Legislature(1999 - 2000)
01/21/2000 01:15 PM House JUD
Audio | Topic |
---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE January 21, 2000 1:15 p.m. COMMITTEE CALENDAR Overview of interstate compact by: Lonzo Henderson TAPE(S) 00-3, SIDE A CALL TO ORDER Representative Pete Kott, Chairman, convened the House Judiciary Standing Committee meeting at 1:15 p.m. PRESENT Committee members present at the call to order were Representatives Kott, Green, Croft, Rokeberg and Murkowski. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER MARGARET PUGH, Department of Corrections, introduced Lonzo Henderson, Deputy Director/Interstate Compact Administrator, Division of Community Corrections. Commissioner Pugh informed the committee that many persons on probation and/or parole, both state and federal, move about the country in one capacity or another. Therefore, states have a compact regarding how issues are handled with people who move across state borders. Furthermore, each state has an interstate compact administrator and as such Mr. Henderson represents the State of Alaska. LONZO HENDERSON, Deputy Director/Interstate Compact Administrator, Division of Community Corrections, Department of Corrections, provided the committee with an overview of the existing interstate compact and how the proposed legislation is coming about. He explained that the current compact allows for the transfer of the supervision of people on probation or parole to another state, the receiving state, if certain criteria are met. Those criteria include the person having a residence in the receiving state, the person being a resident of the receiving state, the person having a home offer in that state or receiving acceptance from the compact administrator of the receiving state that the plan is acceptable for the rehabilitation of the person. Due to issues that have arisen with the existing compact, which has been in existence since 1937, the Probation (Indisc.) Compact Administrators Association approached the National Institute of Corrections (NIC) for technical assistance. Those issues include victim notification, the allowance of people to transfer across state lines without going through the interstate compact, the issuance of travel passes that were outside the 30-day limitation and the allowance of sex offenders to cross state lines without verification as to their specific location. The NIC's position is that the current compact is outdated and should be "revamped." Therefore, NIC provided the states with a draft of the proposed compact. MR. HENDERSON stated that the proposed compact will have "more teeth" than the existing compact. He emphasized that any state [wishing to participate] would have to utilize the exact language provided in the proposed compact; there can be no deviations. Therefore, under the proposed compact the state would have to create a state council, a interstate council and an executive committee. He noted that the committee packet should include a breakdown regarding the cost per state that NIC projects. The formation of a new interstate compact ranges in cost from $18,000 to $48,000 per year. He pointed out that the new interstate compact has to be adopted by 35 states before it can become effective and before the rules can be established. MR. HENDERSON informed the committee that at the last Interstate Compact Administrators Association meeting a resolution to revise the new compact and add rules was adopted. One rule being drafted is in regard to the development of a policy for traveling sex offenders. Mr. Henderson noted that his policy for sex offenders in Alaska is that if a sex offender wants to travel to another state, the travel pass has to be faxed to his office where it is reviewed and then faxed to the receiving state. Furthermore, if the receiving state has registration requirements, those must be followed. Another issue under review is victim notification. Practically every state has a victim notification system and thus it is merely a matter of coordination between states. The new compact creates the Interstate Commission, which can sanction a state for not following the rules. However, Mr. Henderson believes that when an officer doesn't follow the compact rules that is an issue that should be dealt with in that state as a personnel issue, which is [currently] the case in Alaska. In conclusion, Mr. Henderson noted that if Alaska were to consider [the new compact], there would be an initial fiscal note of $18,000, which would cover the creation of the state council, the executive committee and the interstate commission. A question and answer session followed in which Mr. Henderson explained that Alaska doesn't have the issues that other states are experiencing with the existing compact and thus the adoption of the new compact would not have relevance for Alaska. If 35 states adopt the new compact and Alaska is not one of the 35, Alaska could continue under the existing compact and states with the new compact could continue to send people to states operating under the existing compact. However, it is not clear as to whether a state with the new compact would be able to go to court in order to sanction the receiving state, if the receiving state didn't follow the procedures of the compact. He also pointed out that no states have adopted the new compact, although he believes Massachusetts is reviewing the new compact. In response to Representative Croft, he informed the committee that the existing compact doesn't include representation by victim's groups and thus [the division] is looking into drafting legislation to ensure victim notification. There was discussion regarding the $18,000 fiscal note. It was noted that there may be fiscal notes in other areas. Commissioner Pugh pointed out that [the new compact] would raise the dues from the current $2,000 to $18,000 per year in order to run the commission at the national level. Furthermore, the new compact would require an in-state commission, which would be an additional cost. The discussion then turned to the difference in Alaska and other states in that Alaska doesn't have as much bureaucracy as other states and thus this is less of a problem in Alaska; the existing compact is working in Alaska. Therefore, Alaska needs to wait and see what happens as far as the other states and the proposed compact. During further questions and answers, Mr. Henderson said that the [proposed new] compact would supersede state law if there is a conflict. In regard to whether there would be an increased liability/burden to the state with the new compact if a person enters the state under the compact and commits a heinous act, Mr. Henderson indicated that if the policies and procedures were followed, there would be no additional liability. Regarding the cyclical work in Alaska, Mr. Henderson noted that there have been a few cases in which people have stayed without permission [beyond the length of their seasonal work], but those situations were resolved [with] the compact administrator of the other state. The questions turned to the issue of sex offenders, which are covered under the existing compact. Mr. Henderson pointed out that [the division] is looking at legislation to draft rules for travel passes for sex offenders. Commissioner Pugh pointed out sex offender travel has to be coordinated through the probation parole officer of the sending state. There was discussion regarding the sex offender laws in Alaska and other states and how that is dealt with in respect to the compact. Mr. Henderson clarified that the existing and the proposed compact only cover the supervision of those on probation or parole supervision. In regard to cases in which say an Alaskan on probation or parole supervision with electronic monitoring wants to travel to another state which doesn't have electronic monitoring, the case would have to be brought to the court for sentence modification in order for the person to travel to that state. COMMITTEE ACTION The committee took no action. ADJOURNMENT The meeting took a brief at-ease in order to organize for the committee to hear the legislation scheduled for the day. Therefore, the portion of the meeting in which the scheduled legislation was heard is treated as a separate meeting with separate minutes. NOTE: The meeting was recorded and handwritten log notes were taken. A copy of the tape(s) and log notes may be obtained by contacting the House Records Office at 129 6th Street, Suite 229, Juneau, Alaska 99801, (907) 465-2214, and after adjournment of the second session of the Twenty-first Alaska State Legislature this information may be obtained by contacting the Legislative Reference Library at 129 6th Street, Suite 102, Juneau, Alaska 99801, (907) 465-3808.
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|