULTURE,
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, discussed the department's
fiscal note. She confirmed that there are two positions
requested under the bill. One position is for a Range 18
development specialist required to implement the in-school
education process as well as educating the schools
statewide. In addition, an agricultural inspector would be
necessary if a garden program were implemented, in order to
provide food inspection prior to its entry into schools for
consumption.
Representative Austerman observed that it appeared the
legislation would only involve schools in the public
system. He noted that a definition of schools is needed and
that the legislation should apply to university and all
others.
Co-Chair Stoltze asked Representative Gatto if he would
want the bill to be inclusive of all schools.
Representative Gatto verified that he would like to be as
inclusive as possible. He remarked that he would even like
to see people who have no ability to grow crops included,
as long as the impetus and structure for the program are in
place with state support.
Representative Austerman commented that he would also like
to be as inclusive as possible for as many as possible.
2:23:37 PM
Representative Doogan stated that the bill covers
everything that the Department of Education accredits
except for the University of Alaska. He noted that the list
located on page 6, appears to be complete with the
exception of the University.
Representative Gara asked the department to explain whether
it is already providing agricultural inspection for
products that are produced in the state. He wondered why
the bill required another agricultural inspector position.
Ms. Havemeister answered that the position would be
necessary if gardens were implemented in rural areas to
guarantee that the process of clean food development is
understood. There are currently two inspectors at the
Division of Agriculture, and their time would not allow
them to travel to rural Alaska.
Representative Gara asked for verification that the
department currently employs two inspectors. Ms.
Havemeister agreed.
Representative Gara asked if the program would increase the
demand by 20 percent. Ms. Havemeister responded that
implementing the program state-wide would increase expenses
due to travel costs.
Representative Gara voiced that there are farms statewide
that have products for consumption. He noted that it is not
obvious how the program differs from the agricultural
inspector needs that currently exist in rural areas.
Ms. Havemeister clarified that there are two inspectors for
Anchorage who do inspections for large producers who sell
into retail. For schools wanting to move product into the
school system for consumption, there would need to be an
inspection process in place.
Co-Chair Stoltze voiced the need to look at the fiscal note
further.
2:27:49 PM
Representative Austerman asked whether rural areas with
community gardens would need the produce to be inspected
prior to bringing it into the schools for consumption. Ms.
Havemeister affirmed.
Representative Austerman asked if there would be a fee to
the community for the inspection.
Ms. Havemeister responded that the fiscal note does not
reflect a fee for community inspection. The fiscal note
would include the development specialist traveling to do
more education type-work. Currently, most of the
inspections are done on the road system so the department
has not had to address the issue.
Representative Austerman asked if a restaurant has to pay a
fee for inspections, would the gardens also be subject to
an inspection fee from the Department of Natural Resources
(DNR). Ms. Havemeister verified the possibility and
responded that DNR would have to look into it.
Representative Austerman asked if DNR would anticipate
regulations. Ms. Havemeister responded possibly, and noted
it would depend on what schools were involved and on how
extensive the travel would be.
2:29:51 PM
Representative Gara noted the importance of updating the
fiscal note before the bill goes to the Senate.
Vice-Chair Thomas MOVED to report CS HB 70(FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 70(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with no
recommendations and with new fiscal notes from the
Department of Education and the Department of Natural
Resources.
2:31:08 PM At EASE
2:32:55 PM RECONVENED
SENATE BILL NO. 257
"An Act relating to funding for youth courts; and
relating to accounting for criminal fines."
2:33:29 PM
SENATOR DENNIS EGAN, SPONSOR, explained that the
legislation provides a sustainable funding source for youth
courts. Youth courts across the state share the same basic
principal that young people picked up for small crimes get
a trial by their peers. He pointed out that only 10 percent
of juveniles who go through the program re-offend, saving
the state approximately $10 thousand per offender. He
maintained that the program provides real attention and
real consequences. The kids who volunteer in the program
get great training in criminal law, which is another
benefit to Alaskans. The legislation designates a portion
of criminal fines as a funding source for the courts.
Currently, adult criminal fines go into the unrestricted
general fund. Senate Bill 257 designates up to 25 percent
of those funds for youth courts. Senator Egan noted that
making criminals pay for crime prevention is logical.
2:35:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ, a Co-Sponsor of SB 257, spoke in
support of the legislation. She noted that youth courts in
general and have been very successful, and specifically
mentioned the success of the program in Juneau. There are
12 youth courts across the state. The bill sponsors
received a significant amount of input from youth courts
across the state as well as from police departments,
municipalities and individuals.
Representative Doogan asked how much 25 percent of fines
would amount to.
JESSE KIEHL, STAFF, SENATOR EGAN, explained that criminal
fines average approximately $5.2 million to $5.3 million
per year. Providing 25 percent of those fines would be a
significant increase over current funding for youth courts
or the near term anticipated need.
Representative Doogan asked how the bill would deal with a
mechanism for funding the current need.
Mr. Kiehl answered that excess funds are automatically
returned to the unrestricted general fund when the
authorization is greater than the amount needed. The
legislative appropriation would be based on the need of the
youth courts. Twenty-five 25 percent would leave room for
future growth in the program.
2:39:10 PM
Representative Austerman asked for clarification regarding
language in the legislation that states the legislature
"may" appropriate 25 percent. He asked if that meant the
legislature could appropriate 10 percent if that was a
sufficient amount.
Mr. Kiehl observed that 10 percent would be approximately
the amount appropriated in the Senate version of the
operating budget.
Representative Munoz pointed out that in the House version
there was an amendment added to include the language "up to
25 percent". Representative Gara did not think the
additional language was necessary and observed that section
3 is permissible.
2:40:43 PM
Representative Foster noted his support for youth courts.
He noted that youth courts have an 8 percent recidivism
rate, which is lower than the traditional juvenile justice
system and asked if there is a cut-off point regarding the
kinds of cases that youth courts can accept. He questioned
if the 8 percent rate reflects an apples-to-apples
comparison between youth courts and the juvenile justice
system.
Mr. Kiehl explained that Alaska statute 47.12.400 sets a
bar for what can be handled by the juvenile court. Cases
referred to youth courts under Alaska statutes can be
alcohol related offenses, traffic offenses, and offenses up
to a Class A misdemeanor.
Co-Chair Stoltze asked what the most serious offense
referred to the youth courts could be.
Mr. Kiehl said a minor assault would be within the
misdemeanor realm, whereas serious bodily injury would not.
Co-Chair Stoltze noted he would like more answers regarding
his question.
Representative Joule commented that he received three
letters from students at Mt. Edgecumbe involved in youth
courts who were very articulate in their support of SB 257.
These students pointed out that having youth handle some of
these issues provides a savings to the courts, noting
savings of about $10 thousand per case. Representative
Joule asked if youth courts would have the latitude to deal
with truancy, which is something that the courts do not
appear to have time for.
Mr. Kiehl responded that he was not familiar enough with
the statute on truancy to provide a definitive answer. He
noted that he did not believe truancy to be a felony and
purported that when a juvenile is picked up for the
offense, the Division of Juvenile Justice could refer the
case to a youth court.
2:45:00 PM
Representative Joule followed up noting that truancy is a
glaring issue around the state that could be addressed in
the legislation. He stated that part of the reason the
youth courts are effective is because peers are dealing
with each other.
Representative Gara asked Senator Egan if the bill's
purpose aimed to address a shortfall youth courts currently
face or at preventing a shortfall in the future.
Senator Egan replied that it is a little of both, so when
current federal funding runs out, the youth courts will
continue to be funded.
Representative Gara asked whether the state is facing
decreasing federal funds.
Mr. Kiehl responded in the affirmative, noting the last of
the second earmark will end. Youth courts have done an
excellent job of reaching out to their communities to
broaden their budgets as much as possible. The 10 percent
referenced in the operating budget would be an amount
sufficient to keep the lights on and nothing more. However,
there have been requests from around the state to open new
youth courts that would serve more Alaskans. Youth courts
in some rural areas of the state have been closed and are
interested in re-opening.
2:48:02 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze questioned in the interaction between
Department of Health and Social Services and the Department
of Law, who handles what role and how would the legislation
impact the activities of both departments.
Mr. Kiehl responded that the youth courts operate under the
Department of Health and Social Services as a diversionary
program for juvenile justice cases. The Alaska Court System
provides cooperation and support but neither funding nor
oversight. Youth courts in most communities have use of
court rooms when available. The court system has in turn
seen the value of the youth courts and provides the use of
their court rooms free of charge.
2:49:07 PM
Representative Foster asked if his assumption that most
youth courts are associated with towns that have a court
was accurate. He wondered if villages have youth courts,
and if not, are there any options to get youth courts in
villages telephonically.
Mr. Kiehl felt there was a great possibility [to expand the
program telephonically] in the future. Alaska statute
47.12.400 only allows one youth court per municipality but
nothing prohibits two or more municipalities from operating
a single youth court by agreement between them.
2:50:13 PM
Co-Chair Hawker pointed out that the legislation originated
as a house bill in 2005, which died in the Senate Finance
Committee and noted his support of the bill.
Representative Austerman noted his support of the youth
courts and belief that they should be funded. Youth courts
help young students. He maintained that the bill does not
fund youth courts but highlights the issue that they should
be funded.
2:51:34 PM
Vice-Chair Thomas asked if plea bargaining from one
complaint to a lower one occurs in youth courts or are
charges are firm.
Mr. Kiehl responded that every youth court runs a little
differently. In some communities the youth court picks up a
case right after arrest. Other youth courts operate as
sentencing courts. The first expansion of youth courts in
Alaska happened at a time when the juvenile justice system
was so swamped that kids picked up for shoplifting just
received a letter notifying them of a $25 fine. Now these
cases get closer look because attorneys volunteer their
services to the youth courts.
Vice-Chair Thomas related a personal antidote.
2:54:53 PM
MEGHAN STANGELAND, ADVOCATE, JUNEAU YOUTH COURT, supported
the bill and keeping youth courts. She stressed that she
has learned so much from the youth court system, including
how the court system works and public speaking skills. She
noted the courts are also very important for the defendants
as the process focuses on constructing sentences that
reflect personalization for each defendant, which allows
the defendant to identify their strengths and to hopefully
give back to the community in ways that help them realize
they can be an asset to the community.
GINNY ESPENSHADE, KENAI PENINSULA YOUTH COURT (via
teleconference), responded to Representative Joule's
comment related to truancy, noting that each community
youth court could work with their community to modify the
court's focus based on the community's specific needs. Ms.
Espenshade referred to the upper state New York youth court
system, which is an entirely truancy based court, as an
example of how each youth court can respond to the needs of
their given community.
2:57:33 PM
CEEZAR MARTINSON, ANCHORAGE YOUTH COURT (via
teleconference), emphasized his strong support of the bill.
As a member of the Anchorage youth court, his experience
has been a very rewarding time, inspiring him to pursue a
career in law enforcement. Mr. Martinson encouraged support
of the bill.
SHARON LEON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ANCHORAGE YOUTH COURT (via
teleconference), in response to an earlier comment by
Representative Foster, voiced agreement on trying to get
youth courts into rural areas. Several youth courts are
currently looking to see if these practices can be used in
rural communities.
Ms. Leon testified that the support of youth courts
presents an opportunity to fund a program that provides
tangible benefits to Alaska's youth and adults and the
lives of future generations. Ms. Leon emphasized the
importance of a program where youth and adults work
together in a partnership and urged support of the bill.
3:02:38 PM
Representative Foster thanked Ms. Leon for the Anchorage
youth court's rural outreach efforts.
Co-Chair Stoltze closed public testimony.
3:03:22 PM
Co-Chair Hawker MOVED to report SB 257 out of Committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
SB 257 was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with previously published fiscal notes:
FN 1(CRT), FN 2(DHS), FN 3(LAW).
HOUSE BILL NO. 331
"An Act relating to funding for youth courts; and
relating to accounting for criminal fines."
HB 331 was SCHEDULED but not HEARD.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:06 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB257 Support Letters.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
SB 257 |
| SB_257_Sponsor_Statement_corrected.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
SB 257 |
| 01 HB331 Sponsor Statement[1].pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 331 |
| 05 HB331-UYCA FactBrief[1].docx |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 331 |
| 07 HB331 Fines in Statute[1].pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 331 |
| 08 HB331 Support Letters[1].pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 331 |
| HB331 Change to bill in (H)JUD.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 331 |
| HB 331 AK Youth Courts FAQS.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 331 |
| UYCA Youth Court Directory 4-2-2010 (3).doc |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
|
| Explanation of changes.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |
| explanation ofchanges HB 70CSHB70(Res)updated020110.doc |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |
| Fact Sheet.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |
| farm to school supporting materials.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |
| farm to school supporting materials.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |
| Letter of support 1.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |
| Letter of support 2.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |
| Letter of support 3.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |
| Request for hearing.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |
| Sectional.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |
| Sponsor statement.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |
| HB 70 CS WORKDRAFT 26-LS0248 P.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |
| HB70CS(RES)-DNR-AG-04-09-10NEW.pdf |
HFIN 4/9/2010 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |