Legislature(2015 - 2016)GRUENBERG 120

04/12/2016 01:00 PM JUDICIARY

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
+ SB 174 REG. OF FIREARMS/KNIVES BY UNIV. OF AK TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
-- Public & Invited Testimony --
+ SB 112 ADOPTION OF CHILD IN STATE CUSTODY TELECONFERENCED
<Bill Hearing Canceled>
-- Public & Invited Testimony --
+ HB 200 ADOPTION OF CHILD IN STATE CUSTODY TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSHB 200(HSS) Out of Committee
-- Public & Invited Testimony --
+ SB 180 PARENT-GUARDIAN/CHILD:TEMP. POWER OF ATTY TELECONFERENCED
Moved CSSB 180(JUD) Out of Committee
-- Public & Invited Testimony --
+= HB 334 CHILD CUSTODY;DOM. VIOLENCE;CHILD ABUSE TELECONFERENCED
Moved HB 334 Out of Committee
-- Public & Invited Testimony --
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
               HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                         April 12, 2016                                                                                         
                           1:07 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Chair                                                                                          
Representative Wes Keller, Vice Chair                                                                                           
Representative Neal Foster                                                                                                      
Representative Bob Lynn                                                                                                         
Representative Charisse Millett                                                                                                 
Representative Matt Claman                                                                                                      
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative Kurt Olson (alternate)                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 200                                                                                                              
"An  Act  establishing  procedures  related  to  a  petition  for                                                               
adoption  of a  child in  state custody;  adding a  definition of                                                               
'proxy  for  a  formal  petition';  amending  Rule  6(a),  Alaska                                                               
Adoption Rules; and providing for an effective date."                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 200(HSS) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 180(JUD)                                                                                                 
"An  Act relating  to the  temporary  delegation by  a parent  or                                                               
guardian  of powers  related to  a child;  relating to  adoption;                                                               
relating   to  nonprofit   organizations  that   provide  certain                                                               
assistance to parents;  relating to the distribution  to a parent                                                               
or guardian  in a  child protection  situation of  information on                                                               
family support services; and providing for an effective date."                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSSB 180(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 334                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to visitation and child custody."                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED HB 334 OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 174(FIN)                                                                                                 
"An Act relating to the regulation  of firearms and knives by the                                                               
University of Alaska; and providing for an effective date."                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
SENATE BILL NO. 112                                                                                                             
"An  Act  establishing  procedures  related  to  a  petition  for                                                               
adoption  of a  child in  state custody;  adding a  definition of                                                               
'proxy  for  a  formal  petition';  amending  Rule  6(a),  Alaska                                                               
Adoption Rules; and providing for an effective date."                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 200                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: ADOPTION OF CHILD IN STATE CUSTODY                                                                                 
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
04/16/15       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/16/15       (H)       HSS, JUD                                                                                               
03/29/16       (H)       HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
03/29/16       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/29/16       (H)       MINUTE (HSS)                                                                                           
03/29/16       (H)       HSS AT 6:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
03/29/16       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/29/16       (H)       MINUTE (HSS)                                                                                           
03/31/16       (H)       HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
03/31/16       (H)       Moved CSHB 200(HSS) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/31/16       (H)       MINUTE (HSS)                                                                                           
04/01/16       (H)       HSS RPT CS (HSS) NT 2DP 2NR                                                                            
04/01/16       (H)       DP: TALERICO, SEATON                                                                                   
04/01/16       (H)       NR: TARR, WOOL                                                                                         
04/10/16       (H)       JUD AT 2:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
04/10/16       (H)       -- MEETING CANCELED --                                                                                 
04/11/16       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
04/11/16       (H)       Scheduled but Not Heard                                                                                
04/12/16       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB 180                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: PARENT-GUARDIAN/CHILD: TEMP. POWER OF ATTY                                                                         
SPONSOR(s): GIESSEL                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
02/12/16       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/12/16       (S)       JUD                                                                                                    
02/24/16       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
02/24/16       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/24/16       (S)       MINUTE (JUD)                                                                                           
03/02/16       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/02/16       (S)       Moved CSSB 180(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/02/16       (S)       MINUTE (JUD)                                                                                           
03/07/16       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/07/16       (S)       Moved CSSB 180(JUD), Rescinded Action                                                                  
                         on Prior CS                                                                                            
03/07/16       (S)       MINUTE (JUD)                                                                                           
03/11/16       (S)       JUD RPT CS 1DP 3NR NEW TITLE                                                                           
03/11/16       (S)       DP: COGHILL                                                                                            
03/11/16       (S)       NR: MCGUIRE, MICCICHE, WIELECHOWSKI                                                                    
03/16/16       (S)       TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                                                                     
03/16/16       (S)       VERSION: CSSB 180(JUD)                                                                                 
03/18/16       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/18/16       (H)       JUD                                                                                                    
04/12/16       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 334                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: CHILD CUSTODY; DOM. VIOLENCE; CHILD ABUSE                                                                          
SPONSOR(s): MUNOZ                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
02/22/16       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/22/16       (H)       HSS, JUD                                                                                               
03/22/16       (H)       HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
03/22/16       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/22/16       (H)       MINUTE (HSS)                                                                                           
03/24/16       (H)       HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
03/24/16       (H)       <Bill Hearing Rescheduled to 3/29/16>                                                                  
03/29/16       (H)       HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
03/29/16       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/29/16       (H)       MINUTE (HSS)                                                                                           
04/05/16       (H)       HSS AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
04/05/16       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/05/16       (H)       MINUTE (HSS)                                                                                           
04/06/16       (H)       HSS AT 3:30 PM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
04/06/16       (H)       -- Continued from 4/5/16 Meeting --                                                                    
04/07/16       (H)       HSS RPT CS (HSS) 2DP 5NR                                                                               
04/07/16       (H)       DP: STUTES, VAZQUEZ                                                                                    
04/07/16       (H)       NR: TARR, TALERICO, FOSTER, WOOL,                                                                      
                         SEATON                                                                                                 
04/09/16       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
04/09/16       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/09/16       (H)       MINUTE (JUD)                                                                                           
04/12/16       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB 174                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: REG. OF FIREARMS/KNIVES BY UNIV. OF AK                                                                             
SPONSOR(s): KELLY                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
02/08/16       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/08/16       (S)       EDC, JUD                                                                                               
02/16/16       (S)       EDC AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
02/16/16       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/16/16       (S)       MINUTE (EDC)                                                                                           
02/17/16       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
02/17/16       (S)       Scheduled but Not Heard                                                                                
02/18/16       (S)       EDC AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
02/18/16       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/18/16       (S)       MINUTE (EDC)                                                                                           
02/23/16       (S)       EDC AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
02/23/16       (S)       Moved CSSB 174(EDC) Out of Committee                                                                   
02/23/16       (S)       MINUTE (EDC)                                                                                           
02/26/16       (S)       EDC RPT CS 2DP 1DNP 1NR SAME TITLE                                                                     
02/26/16       (S)       DP: DUNLEAVY, HUGGINS                                                                                  
02/26/16       (S)       DNP: GARDNER                                                                                           
02/26/16       (S)       NR: GIESSEL                                                                                            
02/26/16       (S)       FIN REFERRAL ADDED AFTER JUD                                                                           
02/29/16       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
02/29/16       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/29/16       (S)       MINUTE (JUD)                                                                                           
03/02/16       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/02/16       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/02/16       (S)       MINUTE (JUD)                                                                                           
03/07/16       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/07/16       (S)       Moved CSSB 174(EDC) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/07/16       (S)       MINUTE (JUD)                                                                                           
03/09/16       (S)       JUD RPT CS (EDC) 2DP 2NR                                                                               
03/09/16       (S)       DP: MCGUIRE, COGHILL                                                                                   
03/09/16       (S)       NR: MICCICHE, WIELECHOWSKI                                                                             
03/24/16       (S)       FIN AT 1:30 PM SENATE FINANCE 532                                                                      
03/24/16       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/24/16       (S)       MINUTE (FIN)                                                                                           
04/04/16       (S)       FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                                                                      
04/04/16       (S)       Moved CSSB 174(FIN) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/04/16       (S)       MINUTE (FIN)                                                                                           
04/06/16       (S)       FIN RPT CS 2DP 3NR 1AM NEW TITLE                                                                       
04/06/16       (S)       DP: KELLY, DUNLEAVY                                                                                    
04/06/16       (S)       NR: MICCICHE, OLSON, HOFFMAN                                                                           
04/06/16       (S)       AM: MACKINNON                                                                                          
04/07/16       (S)       TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                                                                     
04/07/16       (S)       VERSION: CSSB 174(FIN)                                                                                 
04/08/16       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/08/16       (H)       EDC, JUD                                                                                               
04/08/16       (H)       EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
04/08/16       (H)       -- MEETING CANCELED --                                                                                 
04/11/16       (H)       EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106                                                                             
04/11/16       (H)       Moved CSSB 174(FIN) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/11/16       (H)       MINUTE (EDC)                                                                                           
04/12/16       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHRISTY LAWTON, Director                                                                                                        
Office of Children's Services (OCS)                                                                                             
Department of Health & Social Services                                                                                          
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of HB 200, provided an                                                                
overview and answered questions.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
STACIE KRALY, Chief Assistant Attorney General                                                                                  
Labor and State Affairs Section                                                                                                 
Department of Law                                                                                                               
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of HB 200, answered                                                                   
questions.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
AMANDA MacADO                                                                                                                   
Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association                                                                                           
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of HB 200, offered                                                                    
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CRISTY WILLER, Chief Operating Officer                                                                                          
Cook Inlet Tribal Council (CITC)                                                                                                
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of HB 200, offered                                                                    
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MELANIE FREDERICKS, Community Member                                                                                            
Association of Village Council Presidents                                                                                       
Bethel, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of HB 200, offered                                                                    
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ANDREW BEAVER, Tribal Administrator                                                                                             
Native Village of Kwigillngok                                                                                                   
Kwigillngok, Alaska                                                                                                             
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of HB 200, offered                                                                    
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MELANIE BAHNKE, CEO                                                                                                             
KAWEAK Incorporated                                                                                                             
Nome, Alaska                                                                                                                    
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of HB  200,  offered                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
NICOLE BORROMEO, Executive Vice President and General Counsel                                                                   
Alaska Federation of Natives                                                                                                    
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of HB  200,  offered                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
KATHERINE MOSES                                                                                                                 
Tribal Administrator                                                                                                            
Asa'carsarmiut Tribal Council                                                                                                   
Mountain Village, Alaska                                                                                                        
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the  hearing of HB 200, Lorraine Mung                                                             
spoke on  behalf of  Ms. Kathrine Moses  and offered  support for                                                               
the legislation.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
EVELYN PETERSON, Echo Worker                                                                                                    
Asa'carsarmiut Tribal Council                                                                                                   
Mountain Village, Alaska                                                                                                        
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of HB  200,  offered                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DAPHNE JOE                                                                                                                      
Asa'carsarmiut Tribe                                                                                                            
Mountain Village, Alaska                                                                                                        
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of HB  200,  offered                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ELIZABETH STEVENS, Echo Worker                                                                                                  
Napaiap Tribal Court                                                                                                            
Napaiap, Alaska                                                                                                                 
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of HB  200,  offered                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DON SHIRCEL, Director                                                                                                           
Client Development                                                                                                              
Tanana Chiefs Conference                                                                                                        
Fairbanks, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of HB  200,  offered                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DARLENE PETE, Tribal Administrator                                                                                              
North Pole, Alaska                                                                                                              
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of HB  200, testified in                                                             
support of the legislation.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
APRIL FERGUSON, Senior Vice President and General Counsel                                                                       
Bristol Bay Native Corporation                                                                                                  
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of HB  200, testified in                                                             
support of the legislation.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
ELIZABETH MEDICINE CROW, President/CEO                                                                                          
First Alaskans Institute                                                                                                        
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of HB  200, testified in                                                             
support of the legislation.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MELVIN EGOAK                                                                                                                    
Atmauluak, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of HB  200, testified in                                                             
support of the legislation.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
ELIZABETH HENSLEY                                                                                                               
General Counsel, Maniilaq Association                                                                                           
Kotzebue, Alaska                                                                                                                
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of HB  200, testified in                                                             
support of the legislation.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
LORINDA WESTIN O'BRIAN                                                                                                          
Bethel, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of HB  200, testified in                                                             
support of the legislation.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MARY TUNUCHUK                                                                                                                   
Chefornak Tribal Council                                                                                                        
Chefornak, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of HB  200, testified in                                                             
support of the legislation.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
KARLE NORE, Staff                                                                                                               
Senator Cathy Giesel                                                                                                            
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented SB  180 on behalf of Senator Cathy                                                             
Giesel, prime sponsor.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
ANDREW BROWN, Senior Fellow                                                                                                     
Child Welfare Reform                                                                                                            
Foundation for Government Accountability                                                                                        
Naples, Florida                                                                                                                 
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  180,  offered                                                             
testimony.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
ANDY COARY                                                                                                                      
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  180,  offered                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHARITY CARMODY, President                                                                                                      
Beacon Hill                                                                                                                     
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the  hearing of SB 180, explained the                                                             
workings of Beacon Hill.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MIKE COONS                                                                                                                      
Palmer, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of SB  180, testified in                                                             
support of the legislation.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
TRACY SPARTZ CAMPBELL, Deputy Director                                                                                          
Office of Children's Services                                                                                                   
Department of Health & Social Services                                                                                          
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the hearing  of  SB 180,  answered                                                             
questions.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CRYSTAL KOENEMAN, Staff                                                                                                         
Representative Cathy Munoz                                                                                                      
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of HB  334,  offered                                                             
testimony on behalf of Representative Munoz.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REBECCA SHIELDS, Executive Director                                                                                             
Kodiak Women's Resource and Crisis Center                                                                                       
Kodiak, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During the  hearing  of HB  334, spoke  in                                                             
opposition to the legislation.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
PAUL GRANT, Attorney                                                                                                            
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During the  hearing of  HB 334,  discussed                                                             
current law and this legislation.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
SARALYN TABACHNICK, Executive Director                                                                                          
Aiding Women in Abuse and Rape Emergencies (AWARE)                                                                              
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the  hearing of HB 334, discussed the                                                             
effects of domestic violence on children.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
FRED TRIEM, Attorney                                                                                                            
Petersburg, Alaska                                                                                                              
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During the  hearing of  HB 334,  discussed                                                             
legislative drafting.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR PETE KELLY                                                                                                              
Fairbanks, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented SB 174 as prime sponsor.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
JOE BYRNES, Staff                                                                                                               
Senator Pete Kelly                                                                                                              
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  174,  offered                                                             
testimony and answered questions.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MICHAEL HOSTINA, General Counsel                                                                                                
University of Alaska, Fairbanks                                                                                                 
Fairbanks, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the hearing  of  SB 174,  answered                                                             
questions.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MAC COOPER, Associated General Counsel                                                                                          
Office of General Counsel                                                                                                       
University of Alaska                                                                                                            
Fairbanks, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the hearing  of  SB 174,  answered                                                             
questions.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
KEN LANDFIELD                                                                                                                   
Homer, Alaska                                                                                                                   
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  174,  offered                                                             
opposition to the legislation.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
ERIN HOOD                                                                                                                       
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  174,  offered                                                             
opposition to this legislation.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
SALLY RUE                                                                                                                       
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the hearing  of  SB 174,  strongly                                                             
opposed this legislation.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
FRANK RUE                                                                                                                       
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the hearing  of  SB 176,  strongly                                                             
opposed this legislation.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CALLIE CONERTON, Student Government President                                                                                   
University of Alaska Southeast                                                                                                  
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of SB  174, testified in                                                             
opposition for the legislation.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
JENNIFER McCLUNG, Instructor                                                                                                    
University of Alaska Anchorage                                                                                                  
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During the  hearing  of SB  174, spoke  in                                                             
opposition to SB 174.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
ROBIN SMITH                                                                                                                     
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During the  hearing  of SB  174, spoke  in                                                             
opposition to the legislation.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CAROLINE STORM                                                                                                                  
Alaska PTA Advocacy Committee                                                                                                   
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During the  hearing of  SB 174,  discussed                                                             
overreach.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
PATRICK RACE                                                                                                                    
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During the  hearing  of SB  174, spoke  in                                                             
opposition to the legislation.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
BRIAN JUDY                                                                                                                      
Senior State Lobbyist                                                                                                           
National Rifle Association                                                                                                      
State of California Assemblyman                                                                                                 
Unknown Address                                                                                                                 
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of SB  174, testified in                                                             
support of SB 174.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
STEVEN SAMUELSON                                                                                                                
Southeast Alaska                                                                                                                
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  174,  offered                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ALYSE GALVIN                                                                                                                    
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During the  hearing  of SB  174, spoke  in                                                             
opposition to this legislation.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
BUTCH MOORE                                                                                                                     
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  174,  offered                                                             
opposition to this legislation.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MIKE NEWBERN, Assistant Director of Public Relations                                                                            
Buckeyes for Concealed Carry                                                                                                    
National Rifle Association                                                                                                      
Unknown City, Ohio                                                                                                              
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  174,  offered                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
TOM BOUTIN                                                                                                                      
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  174,  offered                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JENNIFER GLENN                                                                                                                  
Volunteer                                                                                                                       
Alaska Chapter, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America                                                                     
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During the  hearing  of SB  174, spoke  in                                                             
opposition to this legislation.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MIKE COONS                                                                                                                      
Palmer, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  174,  offered                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DANIEL BELGRIZE                                                                                                                 
University of Alaska Anchorage                                                                                                  
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  174,  offered                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
RYAN SHERWIN-ALAKAYAK, Student                                                                                                  
University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA)                                                                                            
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  174,  offered                                                             
support for this legislation.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
HANS RODVIK                                                                                                                     
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  174,  offered                                                             
support for this legislation.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CEEZAR MARTINSON, Student                                                                                                       
University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA)                                                                                            
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During the  hearing  of SB  174, spoke  in                                                             
support of the legislation.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
KELSI PULCZINMS, Student                                                                                                        
University of Alaska Anchorage                                                                                                  
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During the  hearing  of SB  174, spoke  in                                                             
support of the legislation.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
LAURA MIKO                                                                                                                      
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During the  hearing of  SB 174,  testified                                                             
against the legislation.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:07:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  GABRIELLE  LEDOUX  called  the  House  Judiciary  Standing                                                             
Committee meeting  to order at 1:07  p.m. Representatives Foster,                                                               
Keller,  Lynn, Claman,  and LeDoux  were present  at the  call to                                                               
order.   Representatives  Millett and  Kreiss-Tomkins arrived  as                                                               
the meeting was in progress.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
           HB 200-ADOPTION OF CHILD IN STATE CUSTODY                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:07:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX announced that the  first order of business would be                                                               
HOUSE BILL NO. 200, "An  Act establishing procedures related to a                                                               
petition  for adoption  of a  child  in state  custody; adding  a                                                               
definition of 'proxy for a  formal petition'; amending Rule 6(a),                                                               
Alaska Adoption Rules; and providing for an effective date."                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:08:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHRISTY LAWTON,  Director, Office  of Children's  Services (OCS),                                                               
Department of  Health & Social  Services, said she  was available                                                               
to testify.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
1:08:40 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
STACIE KRALY,  Chief Assistant Attorney General,  Labor and State                                                               
Affairs Section,  Department of  Law, said  she was  available to                                                               
testify.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:08:45 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON advised that she would  present an overview of HB 200,                                                               
as  well  as  a  detailed  sectional  analysis.    The  bill  was                                                               
primarily created  to help increase  the state's  compliance with                                                               
the Indian Child Welfare Act, enacted  in 1978.  The Act seeks to                                                               
ensure  that  Alaska Native  and  American  Indian children  are,                                                               
whenever possible,  kept closest  to home  and with  their family                                                               
members, she  explained.  Cases  involving foster care  are heard                                                               
in a  Child In  Need of  Aid (CINA)  proceedings in  the superior                                                               
court.   Although,  hearings involving  foster  children such  as                                                               
adoption,  guardianship,  and   civil  custody  proceedings,  are                                                               
typically  conducted in  different courts  with different  judges                                                               
outside  of the  CINA  proceedings.   This  bill  creates a  "one                                                               
judge,  one  family"  model, whereby,  all  proceedings  will  be                                                               
conducted under  the same judge  when a  child is a  dependent of                                                               
the State of Alaska.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
1:11:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX referred  to the desire to keep a  Native child with                                                               
their family,  and asked  whether it  works differently  for non-                                                               
Native children.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON replied that she intends  to speak to that issue later                                                               
in the  presentation.   She advised that  in developing  the "one                                                               
judge, one family" concept, the  division worked closely with the                                                               
Public  Defender's Office,  Office  of Public  Advocacy, and  the                                                               
Alaska Court System.   This concept will save time  and money for                                                               
state entities and,  more importantly, it will  help all children                                                               
get  out of  the foster  care  system faster.   This  legislation                                                               
ensures  that   the  proceedings  are  timely   with  appropriate                                                               
judicial determinations made, because  multiple judges and courts                                                               
will not be involved, she said.   Another important change in the                                                               
bill  involves   Native  and  non-Native  foster   care  adoption                                                               
preferences in  terms of how  it looks to find  people short-term                                                               
or long-term to  care for those children.  The  division looks at                                                               
immediate  family members  first,  then extend  family, and  then                                                               
close family  friends who have  stepped up.   She said  that with                                                               
regard to  the Alaska  Native children  covered under  the Indian                                                               
Child  Welfare   Act,  after  the  division   has  exhausted  all                                                               
relatives,  the  division  must   also  consider  whether  tribal                                                               
members associated with the child may be interested.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
1:13:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  LAWTON  explained that  this  provision,  in relation  to  a                                                               
federal  legal   decision,  puts  a  burden   upon  those  people                                                               
interested in the immediate and  permanent placement of an Alaska                                                               
Native child.   She explained  that those interested  people must                                                               
file a  formal petition with  the court for those  preferences to                                                               
be  recognized.    Currently,  when the  division  looks  at  the                                                               
temporary or  permanent placement  of a  child, it  reviews those                                                               
preferences along the  way, and continues to  evaluate and search                                                               
for relatives whenever possible, she said.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
1:13:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  surmised that this  is strictly with  Alaska Native                                                               
children.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON replied that in  both scenarios the division is always                                                               
looking  for  relatives  and  trying to  move  children  in  with                                                               
relatives  whenever  possible.   When  discussing  Alaska  Native                                                               
children, once the division has  exhausted looking for relatives,                                                               
it also  looks to the tribe  and other tribal members  who may be                                                               
willing  to care  for  the child.   Under  current  law when  the                                                               
Indian  Child Welfare  Act  applies, a  formal  petition must  be                                                               
filed  to adopt  for  the adoption  placement  preferences to  be                                                               
preserved.   People not  covered under  the Act  do not  have the                                                               
same burden and  requirement to file a petition or  proxy to have                                                               
their preferences  preserved to advise  they are a  relative that                                                               
should  come before  the division  looks to  non-relatives.   She                                                               
explained this  bill tries to  provide a simpler  mechanism, such                                                               
that  those preferences  can  be acknowledged  by  the court  and                                                               
recognized.  She  explained "It doesn't make it  be an automatic,                                                               
you know, proceed to adoption  that basically then requires us to                                                               
do  an evaluation  and consider  their suitability  for adoption,                                                               
long-term,  as   well  as  short-term  placement."     Under  the                                                               
division's  current policy  and  Alaska  Statutes, the  provision                                                               
continues  to require  that the  division  consider other  people                                                               
that come forward  and looking at all of the  options.  She said,                                                               
"This really  just has us  put that on  the record for  the court                                                               
and then it would initiate a process moving forward."                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:15:16 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX asked her to explain  what would be put on the court                                                               
record.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON  answered that it  would basically recognize,  for the                                                               
court, that under that Act  there are specific adoption placement                                                               
preferences that  apply, that  the court  should consider  in its                                                               
final determination.  She explained,  it is not forcing the court                                                               
to make a  final determination one direction or  another, it just                                                               
reads  that "it  must at  least be  considered."   [Under current                                                               
law, a  formal Petition to Adopt  must be filed in  order for the                                                               
adoption placement  preferences to be preserved],  and this proxy                                                               
does  that, so  [the relatives  or members  of the  Alaska Native                                                               
child's tribe]  are not required  to file the formal  Petition to                                                               
Adopt early  on.   Although, she pointed  out, when  the division                                                               
and  the court  decide who  should adopt  the child,  that person                                                               
would,  ultimately,  file  the Petition  to  Adopt  because  that                                                               
mechanism is still  required.  It is just not  required early on.                                                               
She explained  the reason to  not file  the petition early  on is                                                               
because  the division  may  rule  a person  out,  and filing  the                                                               
petition early on  would have been for not,  because the division                                                               
had not yet evaluated them, she said.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:16:13 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX asked  whether, under  current  law, a  grandparent                                                               
desiring to adopt the [foster  Alaska Native] child would have to                                                               
file a petition with the division.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON explained that, currently,  for a grandparent desiring                                                               
to adopt their grandchild covered  under the Indian Child Welfare                                                               
Act, they  are required  to file  a formal  Petition to  Adopt so                                                               
they can  be considered  a higher preference  than a  stranger to                                                               
their  grandchild.    Under this  legislation,  the  less  formal                                                               
process  of  using  a  proxy  for adoption  could  be  used,  she                                                               
explained.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
1:17:04 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX  opined that,  under  this  bill, the  grandparents                                                               
would  be allowed  a less  formal process  of using  a proxy  for                                                               
adoption.   Currently,  she asked,  what  precludes the  division                                                               
from  considering the  grandparents in  the first  place, because                                                               
the  grandparents  or family  members  appear  to be  people  the                                                               
division would want  to consider.  She further asked  why, in the                                                               
first place, the division needs the bill to do the right thing.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS.  LAWTON   responded  that  the   division  always   looks  at                                                               
grandparents  and  relatives  as  a  placement  and  a  permanent                                                               
placement,  with  or  without  this legislation.    The  bill  is                                                               
necessary due  to a federal  law that was changed  that basically                                                               
said  in order  for [the  adoption placement]  preferences to  be                                                               
recognized  and considered  by the  court, a  formal Petition  to                                                               
Adopt  must  be  filed  by the  grandparent,  family  member,  or                                                               
someone in the  category of people considered  to have preference                                                               
for adoption of a Native child.   She referred to the scenario of                                                               
the  grandmother, and  advised that  once the  case is  ready for                                                               
adoption,  in  order to  ensure  that  the court  recognizes  the                                                               
grandmother is  the first preference  placement because she  is a                                                               
relative, that information  must be on the record.   Without that                                                               
information on the  court's record, if a  non-related person also                                                               
wanted  to adopt  the child  then the  court would  look at  them                                                               
almost equally, as  opposed to the consideration  that a relative                                                               
should   have  a   higher  preference   for  consideration,   she                                                               
explained.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
1:19:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX surmised  that under federal law they  still have to                                                               
file the petition, correct.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON agreed,  and she advised they will  eventually have to                                                               
file the  petition, they  just don't  have to do  it early  on so                                                               
those preferences are recognized while moving forward.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX pointed out that  since this is not changing federal                                                               
law, why  wouldn't the department  help the grandmother  early on                                                               
to file this petition.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON  opined that  it is partly  because the  division does                                                               
not know,  at that  point, whether the  grandmother would  be the                                                               
permanent  person because  it does  an  evaluation with  approval                                                               
from the court.  Oftentimes,  several relatives come forward and,                                                               
as part  of the division's  process, it evaluates everyone.   The                                                               
division  wouldn't  want  to  invest   the  time,  nor  have  the                                                               
grandmother invest the  time, with a more formal  mechanism.  The                                                               
proxy basically  says, "as we consider  and as we move  towards a                                                               
permanent decision about  where the child will go,  the court has                                                               
to recognize  that there are preferred  placement preferences for                                                               
this child."   The division would then evaluate  the relatives to                                                               
determine which  relative is the  best long-term plan,  the other                                                               
legal parties  then get to weigh  in on that, and  the court then                                                               
ultimately has to agree.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:20:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  questioned why the  division doesn't just  do this,                                                               
why  is it  taking this  legislation to  get the  division to  do                                                               
something that it wants to do anyway.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS. KRALY  responded that  the reason for  the legislation  is to                                                               
create  a  system  for  both   the  courts,  and  the  Office  of                                                               
Children's Services (OCS), to establish  this "placeholder" for a                                                               
relative or a priority preference  placement.  The system is that                                                               
this proxy  is issued  and it provides  a priority  of preference                                                               
if, and  when, the  case gets  to adoption.   While there  may be                                                               
merit to  Chair LeDoux's statement  about doing  this informally,                                                               
she noted, due to the complexities  of these cases and the number                                                               
of individuals  involved, the legislation is  necessary to create                                                               
a formal recognition  of these issues.  In the  cases that led to                                                               
this  legislation,  the  lack  of  the  formal  petition  created                                                               
enormous confusion  within the  system.   She noted  that members                                                               
may recall news accounts that  when permanency was decided, these                                                               
family  members and  grandparents were  not allowed  to have  the                                                               
permanency  placement of  their grandchildren.   The  legislation                                                               
creates the formal process whereby  everyone, including the court                                                               
system,  the  tribes,  opposing  attorneys,  and  the  Office  of                                                               
Children's  Services  (OCS),  all   know  who  is  interested  in                                                               
becoming  a permanent  placement.    Technically, she  commented,                                                               
this could  be done on an  informal basis, but it  doesn't create                                                               
the efficient guarantee of avoiding  the complexities that happen                                                               
when the  placeholders are  not in  effect at  the time  the case                                                               
gets to permanency.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN  opined that the  push for the  revision to                                                               
the  adoption code  is related  to the  litigation involving  the                                                               
Native  Village  of  Tununak  v.   State  of  Alaska,  Office  of                                                             
Children's Services, 303 P.3d 431.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. KRALY agreed.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
1:23:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CLAMAN asked  whether the  state lost  the Native                                                             
Village of Tununak case.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS. KRALY said the state lost the case.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
1:23:45 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN  asked what  the Native Village  of Tununak                                                             
case  held and  how  these  changes to  the  statute provide  the                                                               
problem does not arise in the future.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON responded  that under Native Village of  Tununak II v.                                                             
State  of Alaska,  334  P.3d  165, the  case  was  in the  Alaska                                                             
Supreme  Court  and  involved a  non-native,  non-related  foster                                                               
family seeking to adopt an Alaska  Native child.  The other party                                                               
was  the  child's  Alaska  Native grandmother.    The  court  was                                                               
litigating and  trying to make  a determination about  that case,                                                               
and at the same time the  United States Supreme Court was hearing                                                               
Adoptive Couple v.  Baby Girl, 570 U.S. ___ (2013),  out of South                                                             
Dakota.  In  the Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl,  the United States                                                             
Supreme  Court  was   contemplating  a  non-native,  non-relative                                                               
foster family  seeking to adopt the  child.  The other  party was                                                               
the  child's  biological  father  who was  seeking  to  have  his                                                               
parental  rights reinstated.   He  had been  active military  and                                                               
when he  returned to the  United States, unbeknownst to  him, his                                                               
child  was up  for adoption.    The United  States Supreme  Court                                                               
basically  concluded that  in order  for  the adoption  placement                                                               
preferences, under  the Indian  Child Welfare  Act, to  be upheld                                                               
and recognized, a  person had to first file a  formal petition to                                                               
adopt.   When that  decision was made,  the Alaska  Supreme Court                                                               
had no  recourse except to rule  in Native Village of  Tununak II                                                             
case on  behalf of the foster  family because they were  the only                                                               
party  that had  previously filed  a Petition  to Adopt  that was                                                               
being  held  in  abeyance.    The grandmother  had  not  filed  a                                                               
petition nor  was she required  to file  at that point,  but they                                                               
had initiated  those proceedings and  because they were  the only                                                               
party that  had initiated, the  Alaska Supreme Court  decided the                                                               
case in  favor of the  foster family and  the child went  to them                                                               
for adoption.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
1:25:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON continued that this  provision basically reads that in                                                               
recognition  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court's  decision,                                                               
Alaska wanted to create something  less burdensome such that they                                                               
wouldn't have  to file  a formal petition  upfront.   She pointed                                                               
out  that close  to 60  percent of  children in  foster care  are                                                               
Alaska Native  and half of  them end  up going to  adoptions with                                                               
non-related extended family members  (NREFM).  The division sorts                                                               
out when  the child should go,  and where the child  should go as                                                               
it works  on possible  reunification.  Relatives  come in  and go                                                               
out  because interest  sometimes waxes  and wanes.   The  [proxy]                                                               
could serve  as a  placeholder that  there are  specific adoption                                                               
placement preferences the court can't  ignore when it gets to the                                                               
final decision.   It does not mean that the  court can't consider                                                               
interested people, but the court must  look at that with a little                                                               
more weight in terms of the people identified.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:26:48 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CLAMAN  asked whether  one  of  the issues  under                                                               
Native Village of Tununak case  was that the grandmother had sent                                                             
a letter or provided some notice  to the Department of Health and                                                               
Social Services  that she was  interested, but she had  not filed                                                               
the formal  notice.   He surmised that  this statute  change will                                                               
provide that a person in  the grandmother's position could send a                                                               
letter to the department to protect  their ability to go in later                                                               
and formally seek to adopt  because the department would have had                                                               
notice they were an interested party.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON  said he  was correct.   The grandmother  had informed                                                               
the department orally,  and in writing, of her  interest, but she                                                               
hadn't taken the step of filing  the formal petition.  Ms. Lawton                                                               
related that  the closest  court to  the grandmother  was Bethel,                                                               
which is an $800 travel ticket  away from her home, she didn't do                                                               
that and  she wasn't required  to do that.   She opined  that the                                                               
court had  told her she  didn't need to do  that, but due  to the                                                               
United States Supreme Court's decision,  the Alaska Supreme Court                                                               
had to  say that  filing the  formal petition  is the  only thing                                                               
that matters now.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
1:27:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   CLAMAN   noted   that  the   department   issued                                                               
regulations allowing for the more  formal notice as an interested                                                               
party, and opined  that those regulations have been  in place for                                                               
roughly a year.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON  agreed, and she commented  that emergency regulations                                                               
were enacted;  however, they  only apply  to what  the department                                                               
does,  it  doesn't require  the  court  to  change any  of  their                                                               
processes or system.  Without  the support of the legislation the                                                               
regulations do not have the intended effect, she said.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
1:28:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN  surmised that the regulations  are working                                                               
well after a year.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON opined that she  was unsure whether the department had                                                               
seen  it tested  entirely.   Although, she  commented, it  hasn't                                                               
heard of  any cases where it  has not worked.   She described the                                                               
regulations  as  being  enacted  backwards  because  usually  the                                                               
statutes come first.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CLAMAN offered  that  this legislation  basically                                                               
puts in  place [a  statute] where the  Native Village  of Tununak                                                             
case won't happen again in Alaska.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON answered, absolutely.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
1:29:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX pointed  out that  federal law  still requires  the                                                               
petition, so under  the Village of Tununak  case, the grandmother                                                             
hadn't filed the  petition, but she put the  department on notice                                                               
that she  wanted to  adopt the  child.   Under Native  Village of                                                             
Tununak, she  asked whether  the department went  to bat  for the                                                             
grandmother.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON  related she  was not  familiar with  the case  in the                                                               
early beginnings and  she couldn't speak to why, or  why not, the                                                               
department did not pursue the grandmother earlier in that case.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
1:29:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX asked  whether there is an exception  in federal law                                                               
that says a person does not have  to do the petition early if the                                                               
state has regulations or a law allowing a placeholder.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS.  LAWTON explained  that the  formal petition  will eventually                                                               
occur,  and this  legislation is  another mechanism,  a temporary                                                               
solution,  of preserving  those placement  preferences until  the                                                               
petition is  actually required.   She  reiterated there  could be                                                               
several  family members  or other  members of  the child's  tribe                                                               
coming forward,  and as the  division sorts out those  folks, all                                                               
but one  are not  viable options.   The  folks [not  chosen] will                                                               
never  get to  the step  of  filing a  Petition to  Adopt.   This                                                               
legislation, she explained, would  provide for the recognition of                                                               
where they fall  in those placement preferences,  and without the                                                               
use  of the  proxy  they would  have been  required  to file  the                                                               
formal Petition to Adopt in order  for the court to recognize and                                                               
consider them.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
1:31:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER  asked  whether   the  Native  Village  of                                                             
Tununak case had to do with filing  by proxy, or not.  He pointed                                                             
out  that the  inference  made  from that  case  was that  Alaska                                                               
needed  to have  a law  changed to  formalize this  process.   He                                                               
queried  whether  without  this  law there  can  be  an  informal                                                               
placement  put in,  such as  a  letter, telephone  call, fax,  or                                                               
filling out  a form, or whatever.   He noted surprise  that it is                                                               
needed  where  it  wasn't  a  direct  corrective  action  in  the                                                               
lawsuit.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON related  that the inference earlier was  that if under                                                               
Native  Village of  Tununak II  the provision  for the  use of  a                                                             
proxy wasn't  in state  law, then the  grandmother, when  she had                                                               
identified  herself  to  the  court   as  someone  interested  in                                                               
placement and  adoption, would  have preserved  her right.   When                                                               
that decision  was ultimately decided  it wouldn't  have mattered                                                               
who had  filed the  formal Petition to  Adopt because  that would                                                               
have still been  considered, but it wouldn't  have guaranteed the                                                               
judge  would have  ruled  in her  favor.   She  offered that  she                                                               
doesn't know all of the  facts of weighing the placement options,                                                               
but  she opined  that if  they  don't file  the proxy  in a  case                                                               
involving  a Native  child, and  later relative  A comes  forward                                                               
saying they  want the child, and  foster family A also  wants the                                                               
child,  the court  does not  have to  recognize that  there is  a                                                               
higher preference.  This child  is covered under the Indian Child                                                               
Welfare Act and this is a  relative of the child, the court could                                                               
almost  look  at  them as  equal  competing  interested  parties.                                                               
Whereby, the  division believes it  is important for  children to                                                               
be with their families, and if  they can't be with their families                                                               
to keep  them within  their tribal communities  or close  to home                                                               
and,  she  related,  that  is what  this  provision  ensures  the                                                               
division do.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:33:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  offered a scenario  of the grandmother  telling the                                                               
division she  wants the  child, writes a  letter, send  an email,                                                               
and  orally puts  it  in on  the division's  record.   She  asked                                                               
whether it is then the  division's responsibility to make certain                                                               
the  grandmother  files a  petition,  and  without this  law  the                                                               
division won't make sure the grandmother files the petition.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:34:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  LAWTON explained  that the  division's responsibility  would                                                               
be,  after the  grandmother identifies  her [desire  to have  the                                                               
child], the division  would [investigate], have a  home visit and                                                               
further  conversations  with  the  grandmother  to  evaluate  her                                                               
ability to take  immediate placement.  She said,  "It's just, you                                                               
know, call  me -- call  me a year from  now if things  don't work                                                               
out, you know,  with the biological mom, but I'm  willing to take                                                               
the child now and permanently, if  needed."  The division is then                                                               
required to provide  a written report to the  court advising what                                                               
it learned  about the  grandmother.  A  court hearing  would then                                                               
take  place to  evaluate  whether anyone  has disagreements  with                                                               
this potential placement.   Assuming she is  suitable and willing                                                               
to  take immediate  placement, the  division  would move  forward                                                               
from that perspective.  The  petition still would not necessarily                                                               
need to be formally filed  until, and if, reunification fails and                                                               
the division must actually move to an adoption.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
1:35:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX inquired  as to  why the  division doesn't  just do                                                               
that, why a  law is necessary to tell the  department what to do,                                                               
and if that  is the best practice why hasn't  the department been                                                               
doing it.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON  responded that it  has been the  division's practice,                                                               
and opined that the law is  necessary in order to ensure that the                                                               
adoption placement preferences are  not ignored, or otherwise not                                                               
considered by the  court.  She offered that it  has nothing to do                                                               
with the department's  efforts to find relatives  or evaluate the                                                               
relatives,  it has  to  do with  a  judicial determination  that,                                                               
without this  legislation or a  formal petition, may  have family                                                               
members or other tribal members  not given the consideration they                                                               
are due.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
1:35:55 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER  asked whether  she  was  saying that  the                                                               
court would ignore  a letter that was on file  and managed by the                                                               
division.   He further asked  the difference between  "what we're                                                               
doing"  and information  the division  receives through  whatever                                                               
means that there is a potential  placement out there.  He quiered                                                               
whether the courts would take that into consideration,                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS.  LAWTON answered  that in  Native Village  of Tununak  it was                                                             
exactly seen that  the court didn't take  that into consideration                                                               
even though that request and  notification had occurred.  Except,                                                               
by  the letter  of the  law, the  grandmother had  not filed  the                                                               
formal  Petition  to  Adopt  and  court  said  the  grandmother's                                                               
actions were not good enough, she explained.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:36:49 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX surmised  that if this legislation had  been the law                                                               
and  the grandmother  still  hadn't filed  a  formal Petition  to                                                               
Adopt, that would not have been good enough either.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MS.  LAWTON responded  that if  the grandmother  didn't file  the                                                               
formal Petition to  Adopt and the division didn't  have the proxy                                                               
provision, and a  family member came forward at  some other later                                                               
date,  the  court  would  not  have  to  recognize  the  adoption                                                               
placement preferences.   For example,  if the child  was residing                                                               
with  a non-related  extended family  member  (NREFM), the  court                                                               
could look at  them equally, weigh the pros and  cons, and make a                                                               
determination as  to who  would best meet  the child's  needs and                                                               
not give consideration to a relationship with the child, per se.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
1:37:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  FOSTER surmised  that the  state lost  the Native                                                             
Village of  Tununak lawsuit  and the state  is attempting  to fix                                                             
that.   He  referred to  the committee  packets and  offered that                                                               
they include information  in which First Alaskans,  AFN, and many                                                               
tribes  and  Native Corporations  show  support  for the  state's                                                               
proposal  to fix  it.    He then  voiced  support  because he  is                                                               
comfortable where the bill is going with this issue.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
1:38:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took a short at ease.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
1:38:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  listed the names  of witnesses available  to answer                                                               
questions, and hearing no requests opened public testimony.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
1:39:49 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
AMANDA  MacADO, Aleutian  Pribilof  Islands Association,  offered                                                               
the  Aleutian  Pribilof  Islands  Association's  support  of  the                                                               
legislation.   After listening to  the confusing  discussion, she                                                               
stated the Child In Need of Aid  (CINA) process can be a long and                                                               
confusing  process for  communities and  villages across  Alaska.                                                               
These  are  formalities  that  many  Native  individuals  do  not                                                               
understand.   Allowing these families  to express  their interest                                                               
in the CINA proceedings, not  having to wait until the permanency                                                               
goal where the  parents have already terminated  their rights and                                                               
wait until  probate, gives  them an opportunity  to have  time to                                                               
prepare, time  to have a  full understanding of what  will happen                                                               
and  what will  take place,  rather than  waiting until  the end.                                                               
She  explained, once  it  goes  to the  point  of permanency  and                                                               
adoption, it  is similar to a  race and not easy  for someone out                                                               
in the village, who does  not understand the process and possibly                                                               
the families don't speak English, this  gives them more time.  It                                                               
also  gives  ECHO   workers  more  time  to   help  the  families                                                               
understand  the  process  and  have  their  voices  heard.    The                                                               
Aleutian  Pribilof Islands  Association  supports  this bill  100                                                               
percent and the  committee would be doing a great  service to not                                                               
only  Alaska's  children  but  to   their  extended  families  by                                                               
approving this bill.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
1:42:22 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CRISTY  WILLER,  Chief  Operating   Officer,  Cook  Inlet  Tribal                                                               
Council (CITC),  said she serves  as Chief Operation  Officer for                                                               
the  Cook  Inlet  Tribal  Council (CITC)  and  it  offers  strong                                                               
support for HB  200.  This bill provides  an important correction                                                               
to the  Alaska Supreme  Court decision in  the Native  Village of                                                             
Tununak case.   Within CITC's  child welfare services there  is a                                                             
broad continuum  of care, from intensive  in-home case management                                                               
to supervised  visitation.   It is especially  proud of  the work                                                               
within  its Father's  Journey  Program where  90  percent of  the                                                               
parents  have increased  contact  with their  children within  90                                                               
days.   She  advised the  CITC works  closely with  OCS and  with                                                               
families for these results.   House Bill 200 removes barriers for                                                               
Alaska Native families  who want to adopt these  children who are                                                               
connected  to  them   by  family  or  tribal   membership.    The                                                               
legislation makes  the process realistic and  understandable, and                                                               
remove  obstacles that  have resulted  in children  unnecessarily                                                               
being  disconnected  from  their families.    Unfortunately,  she                                                               
noted, currently well  over 40 percent of  Alaska Native children                                                               
are adopted annually by non-Native  non-family members.  The bill                                                               
will  increase the  number  of Alaska  Native  children to  reach                                                               
permanency  with their  family culture  and traditions,  and will                                                               
reduce litigation  based on  lack of  compliance with  the Indian                                                               
Child  Welfare Act.    This bill  seeks  to eliminate  procedural                                                               
barriers  in the  adoption process  for children  in custody  and                                                               
Alaska  Native families  can be  considered for  adoption through                                                               
the CINA  proceedings rather than  through an  entirely different                                                               
proceeding held  in probate court.   As a result, children  in an                                                               
out-of-home  placement  would   reach  permanency  more  quickly,                                                               
lessening the burden on the  Alaska Office of Children's Services                                                               
(OCS).   She  thanked the  committee for  its support  in keeping                                                               
Alaska's  children with  their  families and  in  their own  home                                                               
communities.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
1:45:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT  asked  whether   the  current  ratio  is                                                               
disproportionate in  terms of Native  and non-Native  children in                                                               
foster   care.      Statistics,    she   stated,   there   is   a                                                               
disproportionate number  of Native children and  this legislation                                                               
is a way to move children into tribes  and this is way to move to                                                               
a more proportionate number.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  WILLER  opined the  ratio  is  approximately 60  percent  of                                                               
Alaska  Native   children,  and   this  bill  would   allow  that                                                               
permanency   to  be   achieved  more   quickly  and   reduce  the                                                               
inequality.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  surmised that  the legislation  is geared                                                               
toward  better   placement  and  better  opportunities   for  the                                                               
disproportionate population to find permanent homes.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. WILLER agreed.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:46:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MELANIE  FREDERICKS,  Community  Member, Association  of  Village                                                               
Council Presidents, offered support  for HB 200 because currently                                                               
Alaska Native families, in her  region, encounter many challenges                                                               
and  barriers throughout  the  life of  a Child  In  Need of  Aid                                                               
(CINA) case.   The  barriers can  include language  because often                                                               
English is  the region's second  language.  These  barriers cause                                                               
complications  and   confusion  such  that  paperwork   is  often                                                               
discouraging and  confusing, and  they often  do not  receive the                                                               
help  or  undivided attention  they  need  because advocates  and                                                               
social workers may  not reside in their  communities.  Relatives,                                                               
especially  those   living  in  rural  communities,   often  feel                                                               
intimidated  and  confused  with  the court  system  which  could                                                               
potentially deter family members  from moving forward with issues                                                               
such  as the  formal  Petition  for Adoption.    In passing  this                                                               
legislation the  State of Alaska  would ensure removal of  one of                                                               
these many  barriers for families  and children in her  region to                                                               
gain  permanency, and  the opportunity  to  take care  of one  of                                                               
their relative children, she said.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
1:48:41 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ANDREW   BEAVER,   Tribal   Administrator,  Native   Village   of                                                               
Kwigillngok, said they  strongly support HB 200  because it makes                                                               
it easier for  families to work with OCS and  also lets the court                                                               
know that the  Native Village of Kwigillngok is  willing and able                                                               
to take  care of  its families  in their  village.   He expressed                                                               
there  shouldn't  be  complicated   paperwork  when  everyone  is                                                               
already aware that a family member  is willing to adopt their own                                                               
relative.  He described this bill  as "making a lot of sense" and                                                               
noted it  can prevent a lot  of grief for children  and families.                                                               
He thanked  the legislature  for honoring  the Native  Village of                                                               
Kwigillngok's  volunteer child  protection team  with an  Alaskan                                                               
sealed certificate  on March 26,  2010, signed by the  Speaker of                                                               
the House,  the President  of the Senate,  Bob Heron  and Senator                                                               
Lynn Hoffman  as prime  sponsors, and 57  other co-sponsors.   He                                                               
expressed  appreciation  for  recognizing  the  child  protection                                                               
team.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
1:50:54 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MELANIE BAHNKE,  CEO, KAWEAK  Incorporated, advised  that English                                                               
is her second language and  she would prefer giving her testimony                                                               
in Yupik  simply so the committee  could get a sense  of what the                                                               
court system  can feel like from  the other end of  the spectrum.                                                               
She remarked  that Child  In Need of  Aid (CINA)  proceedings and                                                               
the court system may as well all  be held in Chinese.  She echoed                                                               
support for  the legislation and  stressed that Chair  LeDoux hit                                                               
the nail on its head when she  asked why people can't just do the                                                               
right thing  in the  first place  without requiring  a law.   She                                                               
expressed her  wish that people  and systems  would automatically                                                               
do  the  right  thing,  but  they  don't  always.    The  current                                                               
Department of Health  and Social Services, Division  of Office of                                                               
Children's  Services administration  has been  good to  work with                                                               
from   her  end   of  the   tribal  partner's   perspective,  but                                                               
administrations come and go, people  come and go, judges come and                                                               
go, and  that is why things  need to be put  into regulation, and                                                               
placed  into law.    "You  represent 20  percent  of the  overall                                                               
population  in  the  state"  she   said,  and  yet  its  children                                                               
represent 60 percent of children in  OCS custody, and half of its                                                               
children are adopted out to  non-Native people.  She implored the                                                               
committee to  do the  right thing  in the  first place  and enact                                                               
this  law.   She reiterated  barriers  such as  language and  the                                                               
court  system,   and  offered   that  the   OCS  system   can  be                                                               
intimidating, confusing, and  a total power imbalance.   Even she                                                               
as a highly educated person, she  said, she can be intimidated by                                                               
the  process.    The  legislature should  be  looking  to  reduce                                                               
barriers wherever possible for her  people to take responsibility                                                               
and take care of their own people.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS. BAHNKE  referred to the  question asking why  the legislation                                                               
only applied  to Alaska  Native children,  and commented  that if                                                               
this  bill  would be  killed  because  it only  addresses  Alaska                                                               
Native  children,  then  she  urged  the  committee  to  look  at                                                               
expanding the scope.   The State of Alaska  claims authority over                                                               
children's matters,  court matters, and  it needs to  fulfill its                                                               
responsibilities,  which includes  compliance with  federal laws.                                                               
In this  case, the  Department of Health  and Social  Services is                                                               
earnestly working to  reduce barriers for Native  people to adopt                                                               
Native children,  and she asked  that the committee do  the right                                                               
thing and pass this bill.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
1:54:46 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE FOSTER remarked  that Ms. Bahnke is  a good friend                                                               
[of his].   She is also the CEO of  his regional Native nonprofit                                                               
representing Little Diomede Island.   He described Little Diomede                                                               
as small, with no roads, no  railroad, no airplanes, and the only                                                               
transportation is  by helicopter.  Therefore,  the challenges for                                                               
someone living on  the small island include  the possibility that                                                               
two weeks  may pass  before someone can  leave the  island, there                                                               
are  telephones  but  working  face-to-face  is  more  effective,                                                               
especially when it comes to  a situation like this where adoption                                                               
is involved,  and not  understanding the legal  system.   He said                                                               
the bill  is good  because distance  is an  issue and  added that                                                               
there are many more challenges.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
1:56:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  expressed to Ms.  Bahnke that she was  not thinking                                                               
the bill  should die because it  may only apply to  Alaska Native                                                               
children, she was thinking that  the idea of family reunification                                                               
and reunifying with  other relatives should be  applied along the                                                               
gamut for all children.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. BAHNKE  related that  she had that  sense from  Chair LeDoux,                                                               
she just didn't want "perfect be  the enemy good."  She suggested                                                               
that possibly this could be  considered a starting point and then                                                               
see how things develop.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
1:57:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
NICOLE BORROMEO,  Executive Vice  President and  General Counsel,                                                               
Alaska Federation of Natives, said there  is a lot of support for                                                               
the  bill  within the  Alaska  Native  community and  the  Alaska                                                               
Federation of Natives  (AFN).  The AFN has  been heavily involved                                                               
in the  bill since it  originated since  AFN drafted it  in close                                                               
partnership with  OCS and the  governor's office,  she explained.                                                               
She said she echoes Chair  LeDoux's words relating to people just                                                               
doing the right  thing and said that, unfortunately,  for all the                                                               
reasons  previously  identified,  that doesn't  happen  and  this                                                               
legislation is necessary to protect the right thing.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
1:59:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
KATHERINE  MOSES,  Tribal  Administrator,  Asa'carsarmiut  Tribal                                                               
Council,  was  not  available  and Lorraine  Mung  spoke  on  her                                                               
behalf.   Ms. Mung  advised that they  live in  Mountain Village,                                                               
and support  HB 200  for the  same reasons  previously mentioned,                                                               
and many  people in villages, communities,  and cities throughout                                                               
the  state agree.   She  asked  the committee  to understand  the                                                               
importance  of the  legislation to  Native families,  and to  not                                                               
make  the process  complicated for  a family  care for  their own                                                               
relatives in  situations where good  family members are  ready to                                                               
adopt.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:00:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
EVELYN  PETERSON,  Echo  Worker, Asa'carsarmiut  Tribal  Council,                                                               
said she  lives in Mountain  Village.   She said she  agrees with                                                               
Ms.  Mung's reasons  for supporting  this legislation,  and asked                                                               
that the bill pass.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
2:01:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DAPHNE  JOE, Asa'carsarmiut  Tribe,  said she  lives in  Mountain                                                               
Village and  fully supports  HB 200.   She  pointed out  that too                                                               
many  of their  tribal members  have  been adopted  out of  their                                                               
families,  when there  are families  that want  to take  them in.                                                               
This legislation  will make it  easier for family members  to let                                                               
the  court know  they are  willing to  raise their  relatives, or                                                               
children, by  changing it to  only one judge following  the case.                                                               
She remarked  that that will save  a lot of time  and importantly                                                               
keep children close to their families, communities, and culture.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:02:46 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ELIZABETH STEVENS,  Echo Worker,  Napaiap Tribal Court,  said she                                                               
works with  the Association of Village  Council Presidents (Avcp)                                                               
in Bethel and with OCS workers.   She stated she supports HB 200,                                                               
and if this bill passes it will be easier for members.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
2:04:13 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DON   SHIRCEL,  Director,   Client  Development,   Tanana  Chiefs                                                               
Conference, offered strong  support for HB 200.  He  said that as                                                               
a  social worker  who spent  the last  33 years  working for  the                                                               
Tanana  Chiefs  Conference  and  working  closely  with  OCS,  he                                                               
recognizes   the    practical   implications    and   significant                                                               
contributions this  bill could make  toward improving  the Office                                                               
of Children's Services, and the court system.  He opined that                                                                   
HB 200 makes  possible a common sense approach  that could easily                                                               
fix  a  problem,  potentially  save time,  effort  and  money  by                                                               
consolidating   and   streamlining   court   processes.      Most                                                               
importantly, he said, it could  provide more children traumatized                                                               
by abuse, a  safe, healthy, nurturing and permanent  home that is                                                               
fully connected  to their  family, community  and culture.   This                                                               
legislation could  significantly help  the state comply  with the                                                               
spirit, intent, and letter of  the law regarding the Indian Child                                                               
Welfare  Act by  ensuring  that  a relative  willing  to adopt  a                                                               
family member will always have  their voice heard.  He commented,                                                               
it  is one  of  those bills  that  just makes  sense  for all  of                                                               
Alaska's children  who won't have  to wade through  another court                                                               
process to have a permanent home.   The bill also makes sense for                                                               
all of  Alaska's families  that are ready,  able, and  willing to                                                               
provide a home  right now.  He asked that  the committee actively                                                               
support the passage of this bill this session.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:06:22 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DARLENE PETE,  Tribal Administrator, said she  fully supports the                                                               
bill because  too many  of her tribal  members have  been adopted                                                               
out  of their  families  and communities  when  they have  family                                                               
willing to  take them in.   She related that it  is heartbreaking                                                               
that  many  children have  been  adopted  out and  are  sometimes                                                               
nowhere to  be found by  other family  members.  This  bill would                                                               
make it  easier for a  family member to  let the court  know they                                                               
are willing to  raise their relative by changing it  to one judge                                                               
following the case.   Money will be saved,  and most importantly,                                                               
it will  keep their  children close  to their  family, community,                                                               
and their culture, she said.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:07:59 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
APRIL  FERGUSON,  Senior  Vice  President  and  General  Counsel,                                                               
Bristol  Bay Native  Corporation,  said that  she  has served  as                                                               
Senior  Vice President  and General  Counsel to  the Bristol  Bay                                                               
Native  Corporation,  and  she  chairs  the  AFN  litigation  and                                                               
legislative committee.   Hard work has  gone into this bill  by a                                                               
number of  experts having experience  in all areas of  the state.                                                               
She noted that every process  needs periodic review and this bill                                                               
contains a number  of corrective fixes that  will help streamline                                                               
the process in moving forward, and save the state money.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
The foster care system in this  state is in desperate trouble and                                                               
the state  must utilize all of  its resources to do  the best for                                                               
the  children.   She  asked  that  the House  Judiciary  Standing                                                               
Committee become  a champion for  this cause, and she  asked that                                                               
the committee support the bill.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:10:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ELIZABETH   MEDICINE   CROW,    President/CEO,   First   Alaskans                                                               
Institute, said  she supports this  bill and for the  past twelve                                                               
years,  First Alaskans  Institute has  had the  honor, privilege,                                                               
and   responsibility   in   helping   develop   its   community's                                                               
leadership.  The  First Alaskans Institute has  touched the lives                                                               
of over  8,000 children,  young people,  youth, and  young adults                                                               
from across  the state.   Throughout this  time, it has  seen its                                                               
young people seek  to strengthen families or already  have a deep                                                               
cultural connection  to who they  are through  relationships with                                                               
their  families and  communities.   These  young  people have  an                                                               
inherent  ability   and  capacity   to  lead  their   people  and                                                               
contribute to  Alaska.  She  related that,  "At the root,  of the                                                               
root,  of the  root  of  this bill"  is  common sense,  practical                                                               
application, and experience of all  Alaskans to place children in                                                               
families and  communities within  their culture, where  they have                                                               
the  best chance  of  thriving."   She said  that  all people  of                                                               
Alaska  have that  responsibility.   The First  Alaskan Institute                                                               
thanks the sponsors  of this bill in supporting  and fighting for                                                               
children's rights, she said.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:12:22 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MELVIN EGOAK said he fully supports HB  200.  He said he has seen                                                               
too many tribal members adopted  out even though families advised                                                               
OCS and  the court, that families  are willing and able  to "take                                                               
care of  our family  right here  in our  villages."   He related,                                                               
paperwork shouldn't  be necessary when everyone  is already aware                                                               
that the family members are  willing to adopt their own relative.                                                               
This bill  can relieve families  of heartbreak, please  pass this                                                               
bill, he asked.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
2:13:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ELIZABETH  HENSLEY, General  Counsel, Maniilaq  Association, said                                                               
the Maniilaq Association is a  consortium of the twelve tribes of                                                               
Northwest Alaska.  She related that  she is preparing to take the                                                               
children,  in the  emergent school,  ice fishing  this week,  and                                                               
while fishing, will  speak their native language.   The fish will                                                               
then  be taken  back to  the classroom,  cut up,  viewed under  a                                                               
microscope  to  identify various  parts  of  the fish,  and  then                                                               
cooked and  eaten.  She said  that what she described  is some of                                                               
what Kotzebue children  do at home, and these  children would not                                                               
receive  that  education  any  place else.    She  requested  the                                                               
passage of  HB 200, and  keep children home in  their communities                                                               
across  the  state so  they  can  be  enriched in  the  beautiful                                                               
cultures thriving  throughout Alaska.   She noted that  she comes                                                               
from a family wherein her aunties  and uncles were raised in four                                                               
different communities, she did not  know them growing up, and she                                                               
does not  know their  children.   She asked  that the  process of                                                               
adopting their  children be as  simple as possible, to  help keep                                                               
children at home, and save the state money.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
2:17:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
LORINDA WESTIN O'BRIAN  pointed to the importance of  HB 200, and                                                               
related  it is  all about  [children] knowing  who they  are, and                                                               
grown adopted people want to  know where their family is located.                                                               
Although,  she remarked,  some children  will never  know, [where                                                               
their family is located] due  to sealed records.  She acknowledge                                                               
that  information may  seem separate,  but  it is  relevant to  a                                                               
person knowing  who they  are.  Clearly,  this legislation  is in                                                               
line  and connects  to the  federal  intent of  the Indian  Child                                                               
Welfare   Act,  keeping   children   with   their  families   and                                                               
communities,  and  keeping  those  children  connected  to  their                                                               
heritage.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:19:41 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MARY TUNUCHUK,  Chefornak Tribal  Council, said  she is  "all in"                                                               
for HB  200, and echoes  the support  from prior witnesses.   She                                                               
asked the  committee to  understand the importance  of HB  200 to                                                               
Alaska's families and  not making it complicated for  a family to                                                               
take care of its own relatives.   There are situations, she said,                                                               
where good  family members are ready  to adopt in order  that the                                                               
child  is not  misplaced outside  their village,  and raised  not                                                               
knowing their blood line.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX,  after  ascertaining  no  one  further  wished  to                                                               
testify, closed public testimony.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
2:21:46 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT asked  Ms. Lawton  to walk  the committee                                                               
through the 60  percent - 40 percent population,  and discuss the                                                               
difficulty  of   finding  adoption   for  Alaska   Native  foster                                                               
children.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
2:22:34 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. LAWTON  responded that currently  there are just  under 3,000                                                               
children in  foster care,  and of  that amount,  approximately 55                                                               
percent  are Alaska  Native.   She  referred  to difficulties  to                                                               
adoption  that  this  bill  will help  improve,  and  noted  that                                                               
sometimes, due to  workloads and other reasons,  OCS struggles to                                                               
identify all  of the family members  in the beginning.   There is                                                               
federal  and  state law  and  policy  governing how  much  family                                                               
searching  is  taken on,  and  at  which  point it  continues  to                                                               
search.   Although,  she said,  as  the case  moves along,  often                                                               
family  members come  forward  late in  the  game, and  sometimes                                                               
parents are  not always willing to  tell OCS all of  their family                                                               
members in  the beginning,  which can  cause delays.   Sometimes,                                                               
she pointed out,  given the historical context  the Alaska Native                                                               
population  has experienced  in Alaska,  and around  the country,                                                               
there is  some caution  and concern about  "jumping on  board" to                                                               
work with OCS.  Particularly, she  said, when OCS asks a relative                                                               
to be in a  position where they may see that  as "they're kind of                                                               
being an agent of the state,"  because if they are caring for the                                                               
child, OCS will tell them what  the rules are in terms of contact                                                               
with relatives.   She described that  as a difficult place  for a                                                               
relative to be  in when working with the state,  working with the                                                               
authority that  comes from working  with OCS, and  the historical                                                               
distrust.  She opined that  sometimes relatives are nervous about                                                               
stepping  forward early,  and  OCS believes  the  bill will  help                                                               
because it allows its colleagues  in tribal child welfare to have                                                               
earnest  conversations with  relatives  and advise  that this  is                                                               
their  opportunity.   Also,  the  Office  of Children's  Services                                                               
(OCS)  will explain  that they  can't  wait until  they see  that                                                               
reunification fails,  because that  is when  the state  gets into                                                               
terrible situations where the children  have become attached, and                                                               
the foster  families have fallen  in love  with them.   This bill                                                               
not  only requires  that  the party  is  interested in  permanent                                                               
placement, but  it also  requires that they  are willing  to take                                                               
immediate placement.  She related  that that will help to promote                                                               
earlier  decision making  to get  people on  board with  families                                                               
within their tribal communities earlier.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:25:19 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER  moved to  report  CSHB  200, Version  29-                                                               
GH1262/H, out  of committee  with individual  recommendations and                                                               
the accompanying  fiscal notes.   There being no  objection, CSHB                                                               
200(HSS) moved from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                     
2:25:40 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 2:25 p.m. to 2:31 p.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
       SB 180-PARENT-GUARDIAN/CHILD: TEMP. POWER OF ATTY                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:31:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX announced  that the next order of  business would be                                                               
SENATE  BILL  NO.   180,  "An  Act  relating   to  the  temporary                                                               
delegation by a parent or guardian  of powers related to a child;                                                               
relating  to adoption;  and  relating to  the  distribution to  a                                                               
parent   or  guardian   in  a   child  protection   situation  of                                                               
information on family support services."                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
2:31:30 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
KARLE   NORE,  Staff,   Senator   Cathy   Giesel,  Alaska   State                                                               
Legislature, said  that SB  180 is commonly  referred to  as Safe                                                               
Families for  Children.  An  issue considered when  drafting this                                                               
legislation was to preserve families,  which are the core unit of                                                               
society,  because   [families]  are  the  best   environment  for                                                               
children.   She remarked that  life has challenges, such  as loss                                                               
of  work,  divorce,   homelessness,  struggling  with  addiction,                                                               
medical emergencies, military deployment,  or incarceration.  Not                                                               
all Alaskan  families have  someone to  care for  their children,                                                               
who need a safe place while  they solve these issues, she pointed                                                               
out.  These parents do  not necessarily want, or need, government                                                               
to  take their  children, and  the  bill establishes  a safe  and                                                               
healthy  alternative to  placing  a child  into  the foster  care                                                               
system.   She said SB  180 allows parents  to execute a  power of                                                               
attorney over  their minor child, for  no more than one  year, to                                                               
another family  in order to  prevent the child from  entering the                                                               
foster  care system.    This legislation  allows  the parent,  or                                                               
guardian,  to retain  all  of their  parental  rights inside  the                                                               
power  of  attorney.   Either  parent  can  revoke the  power  of                                                               
attorney immediately, at any time,  regardless of who implemented                                                               
the  power of  attorney.   Birth  parents retain  all rights  and                                                               
responsibilities of the  child, she said.  It  allows parents, or                                                               
guardians,   struggling   to   seek   help   with   unemployment,                                                               
homelessness, and/or  eviction, without  concern of  losing their                                                               
children,  or without  being accused  of  abandonment, abuse,  or                                                               
neglect of the child while  these family challenges are resolved.                                                               
There are provisions  in the bill allowing  for military parents,                                                               
or  guardians, as  well  as incarcerated  parents,  to execute  a                                                               
power of attorney  for their children's care.   This bill creates                                                               
an exemption allowing for nonprofit  organizations that help find                                                               
temporary  care  for  children   in  struggling  families.    She                                                               
explained that  it exempts the  nonprofit from having  a variance                                                               
in order to operate, and it  is getting government out of the way                                                               
at the heart of these issues.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
2:34:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  listed witnesses available to  answer questions and                                                               
asked  Ms.  Nore  to  point   out  significant  portions  of  the                                                               
sectional.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS.  NORE explained  that the  heart of  the bill  is the  robust                                                               
version of  the power  of attorney  that gives  more stipulation,                                                               
and allows for military parents  to execute the power of attorney                                                               
for the length of their active duty plus 30 days.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS. NORE referred to the  exemption for non-profit organizations,                                                               
and pointed  to Sec. 7,  AS 47.32.020,  page 8, lines  3-6, which                                                               
read:                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
          (c) If a nonprofit organization operates a                                                                            
     program  that assists  parents to  find temporary  care                                                                    
     for a child, the  nonprofit organization is exempt from                                                                    
     the licensing  and other  requirements of  this chapter                                                                    
     when operating the program.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:35:47 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT  described  this   as  the  "safe,  soft,                                                               
surrender bill," when families  are experiencing temporary crisis                                                               
they can  find suitable parents  to intervene for them  while the                                                               
parent gets their life back together.   She asked whether that is                                                               
the gist of the entire bill.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
2:36:28 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  NORE agreed,  and she  said there  was testimony  within the                                                               
Senate Judiciary Standing Committee by  a mother who utilized the                                                               
Safe Families for  Children in Alaska program,  which is operated                                                               
by  Beacon Hill.   This  mother was  facing an  extended hospital                                                               
stay for  several weeks and did  not have anyone to  care for her                                                               
children.   She asked  Safe Families  for Children  for temporary                                                               
care for her  children; the children were  temporarily place, and                                                               
once she was healed regained custody of her children.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER  expressed  gratitude  for  the  work  the                                                               
sponsor put  into the  bill, and  noted he is  the sponsor  of HB                                                               
201, which is the House version of SB 180.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
2:37:30 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX opened public testimony.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:37:40 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ANDREW  BROWN, Senior  Fellow, Child  Welfare Reform,  Foundation                                                               
for   Government   Accountability,   said  the   Foundation   for                                                               
Government    Accountability   is    a   nonprofit    nonpartisan                                                               
organization dedicated to promoting  better lives for individuals                                                               
and  families  through  improving  health  and  welfare  programs                                                               
nationwide.    He advised  that  Safe  Families for  Children  is                                                               
working  in Alaska  by  rallying the  local  communities to  come                                                               
along side  families in crisis  before problems get to  the point                                                               
of OCS  intervention.   Statistically, he  said, the  majority of                                                               
children in  foster care  are there due  to poverty  and neglect,                                                               
rather than physical  or sexual abuse.  These  children are there                                                               
because  their families  often have  nowhere to  turn to  get the                                                               
help  they need,  and  he related  stories from  his  past.   The                                                               
concept of Safe Families for  Children is simple, it is neighbors                                                               
helping neighbors during times of  trouble.  It organizes through                                                               
the local community to recruit,  screen, and train volunteer host                                                               
families  to temporarily  care for  children while  their parents                                                               
receive  help.    He  noted  that the  families  do  not  receive                                                               
compensation.  Beacon Hill is  overseen by professional staff and                                                               
it is often done through  existing private child welfare agencies                                                               
to  ensure the  safety  of all  placements.   When  a parent,  in                                                               
crisis, seeks  the help of  Safe Families for Children,  they are                                                               
introduced to  a host  family willing  and able  to take  care of                                                               
their children.   In  the event that  parent is  comfortable, the                                                               
parent  authorizes the  host family  to care  for their  children                                                               
through a  power of attorney.   He described this  arrangement as                                                               
unique,  because the  parent retains  full legal  parental rights                                                               
throughout the  duration of the  placement.  It is  important, he                                                               
pointed  out, that  this legislation  allows  parents to  address                                                               
issues without fear their family will be torn apart.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
2:42:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BROWN pointed  to Sec. 2, AS 13.26.023(h), page  5, lines 13-                                                               
17, which read:                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
          (h) Except as otherwise determined under another                                                                      
     statute,  the execution  of a  power of  attorney by  a                                                                    
     parent  or guardian  does  not constitute  abandonment,                                                                    
     neglect, or abuse  of the minor child or  ward under AS                                                                    
     47.10.013 -  47.10.015, unless  the parent  or guardian                                                                    
     fails,  after  the  power of  attorney  terminates,  to                                                                    
     retake custody of the child  and does not execute a new                                                                    
     power of attorney.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MR. BROWN  continued that  the provision  means that  the parents                                                               
loving choice  to ask for  help cannot  be held against  them, as                                                               
opposed to  being a bad  parent and  neglecting their child.   He                                                               
said he has  been told by families in crisis  that they would not                                                               
go to the state  for help due to fear the  state would take their                                                               
children  away from  them.    Safe Families  for  Children is  an                                                               
important tool, this legislation is  critical to get out in front                                                               
and  help OCS  do  the work  they are  already  doing to  protect                                                               
children in Alaska.  Nationwide,  he explained, the Safe Families                                                               
for Children network  is active in 27 states, it  has served over                                                               
20,000 children,  and of those  children 90  percent successfully                                                               
returned home  within an average of  45 days, never to  enter the                                                               
child welfare system.  Nationally,  when comparing a child in the                                                               
foster  care system,  they  have  roughly a  50-50  shot at  ever                                                               
coming  home, and  an average  time in  foster care  is over  700                                                               
days.  He explained that this  bill is inspired by best practices                                                               
perfected  by the  Safe Families  for Children  organization over                                                               
the last 14  years, and SB 180 gives families  the safe option to                                                               
provide for temporary  care of their children while  they get the                                                               
help  they need  to achieve  stability.   The  program keeps  the                                                               
children close  to their communities  and creates  an environment                                                               
where someone in  that child's school district,  or local church,                                                               
or local  community, comes  forward to help  the family  and take                                                               
the  children  in.    He  said that  frontline  OCS  workers  are                                                               
stretched thin,  they are  overwhelmed and  need better  pools of                                                               
resources  to help  them respond  to  the needs  of children  and                                                               
families.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
[CHAIR LEDOUX passed the gavel to Vice Chair Keller.]                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:46:55 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR KELLER  advised that Chair LeDoux passed  the gavel to                                                               
him because she has a bill in another committee.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:47:11 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ANDY  COARY said  he is  in favor  of the  bill because  it makes                                                               
sense,  and will  enable  movements, such  as  Safe Families  for                                                               
Children, to  operate in Alaska  and keep children  from entering                                                               
the foster  care system.   Also, he  pointed out, by  doing that,                                                               
there is  reduced financial  strain on the  state, and  it allows                                                               
non-state resources  to step  in and care  for these  children in                                                               
need.   He opined  that the  bill has  the proper  protections in                                                               
place for parental rights, because  it is a voluntary arrangement                                                               
between a  parent and a  caregiver, and the parent  maintains the                                                               
right  to  revoke the  power  of  attorney at  any  time.   On  a                                                               
personal note,  he offered that he  has seen the benefits  of the                                                               
Safe Families  for Children movement in  Anchorage, because close                                                               
friends have taken  in children, and those children  did not have                                                               
to enter foster care.  He  described this as an ongoing effort to                                                               
reduce the  number of children  entering foster care, and  SB 180                                                               
will assist  in reducing the  number of children in  state foster                                                               
care.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:49:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHARITY CARMODY,  President, Beacon  Hill, explained  that Beacon                                                               
Hill is  a foster  care and  adoption community  resource center,                                                               
and is  the arm of the  faith based community seeking  to provide                                                               
aide to children  going into foster care, or children  at risk of                                                               
going into foster care.  In  2003, the Safe Families for Children                                                               
national  movement began,  and is  in seven  different countries.                                                               
Beacon Hill  is the implementer  for Safe Families  for Children,                                                               
with the blessings  of OCS, because it believed  the system would                                                               
work in  Alaska, especially within rural  communities, because it                                                               
does go  back to the tribal  way of the community  taking care of                                                               
itself, she said.   Although, she commented, Beacon  Hill did not                                                               
want  to  become  a  child   placement  agency  with  regulations                                                               
attached, although,  it does operate  in that manner,  it prefers                                                               
to operate outside  of the state system.   Therefore, Beacon Hill                                                               
requested  legislation that  would  help eliminate  the need  for                                                               
Beach Hill  to be a  child placement  agency, and also,  that the                                                               
host families  are not required  to be licensed  foster families.                                                               
She  explained that  the  families within  the  movement are  not                                                               
families with any  current OCS investigation, she  stated, and if                                                               
abuse was  happening, the parents  would be referred  directly to                                                               
OCS.   These are  families calling about  other forms  of crisis.                                                               
She  said that  Beacon  Hill began  operating  Safe Families  for                                                               
Children in Alaska  on January 1, [2016], and since  that time 12                                                               
children  have entered  Safe Families  for Children  in Anchorage                                                               
and  the Matanuska-Susitna  Valley  who have  not entered  foster                                                               
care.   She explained  that Beacon Hill,  and the  host families,                                                               
come alongside the parents, surround  them with a whole community                                                               
of  people that  helps keep  them  on track,  provides for  their                                                               
needs and  the needs of the  host families, and creates  a social                                                               
network  that  didn't  exist  for those  families  before.    She                                                               
commented  that Beacon  Hill has  a  wonderful relationship  with                                                               
OCS,  under its  current leadership,  but administrations  change                                                               
and  it wants  to help  protect the  people willing  to volunteer                                                               
their time and lives for this movement.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
2:53:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MIKE  COONS said  he was  speaking as  a former  non-commissioned                                                               
officer in  charge of medical  readiness at  Wright-Patterson Air                                                               
Force  Base,  Ohio.     He  offered  that   his  duties  included                                                               
determining what to  do with the children of the  families if the                                                               
United States went  to war, with many logistical issues.   From a                                                               
deployment standpoint,  he opined,  there is a  timeframe wherein                                                               
deployment orders come in so an  airman can work on those issues.                                                               
Although, he explained, in the  event of Desert Shield and Desert                                                               
Storm, the deployment  happened fast, and being in  Alaska it was                                                               
difficult to  get the  grandparents to the  children.   He opined                                                               
that  this  legislation will  help  the  military community  with                                                               
those  deployments  and rapid  deployments  that  occur and  save                                                               
those  children  from trauma  in  the  foster  care system.    He                                                               
related that  he is not  a fan of  the state foster  care system,                                                               
and he supports this legislation moving forward.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:56:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR  KELLER after  ascertaining no  one further  wished to                                                               
testify, closed public testimony.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT remarked that this  is a good bill and she                                                               
would  like  to see  it  move  out  of  committee to  avoid  some                                                               
children entering  into the  state foster  care system,  and save                                                               
money for the state.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR KELLER  added that having a strong family  as a result                                                               
[of this legislation] is a great bonus.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CLAMAN  asked  the administration's  position  on                                                               
this bill.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR  KELLER advised that  Ms. Tracy Campbell can  speak to                                                               
his question.  He related that  he has spoken with OCS on several                                                               
occasions and his impression is that OCS is positive.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
2:57:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
TRACY  SPARTZ CAMPBELL,  Deputy  Director,  Office of  Children's                                                               
Services, Department of Health &  Social Services, responded that                                                               
the  Office of  Children's Services  (OCS) has  positive feelings                                                               
about  this  program;   however,  the  administration's  official                                                               
position on the bill is neutral.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
2:57:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN moved to report CSSB 180(JUD), Version 29-                                                                
LS1431/I  out of  committee with  individual recommendations  and                                                               
the accompanying  fiscal notes.   There being no  objection, CSSB                                                               
180(JUD) passed out of the House Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
2:58:16 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 2:58 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
        HB 334-CHILD CUSTODY; DOM. VIOLENCE; CHILD ABUSE                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:00:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE  CHAIR KELLER  announced  that the  next  order of  business                                                               
would be HOUSE  BILL NO. 334, "An Act relating  to visitation and                                                               
child custody."                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
[Before the committee was HB 334, Version 29-LS1409/I.]                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
3:01:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT  moved  to  adopt  HB  334,  Version  29-                                                               
LS1409/H  as the  working document.   There  being no  objection,                                                               
Version H was before the committee as the working document.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
3:01:28 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CRYSTAL  KOENEMAN,  Staff,  Representative  Cathy  Munoz,  Alaska                                                               
State Legislature, said Version H  is the original version of the                                                               
bill introduced  by Representative Munoz modifying  visitation in                                                               
child custody  statutes.   Currently, AS  25.24.150 allows  for a                                                               
rebuttable presumption  to be utilized  if there is a  history of                                                               
domestic violence.   She advised  that history is defined  as one                                                               
serious incident, or more than  one incident of domestic violence                                                               
as identified  by the  judge.  This  legislation seeks  to change                                                               
that  language  from  "a  history of  domestic  violence"  to  "a                                                               
conviction of domestic violence," she said.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR KELLER opened public testimony.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:02:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REBECCA SHIELDS, Executive Director,  Kodiak Women's Resource and                                                               
Crisis  Center, said  she has  worked  in the  field of  domestic                                                               
violence  and  sexual  assault  for  25  years,  and  within  her                                                               
experiences,  has come  to  learn that  domestic  violence is  an                                                               
isolated  and secretive  crime that  happens behind  closed doors                                                               
and is; therefore,  hard to prove in a court  of law.  Currently,                                                               
with the  state's budget crisis, its  district attorney's office,                                                               
law  enforcement offices,  and courts  are suffering  from budget                                                               
cuts and  understaffed with  reduced working  hours.   The threat                                                               
most often heard  from victims is that their abuser  told them if                                                               
they leave  the relationship, the  abusive partner will  take the                                                               
children, or  sue for custody.   She  related that the  threat is                                                               
already  all  too  real  for   victims,  because  the  abuser  is                                                               
oftentimes the main  wage earner in the household  with the money                                                               
to fight  for custody.  She  said that victims stay  or return to                                                               
their violent  relationship because,  in their  minds, it  is the                                                               
only  way to  keep  custody  and protect  their  children.   This                                                               
legislation will validate the victims'  greatest fears, to not be                                                               
able  to protect  their children  in court  protected or  custody                                                               
cases,  would  be  realized.   The  most  undeserved  victims  of                                                               
domestic violence  incurring the  greatest harm are  children who                                                               
grow up  in violent  homes.   Alaska has  1.4 times  the national                                                               
rate in child  abuse, and this legislation  disregards the rights                                                               
of children's safety  as priority.  The consequence of  HB 334 is                                                               
that children would be sentenced  to living in violent households                                                               
either as  witness to,  or direct recipients  of, violence.   The                                                               
Alaska Network  on Domestic Violence and  Sexual Assault (ANDVSA)                                                               
worked hard with  the legislature to pass  the current rebuttable                                                               
presumptive  law  in  2004  to protect  Alaskan  children.    She                                                               
explained that under the law  prior to 2004, parents and children                                                               
were  killed  during custody  disputes,  that  current law  saved                                                               
lives,  and the  legislature  should  not mess  with  that.   She                                                               
advised  she  is  strongly  opposed  to HB  334,  and  urged  the                                                               
committee to not move the bill forward.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
3:06:30 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
PAUL GRANT, Attorney,  said he has practiced law  in the domestic                                                               
violence  and  sexual  assault  field  over 25  years.    In  his                                                               
experience,  he  related,  the current  law  frequently  destroys                                                               
relationships between  children and parents who  are not violent,                                                               
and  have not  committed any  physical violence  or psychological                                                               
violence  against the  children.   Under  current  law, once  the                                                               
court is  forced to impose  supervised visitation there  are many                                                               
barriers to  supervised visitation  being effective contact.   He                                                               
explained that those barriers  can include, costs, unavailability                                                               
of  a   batterer's  programs  in  remote   communities,  lack  of                                                               
qualified  supervisors,   and  any   number  of  problems.     He                                                               
expressed,  current  law  needs  to  change,  and  addressed  the                                                               
differences  between  the  original  bill (Version  H),  and  the                                                               
committee  substitute   (Version  I),  and  noted   his  personal                                                               
preference for  Version I.   He explained  there are two  ways to                                                               
approach  the problem,  but they  both come  down to  making sure                                                               
that  the  people  subjected  to   a  presumption  or  supervised                                                               
visitation,  are people  who are  causing harm  to children.   He                                                               
said,  often   there  are  technical   violations,  such   as  an                                                               
accidental  encounter  in  a  grocery store,  which  leads  to  a                                                               
violation  of  a  protective  order,   which  then  triggers  the                                                               
presumption,  and  from  there   all  of  the  consequences  roll                                                               
downhill.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
3:09:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. GRANT  suggested requiring a  conviction of the  crime before                                                               
imposing the presumption, which  makes clear this person actually                                                               
committed some act  of violence that caused harm  to the children                                                               
of  that  marriage.    The   committee  substitute  approach  was                                                               
different  in that  it  establishes the  highest  civil level  of                                                               
proof, clear and  convincing, in order for there to  be a history                                                               
of domestic violence.  In the  event there was an act of domestic                                                               
violence,  the court  must take  that into  consideration in  the                                                               
custody  determination.    Or,   he  said,  under  the  committee                                                               
substitute, "conviction of a crime."   He explained there are two                                                               
ways  to get  to  the history  of domestic  violence.   The  most                                                               
beneficial aspect  of the committee  substitute is that  it gives                                                               
the court discretion.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. GRANT  pointed to Sec. 2,  AS 25.20.061, page 1,  lines 13-15                                                               
and page 2, lines 1-4, which read:                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
          If visitation is awarded to a parent who the                                                                      
     court  finds by  clear  and convincing  evidence has  a                                                            
     history of  perpetrating [COMMITTED A  CRIME INVOLVING]                                                                
     domestic  violence   or  been  convicted  of   a  crime                                                                
     involving domestic violence,  against the other parent,                                                            
     [OR] a child, or a  domestic living partner [OF THE TWO                                                                
     PARENTS],  within five  years  preceding  the award  of                                                                    
        visitation, the court may set conditions for the                                                                        
     visitation, including                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR.  GRANT explained  that  it  gives the  court  a checklist  of                                                               
[conditions it can  set] to protect the child in  a case where it                                                               
has found  domestic violence.   He explained that when  the court                                                               
finds there is domestic violence  committed by the accused, there                                                               
are  then eight  different  protections the  court  can put  into                                                               
place  in  that   particular  case.    The   conditions  do  not,                                                               
necessarily,  involve   removing  the  child  from   the  parent,                                                               
whereas, under current  law the court really has no  choice.  For                                                               
example, he  said, if  there is a  finding of  domestic violence,                                                               
the  conditions can  include: supervised  visitation; possibility                                                               
of   a  batterer's   program  if   available;  alcohol   or  drug                                                               
restrictions; paying  the costs  of supervised visitation;  and a                                                               
number of other conditions.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
3:12:28 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. GRANT opined,  the most important factor is  giving the trial                                                               
courts the  discretion to make  reasoned decisions as  to whether                                                               
this person  is a danger to  these children.  Under  current law,                                                               
under the  presumption, that  [discretion] does  not happen.   He                                                               
explained  that the  court does  not have  a choice  to determine                                                               
whether this  person is  a danger to  these children,  and opined                                                               
that the court does not  want to destroy the relationship between                                                               
a child and  their parent.  He said his  preference is taking the                                                               
presumption out and  making it a clear and  convincing finding by                                                               
the court,  which would  then trigger  the protections  the court                                                               
can impose.   He  pointed out  that either  version gets  the law                                                               
moving  in  the   right  direction,  which  is   to  not  destroy                                                               
relationships between  parents and children  in the absence  of a                                                               
concrete showing of harm to the child involved.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
3:14:08 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS  asked  how often  the  rebuttable                                                               
presumption  has been  invoked  in these  custody  cases, in  Mr.                                                               
Grant's experience.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. GRANT  opined, it is  invoked approximately 10-15  percent of                                                               
the time, wherein possibly 20 percent  of the time there would be                                                               
a couple  of incidents of  domestic violence when  discussing the                                                               
entire universe of  custody cases.  Another problem,  he said, is                                                               
that  due  to the  way  the  law  is  structured, if  the  parent                                                               
contemplating suing  for divorce wants  to obtain custody  of the                                                               
children, and  that parent  is able to  convince the  court there                                                               
were two  incidents of  domestic violence,  then that  parent has                                                               
immediately put  their ball in  the five  yard line of  the other                                                               
team.   He advised he has  often seen the tactic  of invoking the                                                               
rebuttable presumption used in cases  where there is no danger to                                                               
the  child.   The presumption  is invoked  because it  gives that                                                               
parent  an advantage  in the  unfolding custody  litigation.   He                                                               
opined that he  could not offer a statistical  number, other than                                                               
it is pretty substantial, but he  could say there are a number of                                                               
cases in which he has seen the tool applied.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:16:40 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 3:16 p.m. to 3:17p.m.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:17:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR KELLER advised that  Chair LeDoux had returned, but he                                                               
would continue  as chair  through the  conclusion of  Mr. Grant's                                                               
testimony.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS  asked Mr.  Grant, as a  family law                                                               
attorney, which side of these cases he finds himself on.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR.  GRANT  responded that  he  has  represented both  parties  a                                                               
relatively equal amount of time.   He pointed out that it is more                                                               
common  the  mother  invokes the  presumption;  however,  he  has                                                               
recently been involved  in a couple of cases in  which the mother                                                               
was the perpetrator.   Although, he related, it  certainly is not                                                               
a gender exclusive phenomenon and  he finds himself on both sides                                                               
of the issue, and both sides of parents of both genders.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:18:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS referred to  the court finding that                                                               
the domestic  violence had occurred and  the presumption attached                                                               
with  the  notion  of  a   technical  violation,  and  asked  how                                                               
technical a  technical violation  can be.   He further  asked Mr.                                                               
Grant  to  illustrate two  technical  violations  from his  prior                                                               
cases, how  uncommon it  can be  that someone  who, in  his view,                                                               
does  not  pose  a  danger  to  a  child  can  be  found  of  two                                                               
infractions of domestic violence,  and the presumption be invoked                                                               
upon them.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:20:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. GRANT  offered the  example he  presented within  his written                                                               
testimony for the previous committee,  and advised that the facts                                                               
were  modified  slightly  so  the  people  involved  couldn't  be                                                               
identified.  During an argument the  father slammed a door in the                                                               
house and  broke the door frame,  and the police were  called but                                                               
never did  anything about that.   Although,  technically speaking                                                               
that  is malicious  destruction of  property or  some sort  of an                                                               
assault.    The   court  found,  on  request   for  a  short-term                                                               
restraining order, that incident  constituted enough of a showing                                                               
to  obtain a  short-term  restraining order.   Subsequently,  the                                                               
father ran into  the mother in the grocery store,  and not having                                                               
consulted  with counsel  yet,  asked the  mother  what they  were                                                               
doing, can't  they stop this,  and figure  out some other  way to                                                               
work it  out.  At  some point the  conversation got a  bit heated                                                               
and  the father  finally  walked  away.   The  mother called  the                                                               
police,  he was  arrested for  violating the  20 day  restraining                                                               
order,  supervised visitation  followed,  and he  didn't see  his                                                               
children for a long  time.  He pointed out that  that is the type                                                               
of case  that concerns  him.   An argument can  be made  that the                                                               
father is  a perpetrator because  he slammed the door  during the                                                               
argument and  the child  heard it,  and that's  domestic violence                                                               
that  children are  exposed to.    He opined  that no  reasonable                                                               
person would say  that is a situation where a  father should lose                                                               
his  relationship with  his children,  and  that is  the type  of                                                               
issue the bill needs to address  in whichever version is taken up                                                               
by the committee.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
3:22:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CLAMAN   offered  that   several  of   the  folks                                                               
previously  testifying  discussed   the  challenges  in  domestic                                                               
violence cases, and that reporting is  a large issue.  He pointed                                                               
out that  this discussion is not  the slamming of doors  in anger                                                               
cases, but  rather cases wherein people  are physically assaulted                                                               
and those  children put in  danger.   He also pointed  out, there                                                               
are domestic  violence orders not  resulting in  prosecutions for                                                               
any number  of reasons.   Previous testimony indicated  that this                                                               
legislation makes  it harder  to reverse  the trends  in domestic                                                               
violence  cases if  the legislature  changes  how these  domestic                                                               
violence orders are managed.  He  asked how Mr. Grant responds to                                                               
that critic  of both  versions of  the bill,  not focused  on the                                                               
slamming  of  the  door scenario  where  people  are  potentially                                                               
abusing  the  domestic violence  protective  order  statute.   He                                                               
asked Mr. Grant how he balances  those issues due to the issue of                                                               
domestic violence in this state.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
3:24:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  GRANT  responded  that  the  problem  Representative  Claman                                                               
posited  is that  it  is  an "either  or"  situation, either  the                                                               
perpetrator  gets away  with it,  or potentially  the protections                                                               
are abused.  He opined,  the solution is judicial discretion, the                                                               
judge's ability to look down at  these parties and relate what he                                                               
believes  happened,  and  what   should  happen  to  protect  the                                                               
children  or the  other spouse.   Thereby,  giving the  judge the                                                               
ability  to prevent  destruction of  a parent-child  relationship                                                               
unnecessarily, and  [Version I] does  that.  Although,  he noted,                                                               
at the end of  the day there probably will be  hard cases where a                                                               
choice  has to  be  made  as to  the  unnecessary destruction  of                                                               
parent-child relationships.   The  criminal system  is set  up to                                                               
provide those kinds  of protections, he remarked,  and whether it                                                               
does so, or not, he couldn't  speak to how often prosecutors roll                                                               
over on  a case that  should be  prosecuted.  He  suggested there                                                               
are  other   things  to   do  about   that,  such   as  educating                                                               
prosecutors,  make referrals  to  prosecution  easier, and  other                                                               
ways to  approach that.   He conceded  there is a  tension there,                                                               
and  [Version I]  probably  addresses that  better  by making  it                                                               
either  a conviction  of a  domestic  violence, or  a finding  of                                                               
domestic violence.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
[VICE CHAIR KELLER passed the gavel back to Chair LeDoux.]                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:27:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took a short at ease.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
3:27:57 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SARALYN  TABACHNICK, Executive  Director, Aiding  Women in  Abuse                                                               
and Rape Emergencies  (AWARE), said she has worked  at the Aiding                                                               
Women in Abuse and Rape  Emergencies (AWARE) Center for 29 years,                                                               
and  during  that   time  has  worked  with   children  who  have                                                               
experienced  domestic violence  or sexual  abuse.   She clarified                                                               
that a slammed door doesn't,  necessarily, mean that these people                                                               
are a domestic violence offender.   She pointed out that she does                                                               
not want to minimize what  domestic violence is, and described it                                                               
as an ongoing pattern of behavior  wherein people live in fear of                                                               
an intimate partner in their  home abusing power and control over                                                               
them.  She offered that children  live in fear and slamming doors                                                               
can  be  very  fearful,  it's  not an  isolated  incident.    She                                                               
clarified,  this is  not about  destroying relationships  between                                                               
parents and children, it's about  keeping children safer, and the                                                               
legislation  does  not keep  children  safer.    In order  for  a                                                               
conviction  to occur,  someone has  to  call the  police, and  in                                                               
order for someone to call the  police, they have to not be afraid                                                               
of  calling  the  police  and   not  be  afraid  of  getting  the                                                               
perpetrator in  trouble.  The  [victims] must be willing  to take                                                               
that step.   She continued that there  has to be an  arrest and a                                                               
conviction.     It   is  uncommon   that  there   are  consistent                                                               
convictions  in domestic  violence, because  quite often  charges                                                               
are  pled  down to  disorderly  conduct,  and  then there  is  no                                                               
domestic violence.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:30:51 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  TABACHNICK  related  that   under  current  law,  rebuttable                                                               
presumption  requires  a judge  to  find  a history  of  domestic                                                               
violence.   She referred to  previous testimony as to  leaving it                                                               
to the judge's discretion, and  advised that current law protects                                                               
Alaska's  children  exposed  to domestic  violence  by  requiring                                                               
courts to  consider that.   The presumption is  rebuttable, which                                                               
means an  accused domestic violence offender  has the opportunity                                                               
to come forward and contest it.   She related that knowing all of                                                               
this,  the  rebuttable presumption  law  puts  faith in  Alaska's                                                               
judges to  rely on collateral  sources to determine a  finding of                                                               
domestic violence.   In the event  a history is found,  the court                                                               
has  discretion to  decide whether  unsupervised, or  supervised,                                                               
visitation  is  best,  and require  the  perpetrating  parent  to                                                               
participate  in some  sort of  programming.   She explained  that                                                               
this does not mean an  offending parent can't see their children,                                                               
and when  people say the  father hasn't  seen his children  for a                                                               
year,  that  is  not  because  the court  didn't  allow  it,  she                                                               
remarked.  She  stated, it means the parent made  a choice to not                                                               
see  their   children,  because  the  court   requires  [certain'                                                               
conditions to  keep a  child safe,  generally a  supervisor being                                                               
present.   She pointed  out that  this has  also been  helpful in                                                               
assisting parents  to get  help, and Alaskan  judges do  not take                                                               
that  responsibility lightly.   She  urged the  committee to  let                                                               
judge's do what they do best  and what Alaskans trust them to do,                                                               
look at all of the evidence,  and make an informed decision about                                                               
domestic violence in a given  relationship.  Current law is based                                                               
upon language from  a model code drafted by  the National Council                                                               
on Juvenile  and Family Court  Judges.   She said that  Alaska is                                                               
one  of  twenty-four  states to  have  a  rebuttable  presumption                                                               
against  giving custody  to parents  with a  history of  domestic                                                               
violence,  and that  is something  to  be proud  of, rather  than                                                               
looking to change.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:32:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. TABACHNICK advised, more often  than a rebuttable presumption                                                               
protecting children, AWARE sees children  ordered by the court to                                                               
spend unsupervised  time with  an abusive  parent, a  parent they                                                               
have seen be  hurtful to their mothers, a parent  they are afraid                                                               
of, and  a parent who  may be directly  abusive to them  as well.                                                               
More  often than  a rebuttable  presumption protecting  children,                                                               
AWARE  hears mothers  trying to  protect their  children, mothers                                                               
whose  hearts are  wrenched put  as  they send  their crying  and                                                               
pleading  children to  be with  a parent  they are  terrified of.                                                               
Then,  she  stressed,  when  their  children  return,  they  have                                                               
nightmares, are  angry or anxious  or bed wetting for  days until                                                               
they are able to be soothed  and calmed only to have this pattern                                                               
repeated  the next  weekend.   She  said that  Alaska is  raising                                                               
children who  are learning  that their  needs and  feelings don't                                                               
matter,  that   their  boundaries   are  not  to   be  respected.                                                               
Therefore,  she said,  they learn  that they  are not  allowed to                                                               
have  boundaries  and  thus  have no  skills  in  either  setting                                                               
boundaries or believing they have  rights to boundaries.  Alaska,                                                               
as a  society, set up the  most vulnerable children to  be harmed                                                               
again and again.  She related that  she finds HB 334 to be one of                                                               
the most  disheartening bills she  has ever  spoken to in  her 27                                                               
years  at AWARE.   If  anything, Alaska  needs laws  that further                                                               
protect children,  not laws that  make it more difficult  to keep                                                               
them safe, she related.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
3:34:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS  asked  what  kind  of  supervised                                                               
visitation  programs exist  in a  community such  as Juneau,  how                                                               
available  are those  kinds  of programs  in  different parts  of                                                               
Alaska, and what  cost would they have to  the supervised parent.                                                               
He  asked her  to provide  her  perspective on  the realities  of                                                               
supervised visitation.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS.  TABACHNICK responded,  there  is one  local agency  offering                                                               
supervised visits, and  she was unsure whether  other venues were                                                               
available or arrangements  could be made with the  court in terms                                                               
of finding  a supervisor that is  agreeable to all.   She advised                                                               
that when she  hears about parents not seeing  their children for                                                               
a year,  she stated that it  is not because they  couldn't find a                                                               
supervisor or couldn't afford to pay  for one, it is because they                                                               
don't want to  be told by the  court or anyone that  there has to                                                               
be  a   supervisor,  and  they   put  that  in  front   of  their                                                               
relationship  with their  children.   She said  that is  also not                                                               
unusual  to  see when  domestic  violence  has occurred  and  the                                                               
problem  is not  the presumption.   She  remarked that  she hoped                                                               
people  would look  more at  justice than  [using the  rebuttable                                                               
presumption as a tool and] winning.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
3:37:51 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS surmised  that  in situations  Ms.                                                               
Tabachnick has  seen, indignation and righteousness  is a barrier                                                               
for the parent seeing the  child and not necessarily the external                                                               
barriers, such as cost or lack of services.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. TABACHNICK agreed.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CLAMAN  clarified  that  Mr. Grant  said  he  had                                                               
considered  using  it as  a  tool  but  never actually  done  so,                                                               
although he may have misheard him.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MS.  TABACHNICK  thanked  Representative Claman  because  she  is                                                               
happy and relieved to be corrected on that.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN related that  doesn't mean that others, not                                                               
represented, may not use it in  that way.  He referred people who                                                               
may  use slamming  a  door as  a basis  for  a domestic  violence                                                               
petition,  and the  court may  or may  not approve  the ex  parte                                                               
petition.   He  said those  are contrasted  with cases  involving                                                               
horrific instances  of domestic violence that  anyone would agree                                                               
was awful  by anyone's approach.   He asked whether she  has seen                                                               
cases  where it  appears someone  is using  a single  incident to                                                               
push forward their  domestic violence petition.   He offered that                                                               
he was  trying to get the  breadth of her experience  in what she                                                               
sees coming into the shelters.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS. TABACHNICK  answered that  she does  not do  a lot  of direct                                                               
service,  and she  does not  believe AWARE  receives many  people                                                               
coming  in just  to  look  for a  protection  order, because  the                                                               
AWARE center  looks for certain  elements necessary to  receive a                                                               
protection  order.    Therefore,   AWARE  is  looking  for  those                                                               
elements and not  looking to abuse or use the  system, but it may                                                               
ask  someone why  they are  coming  for AWARE's  services if  the                                                               
issue is not one that puts them in fear.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX advised  that Fred  Triem is  next and  pointed out                                                               
that she normally  does not allow people to  testify under public                                                               
testimony  twice, and  she is  making an  exception in  this case                                                               
because the  bill being  heard today is  different than  the bill                                                               
heard a couple of days ago.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
3:41:15 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
FRED TRIEM, Attorney, advised that  the task before the committee                                                               
is a task  of legislative drafting, and that it  is better to use                                                               
a precise  word or term in  preference to a vague,  amorphous, or                                                               
uncertain  term.   He explained,  this bill  does a  good job  of                                                               
replacing  vague,  amorphous,  and  imprecise  terms  with  exact                                                               
precise language.  For example, under  Version H, page 1, line 5,                                                               
and the phrase  "committed" as in committed a  crime, is replaced                                                               
with the  phrase "been  convicted of  a crime."   He  pointed out                                                               
that when  reviewing the second,  third, and fourth pages  of the                                                               
bill this  legislation is improved  in eight different  places by                                                               
replacing the vague phrase of  "a history of perpetrating" with a                                                               
precise phrase "convicted."   He described this as  the best bill                                                               
he has  seen because it will  improve Alaska's law, it  will save                                                               
the court system  a lot of time,  and it will eliminate  a lot of                                                               
expensive hearings.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. TRIEM referred  to judicial discretion, and  pointed out that                                                               
the problem is  that it requires time, requires a  hearing, and a                                                               
trial.    The  language  of  the bill  eliminates  the  need  for                                                               
judicial discretion  because discretion took place  in an earlier                                                               
proceeding  wherein a  defendant  had their  trial and  exercised                                                               
their due process  rights.  He remarked, this bill  will not give                                                               
free  rein  to  child  abuses  as  it  simply  protects  Alaska's                                                               
judicial  system,  the  people  involved  in  domestic  violence,                                                               
streamlines  the  process  by  requiring  precise  language,  and                                                               
eliminates time  consuming and expensive proceedings.   Given the                                                               
late date  of the session, he  suggested that a good  bill now is                                                               
better than a perfect bill weeks and weeks from now.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
3:46:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked  whether he supports changing                                                               
the  eighth  criteria  listed  on  page  5,  lines  [1-7],  to  a                                                               
conviction  of drug  use or  drug  abuse to  similarly achieve  a                                                               
precise  and clear  definition that  the court  does not  need to                                                               
exercise discretion.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. TRIEM responded, he is not  advocating a court should not use                                                               
discretion.   The  language contained  in Sec.  8, addresses  the                                                               
topic of different  programs, some of which are  not available in                                                               
small towns.   He  stated he  is not  advocating doing  away with                                                               
discretion  for a  court to  determine whether  the defendant  is                                                               
abusing alcohol or psychoactive drugs.   He reiterated that those                                                               
are the kinds  of conduct that have already  been adjudicated and                                                               
determined in  a fair  judicial proceeding.   If a  defendant has                                                               
been convicted of abusing alcohol  or using psychoactive drugs, a                                                               
person can go to CourtView to  determine whether there has been a                                                               
conviction.   He  described it  as  a precise  process wherein  a                                                               
determination is easily made, as  opposed to having days and days                                                               
of hearings  to determine whether  the person does, or  does not,                                                               
have a history of this misconduct.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:48:19 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS  surmised that Mr. Triem  is saying                                                               
he wants to see a conviction  of domestic violence, and asked why                                                               
he does not want to see  a conviction for drug possession or drug                                                               
use also.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR.  TRIEM replied  he is  not  saying he  does not  want to  see                                                               
convictions.  He  explained that a conviction of  misconduct is a                                                               
result of  a judicial process in  which the defendant has  had an                                                               
opportunity  to  present  his defenses  in  an  orderly  process,                                                               
usually with a  jury trial.  Whereas, these cases  that go before                                                               
district courts and superior courts  without a jury do not afford                                                               
the accused  the full range of  their constitutional protections.                                                               
In his  experience, it is almost  invariably a male who  is being                                                               
excluded by  this process,  because it is  almost always  men who                                                               
lose  custody  of their  children  because  they are  accused  of                                                               
having a history of domestic violence, he said.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
3:49:45 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. KOENEMAN pointed  to Representative Kreiss-Tomkins's question                                                               
regarding substance  abuse, and whether  or not there  is support                                                               
for conviction.   She offered, the language in the  bill, both in                                                               
current  statute  and Version  H,  doesn't  contain a  rebuttable                                                               
presumption  language regarding  substance  abuse,  like it  does                                                               
with domestic  violence.  There  is specific language,  "if there                                                               
is a  history, they are  guilty until proven innocent,"  which is                                                               
why the sponsor  hasn't addressed that issue, or  why there isn't                                                               
clear  and convincing  evidence regarding  substance abuse.   She                                                               
explained that it  is a factor the judge can  consider, but there                                                               
is not  an automatic  loss of the  person's children  unless they                                                               
complete  a   batterer's  program  or  alcohol   treatment  abuse                                                               
program.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS.  KOENEMAN  pointed  to  a   question  related  to  supervised                                                               
visitations.   She explained  that she  has found  seven programs                                                               
across the entire state for  supervised visitation.  The cost for                                                               
one  program in  Palmer, is  a $35  orientation fee  and $50  per                                                               
hour.   There was a  2011 Alaska  Judicial Council report  on the                                                               
batterer's intervention  programs that  went through some  of the                                                               
stakeholder  observations.    She  referred  to  the  report  and                                                               
advised  she would  get copies  of the  report should  members so                                                               
desire.   Ms. Koeneman said  that page  6 of "that  report" talks                                                               
about  barriers to  referral, enrollment,  and completion  of the                                                               
batterer's   intervention  programs,   which  she   said  states,                                                               
"enrollment   programs  was   often   hindered  by   a  lack   of                                                               
transportation, lack of money to  pay for programs, and defendant                                                               
transiency."   She  said the  report  further lists  suggestions,                                                               
such as "examine the need  for more programs statewide; look into                                                               
ways  to  use  technology  to   broaden  the  programs  to  rural                                                               
locations,  to women,  and to  ease transportation  difficulties;                                                               
examine ways to  lower program costs, and  to communicate payment                                                               
options to offenders  at the time of the  referral; develop state                                                               
protocols   for    transferring   offenders    from   [Batterers'                                                               
Intervention Program]  BIPs to another  in a  different location;                                                               
consider  ways   to  promote  batterer's   intervention  programs                                                               
completion by teaching  offenders life skills as part  of the BIP                                                               
course prior to entry."                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. KOENEMAN  pointed to the  comment there are  people attending                                                               
batterer's intervention  programs, or  people who  don't complete                                                               
it,  or people  who choose  not to.   She  opined there  are many                                                               
other  reasons why,  and she  said, "I  don't think  it's just  a                                                               
sheer,  'I don't  want to  see my  kids and  I wanna  fight,' you                                                               
know, and 'I don't  think I need to go.'"    She opined there are                                                               
true  reasons as  to  why  people are  unable  to complete  those                                                               
programs, as outlined by the Alaska Judicial Council.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
3:54:02 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER  moved  to  report  HB  334,  Version  29-                                                               
LS1409/H  out of  committee with  individual recommendations  and                                                               
the accompanying fiscal notes.   There being no objection, HB 334                                                               
moved from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:54:25 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 3:54 p.m. to 4:04 p.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
         SB 174-REG. OF FIREARMS/KNIVES BY UNIV. OF AK                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
4:04:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  announced that  the final  order of  business would                                                               
SENATE  BILL NO.  174,  "An  Act relating  to  the regulation  of                                                               
firearms and knives by the University of Alaska."                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
4:05:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  PETE KELLY  advised  there was  a  conflict between  the                                                               
Board  of  Regents  policy,  the Constitution  of  the  State  of                                                               
Alaska, and Alaska's Statutes.   In 2003, he related, under House                                                               
Bill  102, it  became legal  to have  a concealed  carry in  this                                                               
state.  He  described it as a blanket legislation.   He said that                                                               
subsequent to that law, the  University of Alaska put into policy                                                               
that concealed carry  was not allowed, put up  red signs advising                                                               
that no one could  have a gun on campus, and  there was a campus-                                                               
wide restriction  on the carrying  of weapons.    He  stated that                                                               
the state  constitution is specific  about the right to  keep and                                                               
bear  arms in  the  State  of Alaska,  and  it  is more  strongly                                                               
specified  than  the Constitution  of  the  United States.    The                                                               
Constitution of the State of Alaska  reads that the right to keep                                                               
and bear arms is an individual  right.  Currently, he said, there                                                               
are 150 campuses  in the United States  allowing concealed carry,                                                               
and  eight  states put  that  into  specific legislation.    This                                                               
legislation  was   originally  drafted  to  mirror   a  piece  of                                                               
legislation that had  gone through the process a  couple of years                                                               
ago.   The University of  Alaska pointed out their  concerns and,                                                               
he  noted, that  a couple  of unique  concerns involved  the fact                                                               
that  the  university  deals  with  domestic  violence  disputes,                                                               
employee and student disputes,  investigations of those disputes,                                                               
assaults, and it has dormitories.   Changes were made in the bill                                                               
allowing  the university  to restrict  weapons in  specific areas                                                               
where  the university  handles disputes,  and  that the  firearms                                                               
must be  secure in the  dormitories.  Essentially,  he explained,                                                               
the legislation  makes it  so the  university has  to be  in line                                                               
with  other places  in the  state.   Alaskans have  the right  to                                                               
defend  themselves  and,  he  described  the  current  university                                                               
policy as  a red sign saying  bad guys don't carry  weapons here,                                                               
which does  not meet  any test  it would  put forward  to provide                                                               
safety,  if that  is  its  intent.   He  related  that it  unduly                                                               
restricts the constitutional  rights of Alaskans and  it does not                                                               
have  the  authority to  do  that,  because the  authority  rests                                                               
within the legislature and the  provisions of the Constitution of                                                               
the State  of Alaska.  That  is essentially what this  bill does,                                                               
he said.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:10:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KELLY reiterated that this  bill recognizes that Alaskans                                                               
have  the right  to keep  and  bear arms.   He  explained that  a                                                               
motivation for  the legislation was the  San Bernardino shooting,                                                               
and multiple  shootings in  the United States  over the  past few                                                               
years.  Since  1955, all but two of the  mass public shootings in                                                               
the  United States  have  happened in  gun free  zones.   When  a                                                               
person that normally  has the right to defend  themselves is told                                                               
that they  cannot defend  themselves in  these areas  they become                                                               
soft targets for the bad guys.   He related that one of the items                                                               
on the shooters  plan, at the Virginia  Polytechnic Institute and                                                               
State University (Virginia Tech) shooting,  was that it was a gun                                                               
free zone.  He said, with  regard to the Century movie theater in                                                               
Aurora,  Colorado shooting,  there were  eight other  theaters in                                                               
that city, but  that particular theater was posted as  a gun free                                                               
zone.  The choices made by the  people who will do violence do it                                                               
in  places where  they do  not  have people  shooting back,  they                                                               
don't  want  to  be  interrupted   in  their  mission  by  people                                                               
defending  themselves  and,  he  commented, that  many  of  those                                                               
people will ultimately commit suicide.   He opined the University                                                               
of Alaska  has made itself  a large  target, not only  for people                                                               
who are unstable, but also members  of ISIS that have gained more                                                               
and more  strength in the  country.   When ISIS comes  to Alaska,                                                               
the sponsor wants to be  certain Alaskans are prepared, and able,                                                               
to  defend themselves,  and are  not breaking  the law  when they                                                               
carry out their  "god given right," he said.   He stated that the                                                               
University  of  Alaska  is  against this  bill  on,  probably,  a                                                               
philosophical basis, or it does not  think it is able to manage a                                                               
citizenry carrying out  its constitutional rights.   He noted the                                                               
university's complaint that it is  not able to restrict someone's                                                               
right to carry if they are  a threat to themselves or others, and                                                               
said  that  currently exists  in  law,  under  a Title  47  hold.                                                               
Senator Kelly advised Chair LeDoux that he had to leave ...                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
4:14:28 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  interjected that  while she realizes  he is  a busy                                                               
man,  there are  three  questions she  would like  to  ask.   She                                                               
referred to secured  guns in the dormitories, and  asked why that                                                               
would not be constitutionally  prohibited because the dormitories                                                               
are  the student's  living  area.   She  referred  to the  Senate                                                               
Finance Committee zeroing out the  fiscal note, and asked for the                                                               
rationale.    She  then  referred  to  letters  from  the  public                                                               
pointing out that people with guns  are not allowed in the Juneau                                                               
Capitol Building where  the legislature resides.   The public has                                                               
asked why the people working at  the University of Alaska have to                                                               
deal  with people  with guns  when they  are not  allowed in  the                                                               
legislative building.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
4:15:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KELLY responded,  with  regard to  the dormitories,  the                                                               
bill reads that  people must keep the weapon in  a lockbox with a                                                               
self-locking mechanism.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  asked what good is  having the gun in  a lockbox if                                                               
someone breaks into the dormitory.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
4:15:47 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KELLY answered  that  the bill  provides  that a  person                                                               
either has it  on their person, or  it's in a lockbox.   It would                                                               
be against the rules for a  person, leaving their dormitory for a                                                               
long  period of  time, to  leave it  in there  where it  could be                                                               
stolen.    The  idea  is that  with  responsible  gun  ownership,                                                               
certain things  are wired into  gun owners, such that  the person                                                               
has  control  of  their  weapon  or  has  secured  their  weapon.                                                               
Although, he related,  the gun can remain in the  lockbox if they                                                               
are going shopping, or gone for  a short period of time.  Senator                                                               
Kelly said  he does not want  people leaving their guns  in their                                                               
dormitories for a long period of time.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX asked  whether the gun has  to be in a  lockbox if a                                                               
person  is in  their  room in  the dormitory,  or  whether it  is                                                               
alright if they are in their room with the gun.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KELLY replied  that the gun has to be  on their person or                                                               
in the lockbox, which is basic responsible gun ownership.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KELLY  referred  to  zeroing out  the  fiscal  note  and                                                               
offered that  other states  had put  forward large  fiscal notes,                                                               
but those  fiscal notes were  never funded because they  were not                                                               
necessary.  He offered that the  red signs do not work, but areas                                                               
where  the  university  is   investigating  a  domestic  violence                                                               
situation in a certain room,  it is reasonable for the university                                                               
to restrict weapons from that area.   He described it as a simple                                                               
matter that does not require  wands and magnetic metal detectors,                                                               
"it  allows them  to restrict  in  that manner."   Similarly,  he                                                               
noted, courts do  not allow weapons and the  courts have magnetic                                                               
metal detectors, but  he does not feel that is  necessary for the                                                               
university because it will not  be dealing with heightened levels                                                               
of  criminality that  the courts  deals with  on an  hour-by-hour                                                               
basis.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
4:18:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KELLY  referred to the difference  between the university                                                               
and  legislators   [and  restricting   people  with   guns],  and                                                               
responded that this bill is not  about the legislature.  If there                                                               
is a  desire for another  bill, he  commented that he  just might                                                               
sponsor that bill.  This  bill is regarding the university campus                                                               
and he  unsure about adding it  to the bill because  there may be                                                               
complications he is unaware of at this late date, he remarked.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:18:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CLAMAN referred  to  the lockbox  idea and  asked                                                               
whether it  would be in  a student's room  or on the  main floor,                                                               
and whether a lockbox is like a safe.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KELLY advised that the  lockbox would be in the student's                                                               
room, and  a lockbox is similar  to a safe except  it is smaller.                                                               
Although, he explained that a safe  could be used because the gun                                                               
would  be  even more  secure.    He  further explained  that  the                                                               
lockbox is safer, and the bill  specifies that it must be made of                                                               
metal.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN  referred to the Constitution  of the State                                                               
of  Alaska providing  a greater  right to  possess arms  than the                                                               
Constitution of the United States,  and asked whether he is aware                                                               
of any Alaska Supreme Court case making that finding.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KELLY advised that he  is mostly tracking court cases for                                                               
the Alaska  Supreme Court where  there has been an  argument that                                                               
the right  to keep and  bear arms is  a general right  in Alaska.                                                               
When  reading the  Constitution of  the State  of Alaska  on this                                                               
matter, it reads that it is an individual right, he said.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:20:37 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN  referred to Ravin  v. State, 537  P.2d 494                                                             
(Alaska 1975),  involving marijuana  where the court  found there                                                               
was a greater right to  privacy than in the federal constitution,                                                               
and asked  whether he was aware  of an Alaska Supreme  Court case                                                               
that makes a similar finding.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KELLY said, no.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:20:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CLAMAN referred  to his  statement regarding  the                                                               
constitutional right to bear arms,  and asked whether a homeowner                                                               
has  the right  to  tell  his dinner  guests  that  guns are  not                                                               
allowed in the house and to leave them in the car.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KELLY  responded that that  issue is not  contemplated in                                                               
this bill, this involves the university.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN  said that he  asked the question  in terms                                                               
of Senator Kelly's  conception of the right to bear  arms and how                                                               
it weighs  on other  constitutional rights.   He  then reiterated                                                               
the question  and asked  whether the neighbor  can say  that guns                                                               
are not  allowed in his house,  and whether that would  be within                                                               
his constitutional right to tell the  guest to put the gun in the                                                               
car.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  KELLY responded  that  the  property owner,  absolutely,                                                               
would have  the right  to say  that guns are  not allowed  in his                                                               
home.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX pointed  out that  the  neighbor's house  is not  a                                                               
public building.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN  agreed, and he referred  to the comparison                                                               
between the  Alaska Court  System, which  has taken  the position                                                               
that it can bar weapons from  the public courthouse, he asked why                                                               
it is  not within the  university's right,  as the owner  of that                                                               
public  space, to  make these  same determinations.   He  further                                                               
asked how the university differs from the court system.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR KELLY responded that there  is somewhat of a wall between                                                               
the  legislature  being  able  to impose  rules  on  the  courts,                                                               
although, there  is some  authority to  do that,  but there  is a                                                               
separation of powers between the  legislature and the court.  The                                                               
right to keep and bear arms has  evolved over time.  The right of                                                               
the court to say  that the court is in session  and guns are left                                                               
outside the  courthouse has  been part  of the  American culture,                                                               
and it is accepted  by gun advocates.  He noted  he is unaware of                                                               
anyone that  supports guns in  the courtroom due to  the criminal                                                               
nature, contentious nature, and adversarial nature of court.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:23:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JOE BYRNES, Staff, Senator Pete  Kelly, Alaska State Legislature,                                                               
referred to  the fiscal note  and advised that the  University of                                                               
Alaska  requested $1.3  million  because it  referenced the  same                                                               
amount as the  University of Idaho system had  requested in order                                                               
to  implement  its campus  carry  system.    The State  of  Idaho                                                               
legislature never  funded the University of  Idaho's request, and                                                               
he said,  "they found that the  fiscal note, and I  think we feel                                                               
likewise to the fiscal note, on  -- the university has offered on                                                               
SB 174, um ... it was an  attempt to oppose the bill."  Although,                                                               
he said, the University of  Idaho system did implement long over-                                                               
due  security  changes.  Currently,  he  commented,  all  of  the                                                               
University of  Alaska campus security  forces are armed,  and are                                                               
actual peace officers.   He questioned, why  allowing law abiding                                                               
citizens to  carry concealed handguns  on campus would  require a                                                               
sudden increase in security if  the university currently believes                                                               
its policy  adequately protects its  campus.  He then  offered to                                                               
go through the sectional of the bill.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  asked that he  focus on the most  important aspects                                                               
of the bill.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:25:44 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BYRNES  agreed, and referred to  Section 1, page 1,  lines 6-                                                               
10, which read as follows:                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     FINDINGS AND  INTENT.  The  legislature finds  that the                                                                    
     individual   right  to   keep  and   bear  arms   is  a                                                                    
     constitutionally  protected right  under  art. 1,  sec.                                                                    
     19, Constitution  of the State  of Alaska, and  may not                                                                    
     be abridged by  the Board of Regents  of the University                                                                    
     of Alaska.   The legislature reserves to  the state the                                                                    
     authority to regulate  firearms, except as specifically                                                                    
     provided in AS. 14.40.173.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. BYRNES  advised it adds  the findings and intent  language to                                                               
uncodified law.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. BYRNES  advised that Sec.  2 amends the University  of Alaska                                                               
Community  College statutes  under Title  14, and  makes explicit                                                               
that the  authority to regulate  firearms and knives  is reserved                                                               
to  the  state, except  as  provided  in  statute, the  Board  of                                                               
Regents may not regulate firearms  and knives.  He explained that                                                               
the  Board of  Regents  may regulate,  through this  legislation,                                                               
includes:  open  carry  firearms; restricting  the  discharge  of                                                               
firearms on land  where there is a  reasonable likelihood people,                                                               
animals,  or property  will  be in  jeopardy;  the possession  of                                                               
firearms or knives in posted  restricted access areas, defined as                                                               
an area  beyond a  secure point where  visitors are  screened and                                                               
does not include  common areas of ingress and egress  open to the                                                               
public; and may include university  designated rooms where sexual                                                               
assault,   sexual   harassment,    or   domestic   violence   are                                                               
investigated   and  victim   assistance  is   provided;  and   in                                                               
university-designated  rooms  during  adjudication of  staff  and                                                               
student disciplinary issues and disputes.   He continued that the                                                               
Board  of  Regents  may  regulate the  carrying  of  firearms  in                                                               
dormitories   or   shared   living   quarters;   however,   those                                                               
regulations must  require that the  handgun is either  carried on                                                               
the  person or  secured in  an owner  provided lockbox.   Persons                                                               
living  in  dormitories  must declare  to  the  university  their                                                               
intention to  store a weapon in  their dormitory room.   He noted                                                               
that  the  university  may  privately   collect  and  store  that                                                               
information for  no more  than one  year, and  use it  for making                                                               
housing decisions  for students  who have  expressed they  do not                                                               
want to  share a  dormitory room  with a  person who  possesses a                                                               
firearm.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:27:38 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BYRNES  explained that the  sponsor is trying to  balance the                                                               
rights of students who wish to  carry their right to privacy, and                                                               
the  rights of  students not  desiring to  share their  dormitory                                                               
room  with  a  person  possessing a  firearm.    Furthermore,  he                                                               
advised,  the  bill  prohibits   the  following:  the  university                                                               
creating a database or registry  of persons who possess a firearm                                                               
on campus;  requiring permission  before a  person may  possess a                                                               
firearm  on  campus;  or adopting  implied  consent  policies  on                                                               
campus.    The bill  also  contains  a civil  liability  immunity                                                               
section  that   states  the  university  is   immune  from  civil                                                               
liability  for any  act or  omission resulting  from a  policy or                                                               
regulation adopted  or enforced  under this section  of law.   He                                                               
offered that the University of Alaska requested that provision.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. BYRNES explained that Sec. 3,  adds an effective date for the                                                               
bill of August  1, 2016, to address the  university's concern for                                                               
enough  time  to  promulgate  conformed  regulations  before  the                                                               
upcoming  semester.   He  then  listed  individuals available  to                                                               
answer questions.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
4:29:24 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN  pointed to his reference  about restricted                                                               
access  areas, and  asked where  it  is located  within the  bill                                                               
itself.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:29:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BYRNES  responded that restricted access  areas are mentioned                                                               
on page  2, line 16, and  are defined on  page 4, lines 3-5.   He                                                               
explained  that the  restricted  access area  is  a secure  point                                                               
beyond which  visitors are screened,  and does not  include areas                                                               
of common ingress  and egress open to the public.   He noted that                                                               
this  exact  language  is  also  found  in  Title  29,  Municipal                                                               
regulation of  firearms statutes, because municipalities  are not                                                               
allowed to  regulate firearms  beyond what is  found in  the law,                                                               
but are allowed to erect these restricted access areas.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS advised that  he spoke with friends                                                               
who had hunted  since they were young children,  and also trusted                                                               
police officers.   He  advised that his  hunting friends,  one of                                                               
which  had  taken a  marksmanship  course  at the  University  of                                                               
Alaska Fairbanks,  advised that  stress can  affect aim,  and the                                                               
police  officers  advised  that  in  high  stress  and  dangerous                                                               
situations it  is difficult to identify  hostiles versus friendly                                                               
people.  He then referenced  Senator's Kelly's comments regarding                                                               
several mass shootings  and opined that the  clear implication is                                                               
that this is  seen as legislation that will advance  the right to                                                               
self-defense.  He asked what  precedence exists of attempted mass                                                               
killings, cut short by intervention  from everyday people who may                                                               
carry  concealed   weapons,  and  that  their   actions  directly                                                               
resulted in a better outcome.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BYRNES responded  that  he  does not  have  a  study at  his                                                               
disposal, although, he offered that  FBI statistics indicate that                                                               
retaliating  people  have  an  overwhelmingly  better  chance  of                                                               
getting  out  of   their  ordeal  better  than   if  they  didn't                                                               
retaliate.   Although,  he  acknowledged,  that statistic  didn't                                                               
have  examples of  how the  people retaliated.   Anecdotally,  he                                                               
said,  there  are  many  cases  where  armed  citizens  have  de-                                                               
escalated situations by  having a gun.  He pointed  out that when                                                               
it  comes to  violence on  campus and  the fear  that more  armed                                                               
persons on campus will cause  an increase in violence or increase                                                               
in suicide,  that burden of proof  rests with people who  wish to                                                               
deny  the right  to begin  with.   He  said  that in  all of  the                                                               
concealed carry campuses there has  not been a marked increase in                                                               
violence  or  suicide.   Therefore,  he  commented, the  evidence                                                               
shows that, overall, this would not be an issue.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
4:36:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS  referred  to the  active  shooter                                                               
training provided  at the  Capitol Building,  and noted  that the                                                               
basic take  away was that  defensive retaliation  is appropriate.                                                               
He said he agrees there has  probably not been an increase of gun                                                               
violence or  suicides on campuses  adopting concealed  carry, but                                                               
he  would  like  to  know   what  insurance  companies  think  in                                                               
evaluating  the  risks,  and  how  it may,  or  may  not,  affect                                                               
policies, which is a market based test.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:37:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. BRYNES answered that he  does not have any actuarial analysis                                                               
from insurance providers,  but there has not been  an increase in                                                               
violence.   He added that  the four instances that  occurred have                                                               
been accidental  discharges from irresponsible use  with non-life                                                               
threatening injuries.   He commented that concealed  carry is for                                                               
the  self-defense of  the  person  who is  carrying,  and not  to                                                               
protect  other people.   He  advised  that the  sponsor does  not                                                               
contemplate  or  encourage  creating  amateur  armed  swat  teams                                                               
roaming  around  campuses  to  take  out the  bad  guys  in  mass                                                               
shooting, and  described it as  irresponsible behavior.   In many                                                               
situations,  he commented,  where a  person has  been threatened,                                                               
the  mere  brandishing  of  a  gun  may  have  de-escalated  that                                                               
situation, and currently on campus that is not allowed.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX pointed  out that  Europe does  not have  concealed                                                               
carry  due  to stringent  gun  control  laws,  and it  is  highly                                                               
unlikely  the people  in Brussels  or Paris  were carrying  guns.                                                               
Alaska,  she said,  has a  fairly broad  concealed carry  law and                                                               
Alaska could be the only area a study could take place.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:41:24 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX turned  to Michael  Hostina,  University of  Alaska                                                               
Fairbanks, and  noted that,  currently, guns  are not  allowed on                                                               
campus, but  Alaska has a  broad concealed carry law  in general.                                                               
She asked  how he would know  whether someone is carrying  a gun,                                                               
because they are  not required to go through  metal detectors and                                                               
they are not frisked.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
4:42:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MICHAEL  HOSTINA, General  Counsel,  clarified  that weapons  are                                                               
permitted on campus under certain  circumstances and students may                                                               
have their weapons  stored in secure storage.   There are various                                                               
events on  campus to which  weapons may  be carried, such  as gun                                                               
shows, the  rifle team where  people may  check in and  check out                                                               
their  weapons, and  people  in faculty  and  single housing  are                                                               
permitted to  store weapons.   Weapons are  not permitted  in the                                                               
dormitories  and concealed  carry is  not generally  permitted on                                                               
campus.    He explained  that  the  university becomes  aware  of                                                               
someone  carrying a  weapon  when they  act  in an  inappropriate                                                               
manner, such as threatening  someone, demonstrating their weapon,                                                               
or the weapon  is mishandled and falls out.   When the university                                                               
becomes  aware of  a  person carrying  a gun  it  takes steps  to                                                               
administratively remove those weapons from campus.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
4:43:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CLAMAN referred  to the  restricted access  areas                                                               
listed  in the  bill  and  asked his  understanding  of what  the                                                               
university would be required to do, to create those areas.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA responded that a  sign is not sufficient to establish                                                               
a  restricted  access  area, and  currently  the  university,  by                                                               
policy,  may  limit weapons  in  areas  such as,  a  disciplinary                                                               
hearing or  an investigative meeting.   With the passage  of this                                                               
bill,  the university  would  not  be able  to  enforce a  policy                                                               
unless it  had established a  secure point beyond  which visitors                                                               
are screened.   In order to regulate weapons in  those areas, the                                                               
university  would have  to establish  the restricted  access area                                                               
and, he said, that's the definition of a restricted access area.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   CLAMAN  asked   whether   that  involves   metal                                                               
detectors or a  guard sitting at the secure access  point using a                                                               
hand wand to check for weapons.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA answered  that that is not clear and,  he pointed out                                                               
the best  way to set  up the university's restricted  access area                                                               
is not  clear.  Therefore, he  explained, the fiscal note  has an                                                               
expense associated with  it, which is now limited to  the cost of                                                               
a security analysis.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN  asked whether the university  could have a                                                               
secure   access  point,   without  having   something  different,                                                               
screening for weapons.   Or, he asked, would  the university have                                                               
to have something that screens for  weapons to make it qualify as                                                               
a restricted access area.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:45:49 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA opined that someone  disadvantage by the university's                                                               
enforcement of  a restricted  access area,  that did  not include                                                               
some type  of screening,  would certainly  have an  argument that                                                               
the university had  not complied with the law.   The university's                                                               
ability to enforce  requires it to establish some  form of secure                                                               
point, and some form of screening,  otherwise it will not be able                                                               
to enforce that aspect of the law.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
4:46:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX noted  that,  currently,  the university  basically                                                               
does not  allow any  guns on  campus, and asked  why it  does not                                                               
have  a wand  to  test everyone.    She then  asked  why, if  the                                                               
university  is now  allowing guns  on campus,  that people  would                                                               
have to go through the wand  exercise.  Clearly, she pointed out,                                                               
a good portion  of the university is in Fairbanks  and there must                                                               
be many people carrying guns in Fairbanks.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA  replied that he  does not  know whether that  is the                                                               
case or not, or whether it is more likely in Anchorage, or not.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  interject that the university  doesn't know whether                                                               
a person  is carrying because a  wand is not used;  therefore, if                                                               
it is  so important to  check everyone, why isn't  the university                                                               
using the wands now.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA explained  that  it is  a matter  of  being able  to                                                               
respond  when   the  university   becomes  aware  of   an  issue.                                                               
Currently, he  said, if the  university becomes aware  of someone                                                               
violating its policy,  the university can do  something about it.                                                               
Under  this  bill,  the  university  would  not  be  able  to  do                                                               
something about someone carrying  on campus unless the university                                                               
had established  a restricted access  area.  He pointed  out that                                                               
the bill establishes a restricted  access area to prevent weapons                                                               
from being involved in adjudications or investigations.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CLAMAN asked  whether, currently,  the university                                                               
is  involved   in  investigations   of  sexual   assault,  sexual                                                               
harassment, domestic violence, and providing victim assistance.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA  responded  that  the   university  is  involved  in                                                               
investigations and  assistance on  a daily  basis.   He explained                                                               
there  are issues  such as,  sexual  harassment, sexual  assault,                                                               
other assaults,  student disciplinary issues,  staff disciplinary                                                               
issues,  disputes  involving  student grades,  and  removal  from                                                               
programs.   Those adjudications and investigations  take place on                                                               
a daily basis on the campuses of the university, he reiterated.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
4:48:53 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CLAMAN  surmised  that,   under  this  bill,  the                                                               
university  would be  required to  create something  akin to  the                                                               
courthouse  wherein people  are  screened prior  to entering  the                                                               
courthouse.  He  said that under this bill,  the university would                                                               
no longer assume people were obeying  the rules of the campus and                                                               
not carrying weapons.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA agreed.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX asked  why the  university  would currently  assume                                                               
that  people are  not carrying  weapons  just because  a sign  is                                                               
posted that  says "no guns."   She continued that  the courthouse                                                               
does not assume that people do not have guns.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA opined  that  the university  does  not assume  that                                                               
people do  not have guns, but  it does let people  know that that                                                               
is the policy of the university.   The university can ask them to                                                               
declare whether they  have a firearm, and can ask  them to remove                                                               
it  from  the campus.    Alternatively,  he noted,  with  younger                                                               
people  who carry,  many may  be responsible,  but there  will be                                                               
some  who will  brag to  their  friends or  roommates [about  the                                                               
gun], or  possibly try  to intimidate  someone.   Currently, when                                                               
the  university becomes  aware of  that [behavior],  it can  take                                                               
action.   Although, he  said, that  would not  be the  case under                                                               
this bill, it would have to occur in a secure area.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS asked  for  clarification that  if                                                               
someone  was brandishing  a gun,  intimidating,  or showing  off,                                                               
asked whether  anyone would  have any  recourse, or  whether that                                                               
become the new norm.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA   asked  whether  that   was  a  question   for  the                                                               
university.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX answered yes, because  he is the general counsel for                                                               
the university.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA  responded  that,  under  SB  174,  if  someone  was                                                               
brandishing a gun  there may be an issue of  some type of threat,                                                               
assault,  or  intimidation.   There  is  a difference  between  a                                                               
criminal  and university  proceeding,  and  the university  could                                                               
conduct   an   administrative    proceeding   if   someone   were                                                               
intimidating someone with a weapon, he said.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:52:08 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN  noted that  a person can  intimidate without                                                               
having a gun,  and whether currently the university  would act if                                                               
someone was intimidating someone else on the campuses.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA replied,  absolutely.   He then  asked Chair  LeDoux                                                               
whether  he could  offer brief  remarks  because there  may be  a                                                               
misapprehension that  the university  is in direct  opposition to                                                               
this bill, which  is not the case.  The  university is seeking an                                                               
amendment   to  this   bill  to   manage  firearms   in  specific                                                               
situations, and it  does not believe the  current language allows                                                               
it to do that effectively.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX agreed,  opened public  testimony, and  advised Mr.                                                               
Hostina that he could testify.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
4:53:26 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA advised  that the  Board of  Regents is  seeking six                                                               
amendments  to SB  174, the  Senate Education  Standing Committee                                                               
Substitute included  four of the  amendments sought by  the Board                                                               
of  Regents,  and  this  bill   only  includes  two  and  creates                                                               
additional issues.  He pointed  out that the amendments sought by                                                               
the  university  are  grounded   in  existing  state  policy  and                                                               
existing state law.   Those amendments would  apply to situations                                                               
similar to  those situations  in state  law or  under legislative                                                               
policy where  weapons are  prohibited.   For example,  he advised                                                               
that  weapons  are  precluded  under state  law  in  the  Capital                                                               
Building, concealed carry  is precluded for people  under the age                                                               
of  21,  concealed  carry  in   residences  without  the  express                                                               
permission of an adult resident,  loaded firearms in places where                                                               
intoxicating   liquor   is   served,  possession   in   childcare                                                               
facilities, possession in court  system facilities, possession in                                                               
domestic violence and sexual assault  shelters, and possession in                                                               
schools  from   pre-school  through  secondary  school.     These                                                               
existing policies  in law, he  explained, are  constitutional for                                                               
the  reasons Antonin  Gregory Scalia,  Associate  Justice of  the                                                               
Supreme Court of the United  States noted in District of Columbia                                                             
v. Heller, 554  U.S. 570 (2008), which  involved sensitive places                                                             
for government property,  and were based on  sound public policy.                                                               
For  the  same reason,  the  University  of Alaska's  amendments,                                                               
would be  constitutional, they wouldn't criminalize  conduct, are                                                               
narrowly tailored to achieve the  same public safety goals, would                                                               
not exclude weapons from campus,  but the amendments would permit                                                               
the Board of Regents to  manage specific high conflict, high risk                                                               
situations common  on its campuses.   He mentioned there  are two                                                               
problems the  current language  of SB 174  creates, such  that it                                                               
does not adequately  address secure storage of  handguns and does                                                               
not address  storage of  rifles or knives.   It  also technically                                                               
allows  concealed carry  of  rifles,  as well  as  open carry  of                                                               
knives.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:56:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA referred  to risk  of harm  to self  or others,  and                                                               
noted  previous testimony  offered that  Title 47  takes care  of                                                               
that.   He  said  that Title  47  is a  high  threshold to  meet,                                                               
because  it  involves  committing   someone  involuntarily  to  a                                                               
hospital and  essentially imprisoning  them.  It  happens rarely,                                                               
he said  it is  not a useful  tool for the  university to  use in                                                               
dealing with students and employees, and  it simply is not a good                                                               
way to go  when dealing with a student  population the university                                                               
is trying  to help and  support, or  an employee population.   He                                                               
referred to  the testimony regarding mass  shootings on campuses,                                                               
and noted  that those are  still fairly rare events,  but suicide                                                               
in Alaska is not a rare event.   He explained that suicide is one                                                               
of the leading causes of death  among persons 15-24 years of age,                                                               
and  referred to  the  memorandum he  provided  to the  committee                                                               
earlier.   Suicide  attempts by  firearms are  a more  successful                                                               
means because people  can't change their minds  after the trigger                                                               
has been  pulled.  The university  believes that the time  to act                                                               
is when behavior indicates a risk  of harm to self or others, and                                                               
that Title 47 does not provide  an effective answer.  He said the                                                               
university  would appreciate  an  amendment allowing  it to  deal                                                               
with this as the Senate  Education Standing Committee [Version N]                                                               
provided.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:58:19 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA  explained that Amendments  2 and 3,  involve health,                                                               
counseling  services,  or  other   services,  related  to  sexual                                                               
harassment  or violence  located within  the facilities  used for                                                               
adjudication  of  student  and employee  disciplinary  issues  or                                                               
disputes.   The university appreciates  that this bill  allows it                                                               
to establish restricted access areas  to address weapons in these                                                               
areas, but  doing so  will involve  some expense.   He  said, the                                                               
issue  will  have to  be  addressed  to create  those  restricted                                                               
access  areas, and  make the  rules enforceable  as disputes  are                                                               
being adjudicated,  or dealing with  people possibly  involved in                                                               
domestic violence or sexual assault.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
4:59:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA  advised that the  fourth amendment is  regulation in                                                               
student dorms and other shared living  quarters.  To be clear, he                                                               
explained, the  university is not  seeking authority  to regulate                                                               
single family  dwellings or individual apartments,  but rather in                                                               
shared  living  quarters.   He  advised  that the  discussion  is                                                               
concreate   living,  RA's   manage   these   areas,  and   impose                                                               
discipline.   The  dormitories themselves  and shared  apartments                                                               
involve shared  facilities, such  as bathrooms  and lounges.   He                                                               
referred  to allegations  that the  university  has few  students                                                               
under  the age  of  21,  and clarified  that  40  percent of  the                                                               
students in  the dorms are over  21.  Therefore, there  will be a                                                               
mix of people  legally permitted to conceal carry,  and those who                                                               
are not.   He pointed out there are transient  visitors in dorms,                                                               
the  rooms are  sometimes frequently  visited by  other students,                                                               
alcohol is  present, and  allowing concealed  carry in  dorms and                                                               
other  shared housing  results in  concealed handguns  and knives                                                               
being accessible  in a volatile  environment, unlike  any private                                                               
residence.   He  said the  lockbox portion  of the  bill provides                                                               
that the  students provide their  own lockboxes, it is  not clear                                                               
how  that  will  solve  a  problem since  lockboxes  have  to  be                                                               
installed and the bill does not  provide for that.  The bill also                                                               
does not provide technical specifications  for lockboxes, some of                                                               
which are  easily defeated  with a  paperclip or  simply dropping                                                               
them upside  down.  On  the other hand, he  commented, installing                                                               
quality  lockboxes  in every  room  is  a complex  and  expensive                                                               
issue.   He noted  that another  issue in this  area is  that the                                                               
committee  substitute   appears  to  inadvertently   provide  for                                                               
storage of long  guns in university housing, it  doesn't make any                                                               
provision allowing  the university  to require secure  storage of                                                               
long guns  in university  housing.  He  asked that  the committee                                                               
amend this  bill to allow  the university to regulate  weapons in                                                               
shared housing and dormitories.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
5:01:46 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA explained  that the  fifth  amendment involves  K-12                                                               
dedicated programs on  campus, it does not  include K-12 students                                                               
occasionally being on campus, visiting  a museum, or happening to                                                               
walk  across  campus.    This   amendment  relates  to  dedicated                                                               
programs,  and  is  a  narrow  amendment  that  only  applies  to                                                               
portions of  the facility used  for K-12 dedicated  programs, and                                                               
only while  the program  is occurring.   He explained  that these                                                               
all involve programs  where the university assumes the  role of a                                                               
parent or guardian,  and does not bear any  resemblance to public                                                               
places where children  just happen to be  present and accompanied                                                               
by their  parents.  He  advised that  the ability to  regulate in                                                               
these areas,  where dedicated K-12  programs are going  on, would                                                               
be consistent with current law on  K-12 property.  It would avoid                                                               
potential accidents,  and the university  would be able  to apply                                                               
the  same standard  of  care for  K-12  as is  the  case on  K-12                                                               
property.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
5:03:06 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA related  that due  to the  nature of  the university                                                               
premises, it believes that a conceal  carry permit is useful.  He                                                               
point out that of the  eight states requiring a public university                                                               
to allow concealed carry, six require  a permit, and two of those                                                               
require  an enhanced  concealed carry  permit.   He reminded  the                                                               
committee  that  the  university   operates  in  close  quarters,                                                               
classrooms,  laboratories, libraries  and  other communal  space,                                                               
and related  it is appropriate  that students have  some training                                                               
and knowledge  about gun safety  and applicable law.   The permit                                                               
would   also   exclude    certain   individuals   with   criminal                                                               
convictions,   including  class   A  misdemeanors   for  domestic                                                               
violence or stalking, from carrying  concealed weapons on campus.                                                               
He  noted that  the university  asks the  committee to  adopt the                                                               
Senate  Education Standing  Committee  Substitute for  SB 174  in                                                               
place  of the  version passed  by the  full Senate,  and to  also                                                               
include  the   two  additional   amendments  which   provide  for                                                               
regulation for K-12, and a permit.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
5:04:20 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS  asked whether insurance  will rise                                                               
in any manner if this bill passes.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA   replied  that   insurance  companies   often  give                                                               
insurance company type answers to  that question.  The university                                                               
is self-insured  for the first  $2 million in claims  against the                                                               
university.   The university's excess  carrier indicated  it will                                                               
let the  university know the impact  of this bill when  the final                                                               
bill  is  in place,  and  the  policies  and regulations  of  the                                                               
university are in place, after the bill is passed, he said.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
5:05:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS  asked whether  he had  spoken with                                                               
other  universities in  jurisdictions  where similar  legislation                                                               
was  passed,  and  if  so,  how  that  affected  their  insurance                                                               
premiums.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
5:05:29 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA said  he  was unsure  whether  the university  asked                                                               
about insurance  premiums with  other universities,  although, it                                                               
has asked about  increased costs.  He opined  that the University                                                               
of Idaho  implemented screening procedures  for its  stadiums and                                                               
added  additional police.   He  referred to  the earlier  comment                                                               
that all  three of the  University of Alaska campuses  have armed                                                               
police forces, and  clarified that the Southeast  campus does not                                                               
have a police force.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN asked  why a  person should  be required  to                                                               
have a  permit to  carry on  campus if they  are not  required to                                                               
have a permit walking down the street.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR.   HOSTINA  responded   that  the   university  has   specific                                                               
responsibilities for its students and  employees on its campuses,                                                               
in   the  event   it  doesn't   respond   when  someone   behaves                                                               
irresponsibly,  liability may  result.   Whereas,  municipalities                                                               
are not  responsible for  certain events  taking place  on public                                                               
streets.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
5:07:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX  asked  whether  part   of  the  bill  exempts  the                                                               
university from liability.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA  agreed that  part  of  this  bill does  exempt  the                                                               
university,  except   "lawyers  live  for  finding   ways  around                                                               
provisions like that under certain  civil rights actions."  While                                                               
it  would prevent  simple negligence  type  claims, it  is not  a                                                               
guarantee, he said,                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX asked whether there  is any guarantee there wouldn't                                                               
be claims brought against a  municipality when someone is walking                                                               
down a street.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA responded  that in terms of a  shooting incident, the                                                               
municipality  wouldn't   ordinarily  be   subject  to   a  claim.                                                               
Obviously, he  pointed out,  if the police  were called  and they                                                               
failed to  respond, or responded  inappropriately, a  claim could                                                               
arise but not the simple event  itself.  Whereas, he stated, on a                                                               
university  campus  the  university  would likely  be  viewed  as                                                               
somehow responsible for failing to ensure safety.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
5:08:37 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOSTINA,  in response to  Chair LeDoux  as to whether  he was                                                               
aware of  any other  university being  dinged for  that, answered                                                               
the  University  of Alaska  was  dinged  many  years past,  in  a                                                               
negligence action.   He  agreed with Chair  LeDoux that  the bill                                                               
exempts the university from negligence actions.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
5:09:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN  referred to  the fiscal note  describing a                                                               
need for a  consultant to estimate what is necessary  to create a                                                               
secure area,  and asked  reason Mr. Hostina  could not  provide a                                                               
ballpark range.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOSTINA  explained  that,  at  this  point,  the  university                                                               
believes it best to not attempt a guess.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
In terms of  the university trying to be  fiscally restrained, it                                                               
would be  best to  obtain professional advice  on how  to arrange                                                               
sensitive  areas involved  in issues,  such as  investigation and                                                               
disciplinary  actions,  to  minimize the  cost,  potentially,  of                                                               
establishing secure restricted access areas, he explained.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
5:11:13 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MAC  COOPER,  Associated  General   Counsel,  Office  of  General                                                               
Counsel, University  of Alaska,  responded that  the university's                                                               
rough  estimate on  the  cost  of a  metal  detector ranges  from                                                               
$5,000 -  $10,000 per  unit -  with wands  costing a  few hundred                                                               
dollars   per   unit,  and   a   full-time   security  guard   at                                                               
approximately  $50,000 -  $80,000 per  year.   The University  of                                                               
Kansas is  addressing the secured  access issue in response  to a                                                               
law effective  in July, 2017.   The University of  Kansas advised                                                               
if it  secured every building in  its system, it would  be beyond                                                               
its  financial means  to do  so.   Mr. Cooper  remarked that  the                                                               
University  of Kansas  is currently  preparing the  same type  of                                                               
study to determine  what buildings and areas  of buildings should                                                               
be secured.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
5:12:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER  made a point  of order that  the committee                                                               
is  far afield  from debating  the bill,  and offered  to make  a                                                               
motion to zero out the fiscal note.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX advised  the conversation  is allowed  to continue,                                                               
and subsequent  to public testimony,  the fiscal note  debate can                                                               
take place.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN said he would  hold his questions until the                                                               
fiscal note debate so the public would have a chance to testify.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX noted the public  testimony list is fairly long, and                                                               
asked Mr. Cooper whether he would be available tomorrow.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR. COOPER said he would be available tomorrow.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX  opened  public  testimony,   and  advised  she  is                                                               
limiting testimony  to two minutes  per person to allow  time for                                                               
all witnesses.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
5:13:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
KEN LANDFIELD related  that he occasionally takes  classes at the                                                               
Katchemak Bay campus  of the Kenai Peninsula  College, and shared                                                               
the Constitution of  the State of Alaska, Article  VII Section 3,                                                               
which read:                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     The University of  Alaska shall be governed  by a board                                                                    
     of  regents.  The regents  shall  be  appointed by  the                                                                    
     governor, subject to confirmation  by a majority of the                                                                    
     members of the legislature  in joint session. The board                                                                    
     shall,  in accordance  with law,  formulate policy  and                                                                    
     appoint the  president of the  university. He  shall be                                                                    
     the executive officer of the board.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR.  LANDFIELD said  that beyond  the  Board of  Regents and  the                                                               
president  of the  University of  Alaska,  there are  chancellors                                                               
responsible  for  their  respective   campuses,  not  to  mention                                                               
various  branches   with  their  own  directors   and  respective                                                               
administrations.     He   asked  whether   these  officials   and                                                               
administrations  are  not  the  proper  avenue  for  establishing                                                               
university policy in general, and  in particular.  While there is                                                               
a  state policy  allowing concealed  carry statewide,  he related                                                               
that  weapons are  not  allowed  in public  places,  such as  the                                                               
legislature  and  the  court  system.   He  suggested  that  this                                                               
legislation is  a clear  case of  state government  overreach and                                                               
questioned why,  in the  face of a  crippling budget  crisis, the                                                               
legislature  is  spending precious  time  on  an expensive,  non-                                                               
urgent,  non-issue, outside  of its  constitutional jurisdiction.                                                               
He asked that the bill not be enacted.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
5:16:45 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
The committee took an at-ease from 5:16 p.m. to 5:28 p.m.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
5:28:54 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ERIN HOOD  said he is  testifying on  his own behalf,  teaches at                                                               
the University of Alaska Southeast  (UAS), and opined that one of                                                               
the main  justifications for this  bill is righting some  sort of                                                               
constitutional wrong.  Article I,  Section 19 of the Constitution                                                               
of the State of Alaska was  amended in 1994 to confer broader gun                                                               
rights, he said,  and then read the instruction  to voters, "This                                                               
amendment  'quote' would  not overturn  or invalidate  state laws                                                               
restricting   access  of   possession  of   firearms  in   school                                                               
building."   Therefore,  people  voting in  1994  were told  this                                                               
amendment  was  still  in accordance  with  banning  firearms  in                                                               
school buildings.   He said he would read from  an Alaska Supreme                                                               
Court  decision, as  follows: "In  limited respects  as, 'quote,'                                                               
the  Board   of  Regents  is,   'quote,'  co-equal   rather  than                                                               
subordinate  to that  of  the executive  or  legislative arms  of                                                               
government."   That language "in the  constitution," implies that                                                               
there should be deference to the  Board of Regents with regard to                                                               
policies  within  the  University   of  Alaska's  campuses.    He                                                               
explained that the  University of Alaska, Board  of Regents voted                                                               
nine to two  against this bill, and in working  at the university                                                               
and talking  with students, staff,  and administrators,  the nine                                                               
to two vote  is representative of the amount of  support the bill                                                               
has on  campus, with approximately  80 percent against  the bill,                                                               
he remarked.  He pointed to  the idea of government overreach and                                                               
related that the  people of King Cove are  angry and disrespected                                                               
because  they can't  build  a  road to  the  airport because  the                                                               
federal  government is  ignoring  their  particular concerns  and                                                               
overruling  them.    The   university  campus  is  overwhelmingly                                                               
against this  bill and its  concerns are  being ignored.   From a                                                               
practical  standpoint,  the focus  has  been  almost entirely  on                                                               
school  shootings, 30,000  shootings in  the United  States every                                                               
year,   of  those,   two-thirds  are   suicides,  one-third   are                                                               
homicides, and  less than one percent  are justifiable homicides.                                                               
Therefore, there  is no reason to  think that by putting  guns on                                                               
campus  will   doing  anything   except  increase   suicides  and                                                               
homicides, he related.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
5:32:06 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked the subject he teaches at UAS.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOOD responded, Environmental Science.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN  referred to his statement  that the students                                                               
on campus are 80 percent ...                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  HOOD interjected  that that  is his  personal opinion  after                                                               
speaking with  student and  other staff  about guns  and hunting,                                                               
and opined that  the support is almost  negligible between staff,                                                               
the administration, and students.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked whether  his opinion is primarily based                                                               
upon students in the environmental science classes.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOOD advised  that he teaches all majors  in his introductory                                                               
education classes.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX referred  to his statement that he has  no reason to                                                               
believe this bill  will do anything other  than increase suicides                                                               
and homicides, and  asked whether he was familiar  with the other                                                               
schools that have  now initiated the guns on campus  system.  She                                                               
opined there has been no uptick in homicides or suicides.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
5:33:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. HOOD  answered that only 8  states out of [50]  allow guns on                                                               
school campuses,  and school shootings and  justifiable homicides                                                               
are  a tiny  fraction of  the total  number of  shootings in  the                                                               
United States.  He remarked that  it is more important to ask why                                                               
42 states do  not want guns in their school,  and to consider, in                                                               
this  budget crisis,  whether the  legislature  wants to  attract                                                               
students from  out-of-state, and  to consider parents  being told                                                               
guns are in the dormitories where people are drinking.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
5:34:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
SALLY  RUE  said  she  is  a long-time  resident  of  Alaska,  is                                                               
speaking on  her own  behalf, and urged  the committee  to oppose                                                               
this bill.  She offered that she  grew up in a hunting family, is                                                               
a gun owner, has enjoyed hunting  and passing on the tradition to                                                               
her  children,  and she  is  not  against  guns.   Although,  she                                                               
pointed out, she is against  the legislature forcing the Board of                                                               
Regents to  allow guns almost  everywhere on campus.   Currently,                                                               
the university  allows weapons on  campus in a  reasonable manner                                                               
that  is  not  in  conflict  with the  Second  Amendment  of  the                                                               
Constitution  of  the United  States.    Restricting firearms  in                                                               
government  buildings  and schools  has  been  recognized by  the                                                               
courts, and  the Alaska legislature, as  presumptively lawful and                                                               
outside the  scope of constitutional  protections.  The  right to                                                               
bear arms is not  the same as the right to carry  arms all of the                                                               
time and  anywhere.   This bill  is trying  to address  a problem                                                               
that does not  exist, she opined.  Alaska's  university system is                                                               
first and foremost  a place of learning  where students, faculty,                                                               
and staff need  to feel safe to freely discuss  ideas and explore                                                               
differences.  She described it as  a place where young people are                                                               
growing into adults,  where they experience the ups  and downs of                                                               
adolescence   and  young   adulthood.      This  often   includes                                                               
experimenting  with   alcohol  and  drugs,   navigating  romantic                                                               
relationships and  breakups, and sometimes dealing  with a mental                                                               
health crisis.   The  students live in  dorms and  close quarters                                                               
where friction can occur, and  mixing firearms into this volatile                                                               
environment does nothing to increase  safety, and does everything                                                               
to make it inevitable there  will be avoidable tragedies.  Alaska                                                               
has  the  highest rates  of  suicide,  gun violence,  and  sexual                                                               
assault in  the nation, and there  is no evidence this  bill will                                                               
do  anything to  lessen  that  and, it  could  likely worsen  it.                                                               
During this  time of  Alaska's budget  crisis, the  university is                                                               
facing huge cuts to its  budget, cutting academic programs and up                                                               
to  hundreds  of  faculty  positions   and,  she  remarked,  this                                                               
legislation would  divert even more resources  from academics and                                                               
student  support.    Alaska  and   the  Alaska  legislature  face                                                               
momentous  choices this  session that  will determine  the future                                                               
health and welfare  of the entire state, she said.   This bill is                                                               
not needed, potentially harmful to  Alaska's young people and the                                                               
university  system, and  does  nothing to  focus  on its  biggest                                                               
issues.  She urged the committee to oppose SB 174.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
5:37:59 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
FRANK RUE  said he lives  in Juneau,  and is a  long-time Alaskan                                                               
hunter and gun owner.   He related that he is  aware of a suicide                                                               
that took place  because the gun was left unlocked,  and once the                                                               
decision  is made  to pull  the  trigger it  can't be  un-pulled.                                                               
Allowing  concealed  weapons on  campus  will  not make  campuses                                                               
safer, but rather more depressed  suicidal students will have the                                                               
means to kill themselves, and  firearms will be readily available                                                               
at  that moment  of no  return.   He commented  that rather  than                                                               
students being hungover  and seeking help from  a counselor there                                                               
will be  more dead  students.   The same is  true, he  noted, for                                                               
those  moments when  a student  is  angry about  being dumped  by                                                               
their girlfriend or given a bad  grade by a professor.  He opined                                                               
that  rather   than  an  incident   of  assault   or  harassment,                                                               
counseling,  and/or   legal  proceedings,  there  will   be  dead                                                               
girlfriends and  faculty.  The  same runs true for  someone drunk                                                               
on alcohol and  a fight.  He pointed out  that the most promising                                                               
students and  faculty are the  people likely to go  elsewhere due                                                               
to  the  presence  of  concealed weapons  on  the  University  of                                                               
Alaska's  campuses.    He  advised that  the  same  is  happening                                                               
elsewhere in the  country where weapons on  campus legislation is                                                               
passed.  For example, he pointed  out that the dean of the highly                                                               
touted  University of  Texas Architecture  School  left Texas  to                                                               
become the Dean  of the University of  Pennsylvania Design School                                                               
in  large  part,  because  the newly  passed  Texas  law  allowed                                                               
concealed guns on campus.  He  pointed to the sponsor's remark to                                                               
people with  the same  above decisions, "Don't  let the  door hit                                                               
you  on the  ass on  your way  out the  door," or  words to  that                                                               
effect, he  said.  He  related that  most people, who  care about                                                               
the University  of Alaska system,  disagree with  that sentiment,                                                               
and agree that Alaska keeping  its best students and faculty will                                                               
improve  the  experience and  education  for  all students.    He                                                               
related that President Mark Hamilton  remarked, as follows:  "The                                                               
10 percent free  tuition to 10 percent  greatest highest students                                                               
was the one  thing that made the -- increased  the academic rigor                                                               
of the university  because now you had the very  best students in                                                               
Alaska."   Mr. Rue reiterated  that, that one thing  alone raised                                                               
the  academic standards  of the  university, and  he opined  that                                                               
this bill will drive some of those students away.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
5:40:48 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   CLAMAN  referred   to  his   mention  of   other                                                               
universities enacting  these laws, and asked  whether those state                                                               
schools  saw  a  change  after they  added  the  concealed  carry                                                               
provisions in terms of students applying to go to those schools.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR RUE answered that he was not aware of any.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
5:41:19 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LEDOUX referred  to his  concerns about  dead girlfriends,                                                               
dead boyfriends,  suicides, and  so forth,  and pointed  out that                                                               
many students live off campus.   The university doesn't make it a                                                               
condition of attending  UAA, UAF, UAS, that no  students are able                                                               
to live off campus  and have guns.  She advised  she does not see                                                               
the distinction between living on campus and living off campus.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. RUE  opined that situations  can evolve quickly.   He offered                                                               
the  scenario of  people  drinking in  dorms,  suddenly they  are                                                               
pushing each  other, and  a fight  breaks out.   Students  are in                                                               
close  proximity to  each  other in  a dorm,  which  is far  more                                                               
volatile than  someone living in  a house five miles  off campus,                                                               
he opined.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
5:42:49 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CALLIE  CONERTON,  Student  Government President,  University  of                                                               
Alaska Southeast, advised  she is a student at  the University of                                                               
Alaska  Southeast   (UAS),  and  serves  as   student  government                                                               
president,  and as  the statewide  coalition of  student leader's                                                               
vice-chair.   She commented that  there are multiple  reasons she                                                               
opposes SB  174, campus is no  place for guns.   Contrary to what                                                               
the  committee  has  been  told, there  are  fiscal  impacts  and                                                               
Alaskan students cannot  afford it.  Major  stakeholders from the                                                               
university,  including  its  president,   the  Board  of  Regents                                                               
through  the  school  faculty have  opposed  this  dangerous  and                                                               
expensive legislation.   A campus  is no place for  guns because,                                                               
especially  in   dorms,  guns  and  alcohol   leads  to  impaired                                                               
judgement about whether to shoot a  gun, and impairs the aim when                                                               
firing.   A  Columbia  University study  found  that one-half  of                                                               
United  States   students  binge   drink  or  abuse   illegal  or                                                               
prescription drugs.  She said there  is also an elevated risk for                                                               
a firearm suicide  as it is a one-shot deal  and suicide attempts                                                               
with  guns  are  more  successful than  other  suicide  attempts.                                                               
Alaska has  huge problems with Seasonal  Affective Disorder (SAD)                                                               
which  also leads  to depression  in students,  people age  18-20                                                               
represent 4.4 percent  of the total United  States population but                                                               
those  people commit  17  percent  of all  gun  homicides.   Some                                                               
students may be responsible gun  owners; however, there are often                                                               
situations where  they are in  close proximity with  students who                                                               
do not have  the knowledge or responsibility of  gun handling and                                                               
think of  guns as  a toy.   Two  weeks after  the State  of Idaho                                                               
passed a bill  allowing guns on campus, during  class a professor                                                               
literally  shot  himself  in  the   foot  accidentally,  and  she                                                               
questioned whether  Alaska wants  that in  its lecture  halls and                                                               
classrooms.   She pointed  out that students  will end  up paying                                                               
for guns  on campus,  and with  the current  budget crunch  it is                                                               
irresponsible to pass a bill that  will cost students money.  She                                                               
asked the  committee to vote  no on SB  174, and asked  whether a                                                               
responsible  gun  owner  at  a  party will  lockup  the  gun,  or                                                               
continue playing beer-pong.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
5:45:57 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JENNIFER  McCLUNG, Instructor,  University  of Alaska  Anchorage,                                                               
said she is  an instructor at the University  of Alaska Anchorage                                                               
(UAA), and  is opposed to the  bill, because one of  the premises                                                               
on  which the  bill was  written is  false.   The FBI  released a                                                               
study of  active shooter incidents  in the United  States between                                                               
2000-2013,  including  shootings   in  schools,  movie  theaters,                                                               
business districts,  commercial areas, gun free  zones, and areas                                                               
allowing concealed weapons.   The study found that  less than one                                                               
percent of  active shooter  events were  resolved by  an ordinary                                                               
citizen  with  a  firearm.     She  continued  that  out  of  160                                                               
incidents, over a 14 year period,  only one was stopped by a good                                                               
guy  with  a  gun.    In contrast,  that  study  stated  that  21                                                               
incidents  ended by  unarmed civilians.   Therefore,  good people                                                               
without  guns, actually  had more  successful  endings in  active                                                               
shooter incidents than  good guys with guns.  On  the other hand,                                                               
she  commented, Alaska  has  a suicide  problem  and its  college                                                               
students are not  exempt.  During the last two  years, there have                                                               
been 18  suicide attempts at UAA  alone, and likely some  of them                                                               
would have  completed if  they had access  to a  firearm, because                                                               
suicide attempts  with a  firearm are almost  always fatal.   She                                                               
opined that by increasing student  access to firearms, especially                                                               
in the dorms, there is a  real risk more students will be enabled                                                               
to take their own  lives, and that risk is not  worth a less than                                                               
one  percent chance  of  a good  guy  with a  gun  ending a  mass                                                               
shooting that may, or may not, ever occur.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
5:48:17 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ROBIN SMITH said  she opposes the bill.  She  offered that if she                                                               
knew someone in the classroom had  a gun, it would impact how she                                                               
acted  and that  she would  hesitate  to approach  the person  or                                                               
engage  in a  conversation.   Particularly,  she  related, not  a                                                               
divisive conversation,  and it  would have  a chilling  impact on                                                               
their   dialogue.     Unfortunately,  she   remarked,  guns   are                                                               
everywhere  and   society  has  not   found  a  way   to  prevent                                                               
individuals with  mental illness, violent histories,  or criminal                                                               
histories, from  accessing guns.   She  indicated that  this bill                                                               
buys into  the myth that  a good guy with  a gun could  resolve a                                                               
shooting  incident  earlier  than   the  police  response.    She                                                               
referred to an FBI report,  released in 2014, which counters that                                                               
myth, and  written by  a special  operations military  person who                                                               
had  recently retired.   She  related  that he  said, "There  are                                                               
groups of  individuals, special operators  both military  and law                                                               
enforcement, who  train for  years to be  good at  close quarters                                                               
shooting.   Shooting with discernment,  keeping your  head clear,                                                               
and making snap decisions before  you pull the trigger, all while                                                               
being shot  at by  the enemy.   After  dedicating their  lives to                                                               
being good  operators in those extreme  circumstances, even those                                                               
professionals make  mistakes."  In  some cases, she said,  a good                                                               
guy with  a gun can  neutralize the  threat and help  save lives,                                                               
but it  doesn't happen often.   She  related that people  need to                                                               
know it is  a fallacy to believe that the  everyday gun owner can                                                               
be expected  to make  all of  the right  choices in  a dangerous,                                                               
fast  moving situation  like a  mass shooting  with high  powered                                                               
weapons.  She referred to the  FBI report offered by the previous                                                               
witness that  the [shootings] took  place at schools  because the                                                               
shooters were associated  with the schools, and  not because they                                                               
were  gun-free zones.    She  remarked that  in  many cases  [the                                                               
shooter] did not  know that they were gun-free zones.   She asked                                                               
that the committee oppose this bill.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
5:51:28 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CAROLINE  STORM, Alaska  PTA Advocacy  Committee, described  this                                                               
bill as,  effectively, overreaching  from the legislature  to the                                                               
Board of Regents.   She opposes this bill, she  said, because the                                                               
Board  of Regents  believes this  legislation is  unsafe for  its                                                               
campuses, and the  legislature does not have the right  to make a                                                               
decision  for the  people who  know what  life on  campus is  all                                                               
about.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
5:52:34 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
PATRICK RACE advised he lives  in Juneau and described himself as                                                               
"another  soft  target"  testifying  against this  bill.    While                                                               
listening to the  sponsor's testimony, he said he  was amazed the                                                               
sponsor  had  no  relatable statistics  and  relied  entirely  on                                                               
anecdotes  about  "dudes  with  crowbars."   He  said  he  has  a                                                               
computer science degree from UAF,  and is the third generation in                                                               
his  family to  graduate  from Alaska's  university  system.   He                                                               
described his  freshman roommate as an  unstable, unhealthy young                                                               
man who  pulled a knife  on him  in the heat  of the moment.   He                                                               
noted that he was unsure whether  he would be testifying today if                                                               
the  roommate had  instead pulled  a handgun.   Mr.  Race related                                                               
that he  is concerned about  what is  being created here  with no                                                               
upside  to  it,  except  the possibility  of  increased  campaign                                                               
funding.  This  bill begs the question of  whether the University                                                               
of Alaska is  violating the Constitution of the  State of Alaska,                                                               
and he  reminded the committee  that this  is a question  for the                                                               
courts.   It shouldn't  be settled through  a patchwork  quilt of                                                               
legislation, one  bill for the  university, another bill  for the                                                               
Capitol Building, and another bill later  on down the road for K-                                                               
12, and he asked that the committee discard this bill.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
5:54:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS asked  Mr.  Race  to describe  the                                                               
incident during his freshman year.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR. RACE  responded that his  roommate fancied himself as  a "mob                                                               
boss" kind  of guy,  he watched  a lot of  "Good Fellas"  type of                                                               
entertainment,  listened to  Frank  Sinatra, and  had knives  and                                                               
probably guns, but not in their  room.  They got into an argument                                                               
over  a Nintendo  game,  and as  young  men are  wont  to do,  it                                                               
escalated into  shoving.   Eventually the  roommate pulled  out a                                                               
knife and  threatened to slit  his throat while he  was sleeping,                                                               
he described.  Mr. Race said  he started down the hallway and due                                                               
to the  noise, many people were  in their doorways.   He then ran                                                               
past  the crowd,  the crowd  closed in  behind him  [blocking the                                                               
roommate],  and  he  moved  into   a  different  room  after  the                                                               
incident.  The incident he  described is not uncommon, he pointed                                                               
out, there  are many fights  and violence  on campus that  is not                                                               
reported, there is  a lot of drinking, events happen,  there is a                                                               
lot  of   miscommunication,  and   introducing  guns   into  this                                                               
environment will not help anyone.   If this bill is passed out of                                                               
committee and someone  kills someone, the committee  will have to                                                               
live with  that.  He  offered the  scenario of someone  coming at                                                               
him with  a knife, and  "I pull out a  gun, now I've  killed him.                                                               
How does that change my life?"                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN  responded that  Mr.  Race's  life would  be                                                               
changed by being alive.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MR. RACE agreed that he is  alive, and fortunately has not had to                                                               
murder anyone.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
5:56:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
BRIAN JUDY,  Senior State  Lobbyist, National  Rifle Association,                                                               
State of California  Assemblyman, said he has a lot  to unpack in                                                               
two  minutes,  and  he  is  the Alaska  liaison  for  the  Alaska                                                               
National Rifle  Association speaking  in support of  SB 174.   He                                                               
said that self-defense is a  fundamental right and under existing                                                               
law there  is an arbitrary  line, on one side  of that line  is a                                                               
law abiding  adult, age 21  years and  older, that can  choose to                                                               
carry a firearm for self-protection on  one side of the line, but                                                               
they can't  on the other.   He explained that this  bill is about                                                               
not  removing that  line, but  shrinking  the line  tremendously,                                                               
shrinking  the gun-free  zone that  is currently  in effect.   He                                                               
referred to the  question asking the university what  it is doing                                                               
now,  and he  said  the university  is not  doing  anything.   He                                                               
continued  that if  it is  not doing  anything now,  then nothing                                                               
will change in  allowing law abiding adults to  choose to provide                                                               
a  means of  self-protection.   He said  it will  not create  the                                                               
tremendous,  disastrous,  catastrophic, situation  the  committee                                                               
has heard.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. JUDY said that this issue  comes down to emotion versus facts                                                               
and,  he described  "the  emotion is  pretty  astounding in  this                                                               
committee  room and  I  appreciate your  indulgence."   Gun  free                                                               
zones have proven  to be a public policy failure,  and every mass                                                               
killing has happened  in a so-called gun free zone.   He remarked                                                               
that  criminals  do  not  obey  gun free  zones,  they  are  only                                                               
respected by law  abiding citizens.  He said that  the reality of                                                               
designating an  area as  a gun  free zone,  doesn't create  a gun                                                               
free zone,  it creates  an area  where only  the victims  will be                                                               
disarmed.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
5:58:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  JUDY referred  to  the eight  states  discussed in  previous                                                               
testimony, and  said there is  not a problem.   This may,  or may                                                               
not, make campuses safer, but the  evidence is that it won't make                                                               
campuses more dangerous.   He noted that the  committee has heard                                                               
dire predictions  of catastrophe,  and said  it didn't  happen in                                                               
1993 when Alaska passed the  concealed weapon permit law, or when                                                               
Alaska went  permit-less carry, or  in 2013 when Alaska  passed a                                                               
"no  duty  to  retreat"  bill.   He  commented  that  these  same                                                               
arguments are heard  each time a bill passes in  other states and                                                               
the  campuses  are  not  becoming dangerous  areas.    There  was                                                               
testimony regarding  Alaska's tremendous fiscal problems,  and he                                                               
commented  that  if there  are  security  issues associated  with                                                               
irresponsible  people and  their firearms,  that's a  problem now                                                               
and   the  money   needs   to  be   spent,   under  the   current                                                               
circumstances,  because  this  bill  is not  going  to  make  the                                                               
situation any  worse.  The states  that have chosen to  pass laws                                                               
and allow law abiding adults  to carry a means of self-protection                                                               
haven't experienced any problems.   Mr. Judy suggested a negative                                                               
fiscal   note  associated   with  this   bill  because   it  will                                                               
dramatically shrink the area the  university will have to enforce                                                               
a gun free policy, and he urged no amendments to SB 174.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
6:00:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  CLAMAN  asked  whether  he  was  saying  that  by                                                               
dramatically  shrinking  the  authority   of  the  university  to                                                               
control  a  campus,  it  will save  the  university  millions  of                                                               
dollars.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR. JUDY disagreed, and he said he  did not say it would save the                                                               
university millions of dollars.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN argued that Mr.  Judy said it should have a                                                               
negative fiscal  note, and he asked  for an estimate of  how much                                                               
the committee  should think  about in his  view of  the estimated                                                               
negative fiscal note.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR.  JUDY  replied "I  don't  know,  a  dollar, five  dollars,  a                                                               
thousand  dollars?"    He  said   in  the  State  of  Idaho,  the                                                               
observation  by the  legislature  was that  the  fiscal note  was                                                               
unfounded and bloated.  He opined  that the fiscal note should be                                                               
zero, and the bill should be passed out.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
6:02:43 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
STEVEN SAMUELSON  said he  supports the bill  due to  the reasons                                                               
previously  stated, and  he  could  see how  having  guns on  the                                                               
university  campuses could  be contentious.   Although,  with the                                                               
fiscal  notes,  this bill  pertains  to  people who  are  already                                                               
responsible gun owners who want to  know that they can have their                                                               
concealed  weapon  on a  campus  with  adults.   Alaska,  through                                                               
history, has  held strong  on access to  guns due  to subsistence                                                               
rights and  personal use  rights, and he  described this  as just                                                               
another level.   He advised that he briefly attended  UAA and was                                                               
more afraid  of the  moose keeping  him in  his car  than someone                                                               
potentially having  a gun on campus.   He then mentioned  that he                                                               
had been  in the areas of  Moses Lake, Washington, and  New Town,                                                               
Connecticut,  at the  time of  the  shootings and  they were  eye                                                               
openers.    He opined  that  Governor  Frank Murkowski  moved  to                                                               
permit-less concealed carry and nothing came of it.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
6:05:08 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ALYSE GALVIN advised  she has children who have  taken classes at                                                               
the University of Alaska Anchorage,  (UAA), and described them as                                                               
bright  children younger  than 18  years of  age.   She expressed                                                               
that she  would not  allow her  children on  campus if  it allows                                                               
guns  so freely,  and opined  that many  parents agree  with her.                                                               
She  asked whether  the legislature  was, currently,  in a  place                                                               
where it  listens to people  from out-of-state, and  allows those                                                               
people  to tell  Alaskans what  to  do, or  will the  legislature                                                               
listen to  the people of  Alaska.  She  said that, up  until now,                                                               
the state  has been good at  dictating its own future  and she is                                                               
hopeful  the  state  is  not  moving  to a  new  place.    It  is                                                               
important, she  pointed out, to  recognize that  children younger                                                               
than 18 years of age are  frequently on campus taking classes and                                                               
in dorms.   She remarked  that having a gun  in a lockbox  is not                                                               
the same  as a gun  in a safe.   Alaskans believe they  should be                                                               
able to  hunt and do  the things  important to them  as Alaskans,                                                               
and the  Alaskan hunters she knows  use a gun safe.   She pointed                                                               
out that  the entire  amount of  time spent  on this  bill rather                                                               
than the  state's big problem is  a concern, and she  opposes the                                                               
bill.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
6:07:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LYNN  commented  that the  legislature  addresses                                                               
many issues and frequently experts from out-of-state testify.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MS. GALVIN  stated she appreciates  that experts  would sometimes                                                               
testify, but that is different from paid lobbyists.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  related that the  committee offers  the opportunity                                                               
for people from  all over to testify, and noted  the mail she has                                                               
received from Alaskan is tilted  toward favoring this bill rather                                                               
than opposing this bill.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
6:08:58 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
BUTCH MOORE  advised that in  2014 there  were 145 gun  deaths in                                                               
Alaska, and  none of those  deaths occurred on  college campuses.                                                               
He  said  his daughter,  Bree,  was  murdered,  in 2014,  by  her                                                               
boyfriend, she was  a 20-year old UAA student,  and her boyfriend                                                               
was 21 years old.   Within the majority of the  145 gun deaths in                                                               
2014, 79 percent  were suicide, and the majority of  all of those                                                               
were ages  18-26.   The sponsor  of this bill  does not  have any                                                               
statistics that Alaska has a problem.   Mr. Moore said within his                                                               
research of  mass shootings in Alaska,  he could not find  a mass                                                               
shooting in  Alaska until  he researched back  to 1984,  at Manly                                                               
Hot Springs.  Alaska does not  have a problem with guns on campus                                                               
and this bill  is not necessary.  He advised  that Bree Moore was                                                               
proficient  in the  use of  all weapons,  was an  active sporting                                                               
shooter, and  he supports the country's  Second Amendment rights.                                                               
If this bill  passes, the young adult who turns  21 years old can                                                               
walk into  Fred Meyer and buy  a handgun having had  no training.                                                               
He stressed that guns for people  with no education on the use of                                                               
guns is not needed in  Alaska's communities which is a community-                                                               
wide safety  concern.   He stressed  this bill  is not  needed to                                                               
protect Alaskan's constitutional rights, and  to let the bill die                                                               
in committee  to protect the  kids.   He continued that  a person                                                               
has  a greater  chance of  being struck  by lightning  than being                                                               
shot on a college campus in the United States.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
6:12:25 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MIKE NEWBERN,  Assistant Director  of Public  Relations, Buckeyes                                                               
for Concealed  Carry, National Rifle  Association, said he  is in                                                               
support  of the  campus  carry bill,  then  referred to  previous                                                               
testimony advising this  bill will not make  college campuses any                                                               
safer, and responded  that it could not be said  that SB 174 will                                                               
make campuses  any less safe.   He related that shootings  in the                                                               
street  did not  happen when  Alaska passed  the concealed  carry                                                               
bill in 1993,  and the same for  the State of Ohio in  2004.  The                                                               
State of  Ohio recently  "got restaurant  carry" and  people were                                                               
worried  about blood  pouring out  of the  bars where  alcohol is                                                               
served,  and that  hasn't happened.    He mentioned  a Texas  A&M                                                               
University  study found  no  increase in  crime  with respect  to                                                               
campus concealed  carry.  He  said Texas  just passed a  law, and                                                               
other universities are coming up  with policy to deal with campus                                                               
conceal carry.   He advised  the working group at  the University                                                               
of Texas,  Austin found no  instance of violence with  respect to                                                               
campus  conceal  carry.    He   then  referred  to  the  comments                                                               
regarding the  ability to recruit students  and/or faculty and/or                                                               
staff.   Admittedly,  he offered,  there  have been  a couple  of                                                               
faculty members  in Texas  who left,  but the  administrator that                                                               
came to Texas from Utah when  it enacted its conceal carry law in                                                               
2006, Michael Young, is currently  the President of the Texas A&M                                                               
University who said that initially  in Utah there was some uproar                                                               
when they  got campus concealed  carry in 2006, but  in 2008-2011                                                               
the  University of  Utah  saw record  enrollment.   The  concerns                                                               
regarding not being  able to recruit students,  faculty, or staff                                                               
doesn't play out, and neither do the predictions of violence.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
6:15:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
TOM  BOUTIN  advised he  is  speaking  for  himself and  that  he                                                               
supports the  bill because it  is good legislation for  the world                                                               
that Alaska  finds itself  in today.   Gun  free zones  appear to                                                               
encourage  crime, and  encourage  nuts cases  causing mayhem,  he                                                               
said.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
6:15:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
JENNIFER  GLENN, Volunteer,  Alaska Chapter,  Moms Demand  Action                                                               
for Gun  Sense in  America, advised that  Moms Demand  Action for                                                               
Gun  Sense  in America  is  a  grass-roots movement  of  American                                                               
parents in  Alaska, and across  the country, fighting  for public                                                               
safety measures respecting the Second  Amendment and reducing gun                                                               
violence.   She  advised that  she  and her  husband own  several                                                               
guns, but  she is opposed  to this bill.   In the event  the bill                                                               
becomes  law, Alaska  would  join  the ranks  of  only two  other                                                               
states that currently force colleges  to allow all permit holders                                                               
to carry  guns on  campus.   She described  the bill  as assuming                                                               
that  anyone  carrying on  campuses  will  be a  responsible  gun                                                               
owner; however,  it is  known that  not all  of those  carrying a                                                               
concealed  weapon, or  have a  gun, are  responsible gun  owners.                                                               
She  asked how  a student,  rooming with  another student,  would                                                               
know how responsible their roommate  is, and whose responsibility                                                               
it becomes when  that gun owner takes it upon  themselves to step                                                               
into a dispute  using their gun.  She opined  that SB 174 assumes                                                               
many things.   Amy Thompson wrote  an article for the  Journal of                                                             
American  College  Health,  entitled "Reducing  firearms  related                                                             
violence  on  college  campuses-police  chiefs'  perceptions  and                                                               
practices,"  which states  that 89  percent of  university police                                                               
chiefs oppose policies that allow  guns on campuses.  The student                                                               
community also  echoes this sentiment  wherein, "79  percent have                                                               
said  that they  would not  feel  safe if  faculty, students,  or                                                               
visitors, were allowed  to bring concealed guns on  campus."  She                                                               
said she attended UAF and graduated  at UAA, and had there been a                                                               
law allowing  guns on these  campuses, she would  have considered                                                               
attending  another  university or  going  to  an online  program.                                                               
While working at  the Municipality of Anchorage,  at a recreation                                                               
center, a shooting occurred.   Thankfully no one was injured, but                                                               
her experience  tells her that  arming citizens to  protect other                                                               
citizens is  not an  answer to  this problem,  she related.   She                                                               
opined that  this bill  goes against  common sense  when everyone                                                               
knows  often there  is a  mix of  alcohol, drug  use, and  highly                                                               
stressful situations  on campus and  dormitory rooms.   She urged                                                               
the committee to vote no.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
6:19:13 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MIKE  COONS said  he  is speaking  as  a member  of  the NRA  and                                                               
requested  extra time  because  the "anti-gun  crowd" gets  extra                                                               
time.  He  related there has been testimony  that First Amendment                                                               
rights,  freedom  of  speech,  will  be  infringed  upon  because                                                               
teachers  and students  will be  afraid to  discuss controversial                                                               
subjects  with  students due  to  fear  they  may be  carrying  a                                                               
concealed firearm.   He said he  does not agree, and  argued that                                                               
the university  has free  speech zones, or  the only  place views                                                               
considered   non-politically  correct,   based  on   the  liberal                                                               
intolerance by faculty  and student body, are allowed.   He said,                                                               
the assumption is  that no person, unless they  are liberals, can                                                               
contain  themselves in  debating the  issues of  the day  and, he                                                               
said  that is  an  affront to  him and  any  American who  values                                                               
freedom of  speech.  Alcohol  and drugs are another  red herring,                                                               
and  he advised  it's  against the  law to  use  a firearm  while                                                               
intoxicated.   In the event he  were a student, he  said he would                                                               
take grave  offense to the  attack that  students are a  bunch of                                                               
drunks and illegal drug users  that can't contain themselves.  He                                                               
described  mental  health  as  a huge  red  herring  that  paints                                                               
students as not  being able to handle stress, and  he takes grave                                                               
offense for  the vast  majority of  students who  are responsible                                                               
and can  control themselves.   Continued talking points  are just                                                               
that, all based  on the far left anti-gun  organizations lies and                                                               
innuendos,  and the  left has  a long  history of  continuing the                                                               
lies to make the  truth, he said.  In this case,  as well as many                                                               
others, the truth  is the truth and change is  not.  He continued                                                               
that  gun locks  are  safes,  they are  biometric  and rapid  tap                                                               
codes, secure and paperclips do not  gain access.  Gun free zones                                                               
have deaths  of 12 or  greater on  the average, and  guns allowed                                                               
zones have two.  He said  that Virginia Tech paid out $11 million                                                               
in punitive  damages, and  not (indisc.)  that anywhere  close in                                                               
insurance.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
6:22:26 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DANIEL BELGRIZE, University of Alaska  Anchorage, advised he is a                                                               
veteran,  a senior  in  the  justice program  at  UAA, an  active                                                               
member in  numerous student clubs,  and is speaking on  behalf of                                                               
over 50 members  of UAA's Greek Life Organizations,  and over 100                                                               
veterans  who  have  expressed  support   for  this  bill.    The                                                               
Constitution  of the  State of  Alaska guarantees  the individual                                                               
right to keep and bear arms  will not be denied or infringed upon                                                               
by the  state or  political subdivisions of  the state.   Article                                                               
VII, Section  3, states that  the Board of Regents  may formulate                                                               
policy for  the university  and, he  noted, the  qualification of                                                               
"in accordance  with the law"  is vital,  and there is  no higher                                                               
law in Alaska than its constitution.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. BELGRIZE  referred to  the inquiry  regarding defense  of gun                                                               
use,  and said  the  Center for  Disease  Control (CDC)  recently                                                               
stated that  defense of gun  use is (indisc.) with  its estimates                                                               
ranging from 500,000 to 3  million occurrences annually, compared                                                               
to less than 500,000 violent  crimes involving firearms.  The CDC                                                               
has also  consistently found lower  injury rates among  gun using                                                               
victims  compared   with  victims  who  have   used  other  self-                                                               
protective strategies.  He advised  there is a budgetary interest                                                               
in this bill and that is  to guarantee and protect the state from                                                               
potential lawsuits  for the violation of  rights guaranteed under                                                               
the constitution.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
6:24:06 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX  asked whether Mr.  Belgrize is the  Daniel Belgrize                                                               
she knows.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. BELGRIZE agreed.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
6:24:35 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
RYAN  SHERWIN-ALAKAYAK, Student,  University of  Alaska Anchorage                                                               
(UAA), said  he is a life-long  Alaskan, student at UAA,  and has                                                               
devoted his life  to serving his community.  He  pointed out that                                                               
the  testimony  heard  from  the opposition  tends  to  focus  on                                                               
firearm issues,  while the  real focus of  the bill  supports the                                                               
Constitution  of the  State of  Alaska.   Alaskans should  uphold                                                               
those values and  rights.  He noted that  firearm violence exists                                                               
today, and the policies being  made do not necessarily affect the                                                               
people  committing crimes  with  firearms -  the policies  affect                                                               
people  who do  follow the  laws.   A  person desiring  to use  a                                                               
firearm on  campus will do so  regardless of the law,  but folks,                                                               
like himself, who  do carry firearms will tend to  veer away from                                                               
carrying  on  campus.    He   said  he  supports  Mr.  Belgrize's                                                               
testimony and supports SB 174.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
6:27:11 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
HANS  RODVIK said  he  is  a UAA  alumni,  and  in 2014  assisted                                                               
Senator Coghill in spearheading the  efforts, of Senate Bill 176,                                                               
to  correct the  wrong  of  the University  of  Alaska, Board  of                                                               
Regents'  policy which  is an  unconstitutional unlawful  policy.                                                               
He related that Senate  Bill 176 did not pass in  2014, and he is                                                               
testifying in  full support of  SB 174.   He described this  as a                                                               
fundamental right of  self-defense of which has been  echoed by a                                                               
couple  of  different  folks  today.   He  said  there  has  been                                                               
fearmongering  testimony tonight  on  behalf of  folks who  think                                                               
that law  abiding adults over  the age of 21,  currently carrying                                                               
all around Alaska,  are going to become  unlawful criminals, drug                                                               
users and  alcoholics when they  cross that line on  a university                                                               
campus.  He opined that  many alumni, veterans, and students take                                                               
offense to  that [idea], and  asked whether the Board  of Regents                                                               
is telling veterans they don't have the right to carry for self-                                                                
defense,  even though  they served  this country.   He  closed by                                                               
saying  he  fully supports  the  bill  and  hopes it  passes  out                                                               
tonight.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN thanked Mr. Rodvik for his service.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
6:29:54 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CEEZAR MARTINSON, Student, University  of Alaska Anchorage (UAA),                                                               
advised he  is a  student at the  University of  Alaska Anchorage                                                               
(UAA), and  is in support  of this  legislation.  He  referred to                                                               
the Constitution of  the State of Alaska, Article  I, Section 19,                                                               
which read:                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     A  well-regulated   militia  being  necessary   to  the                                                                    
     security of  a free state,  the right of the  people to                                                                    
     keep  and  bear  arms  shall   not  be  infringed.  The                                                                    
     individual right  to keep  and bear  arms shall  not be                                                                    
     denied  or  infringed  by  the  State  or  a  political                                                                    
     subdivision of the State. [Amended 1994]                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR.  MARTINSON advised  that it  is clear  the UAA  policy is  in                                                               
direct violation of the Constitution  of the State of Alaska, and                                                               
illegal given the  fact it does not have  the statutory authority                                                               
to   restrict  the   ability  to   concealed  carry   on  campus.                                                               
Furthermore, he  suggested, the  hyperbole testimony  is complete                                                               
nonsense with  regard to  the fact that  eight other  states, and                                                               
150 private universities, allow concealed  carry on campus.  Mass                                                               
violence has not been seen, he  related, nor has issues of inter-                                                               
student or inter-faculty  violence.  The reality is  that this is                                                               
common sense  legislation bringing the university  back under the                                                               
rule of law.  He said  he supports the legislation, and asked the                                                               
committee to protect his Second Amendment rights.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
6:31:33 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
KELSI PULCZINMS,  Student, University  of Alaska  Anchorage, said                                                               
she is a student at UAA, and is  speaking on her own behalf.  She                                                               
voiced her  support of SB 174,  and advised that she  is an adult                                                               
and  that  just because  she  is  a student,  her  constitutional                                                               
rights should not  be infringed by the Board of  Regents who have                                                               
no  constitutional authority  to  do  so.   She  referred to  the                                                               
testimony  of  a mother  concerned  about  her underage  children                                                               
being on  campus with  firearms present, and  stated that  she is                                                               
sure her children are also  present in Alaska's communities where                                                               
adults responsibly and  legally carry every day,  with no issues.                                                               
She described it  as a fearmongering argument and  stated that if                                                               
the  mother is  uncomfortable  with her  underage children  being                                                               
around firearms, her  children should not be in  the community at                                                               
all  because  people carry  every  day.    She related  that  she                                                               
strongly supports  this bill and  encouraged the committee  to do                                                               
so, as well.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
6:33:21 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
LAURA MIKO said she is testifying  in opposition to this bill and                                                               
on her own behalf.   She said she is a  UAF alumni, UAF employee,                                                               
and has  worked both in  student housing  and on the  main campus                                                               
where students  are in crisis  mode.   She pointed out  that when                                                               
people go  to college  there are many  different things  going on                                                               
with  them, good  and  bad.   Sometimes,  especially with  mental                                                               
health  issues,  things happen  where  guns  should not  be,  she                                                               
pointed  out.    She  related  that on  a  populated  campus,  if                                                               
something should  happen, there  is a whole  system in  place for                                                               
lock  down,  and SB  174  is  telling  people to,  basically,  be                                                               
vigilantes.   In  those  instances, with  many  people trying  to                                                               
handle the situation, it will  confuse police and law enforcement                                                               
who is  actually the  offending person,  which can  contribute to                                                               
more  cross-fire  and more  injuries.  She  appreciates that  she                                                               
lives in  a state where  guns can be  carried in public,  but she                                                               
does not think  a college campus for education  is an appropriate                                                               
place.   Especially,  she  said, because  there  may be  spiteful                                                               
debates and  conversations in classrooms  with people  "who might                                                               
be packin."                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR LEDOUX,  after ascertaining that  no one further  wished to                                                               
testify, closed public testimony.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
[SB 174 was held over.]                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
6:36:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
There being no further business before the committee, the House                                                                 
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 6:36 p.m.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
SB 174 - Sponsor Statement.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Sectional Analysis ver G.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - CS ver G (FIN).PDF HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Summary of Changes ver N to ver G.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - CS ver N (EDC).PDF HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Version H (original).PDF HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Fiscal Note-SFIN-UA-4-04-16.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Supporting Documents - Alaska Constitution Article I, Section 19.PDF HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Supporting Documents - AS 29.35.145 Municipal Regulation of Firearms and Knives.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Supporting Documents - Dept. of Public Safety - Concealed Weapons Info.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Supporting Documents - Dept. of Public Safety - Firearm Ownership, Possession Info.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Supporting Documents - LAA Legal Memo - Immunity from civil liability (Feb. 17, 2016).pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Supporting Documents - NCSL Guns on Campus Overview (February 12, 2016).pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Supporting Documents - News Articles.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Supporting Documents - UA Board of Regents Concealed Carry Position Paper (Feb. 12, 2016).pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Supporting Documents - UA General Counsel Memo - Immunity Provision (Feb. 23, 2016).pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Supporting Documents - UA Population by Age, Academic Organization.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Supporting Documents - UAF, UAS, UAA Campus Crime Statistics.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Letters of Opposition.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Letters of Support.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 180 - Sponsor Statement ver I.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - Sectional Analysis ver I.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - CS Version I (JUD).pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - Summary of Changes - Version W to Version I.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - Version W.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - Fiscal Note - DHSS-FLSW-2-20-16.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - Supporting Documents - ADN Commentary 2-3-16 Walker-Carmody.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - Supporting Documents - ADN Commentary 2-13-16 Demer.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - Supporting Documents - Letter of Support AIC.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - Supporting Documents - Letter of Support AK Childrens Trust.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - Supporting Documents - Letter of Support AYFN.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - Supporting Documents - Letter of Support Beacon Hill.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - Supporting Documents - Letter of Support Brian Schaeffer.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 180 - Supporting Documents - Safe Families One-Pager.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 180
SB 174 - Supporting Documents - UA Regent's Policy 02.09 Public Safety.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
HB 334 - Version H.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 334
HB 334 - Letter of Opposition - AWARE 04.09.16.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 334
HB 334 - Emails of Opposition - Received by 04.12.16.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 334
HB 200 - Letter of Support - Melanie Fredericks.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 200
HB 200 - Letter of Support - Kerry Gray.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 200
SB 174 - Opposing Documents - UA Analysis of CSSB174(FIN) 04.12.16.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
SB 174 - Fiscal Note-UA-SYSBRA-4-11-16.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
SB 174
HB 200 - Letter of Support - Traci McGarry, Kawerak Inc..pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 200
HB 200 - Letter of Support - Cheryl Offt, Association of Village Council Presidents.pdf HJUD 4/12/2016 1:00:00 PM
HB 200