Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 106
02/28/2013 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s): || Alaska Commission on Human Rights | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s): || Alaska State Board of Parole | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
February 28, 2013
8:05 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bob Lynn, Chair
Representative Wes Keller, Vice Chair
Representative Lynn Gattis
Representative Shelley Hughes
Representative Doug Isaacson
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Charisse Millett
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
Alaska Commission on Human Rights
Christa Bruce-Kotrc - Ketchikan
Jason Hart - Anchorage
Grace Merkes - Sterling
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
Alaska State Board of Parole
Sarah Possenti - Fairbanks
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
CHRISTA BRUCE-KOTRC, Appointee
State Commission for Human Rights
Ketchikan, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the State
Commission for Human Rights.
JASON HART, Appointee
State Commission for Human Rights
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the State
Commission for Human Rights.
GRACE MERKES, Appointee
State Commission for Human Rights
Sterling, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the State
Commission for Human Rights.
SARAH POSSENTI, Appointee
Alaska State Board of Parole
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Alaska State
Board of Parole.
TOM STENSON, Legal Director
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the confirmation hearing
for Sarah Possenti, Appointee to the Alaska State Board of
Parole.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:05:10 AM
CHAIR BOB LYNN called the House State Affairs Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:05 a.m. Representatives Keller, Isaacson,
Gattis, Hughes, Kreiss-Tomkins, and Lynn were present at the
call to order.
^Confirmation Hearing(s):
^Alaska Commission on Human Rights
Confirmation Hearing(s):
Alaska Commission on Human Rights
8:05:34 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the first order of business was the
confirmation hearing for appointees to the Alaska Commission on
Human Rights.
8:05:45 AM
CHRISTA BRUCE-KOTRC, Appointee, State Commission for Human
Rights, related that she moved to Alaska over 40 years ago and
worked in the public schools and as an adjunct professor for the
University of Alaska. She recently shifted from development
work at the Ketchikan Medical Center Foundation to the Alaska
Health Education Center in Ketchikan. She said she also
facilitates clinical rotations for University of Washington
students in the area. She said she is a gubernatorial appointee
to both the Alaska Humanities Forum and the State Commission for
Human Rights. She stated that it has been an honor to serve the
people of Alaska. She said she has found the commission
"exceptionally professional" in its focus on the rights of
citizens, and she commented on the personal connection between
the commission and the public.
8:07:49 AM
MS. BRUCE-KOTRC, in response to Chair Lynn, said the commission
focuses generally on discrimination cases.
8:08:39 AM
MS. BRUCE-KOTRC, in response to Representative Hughes, confirmed
that she had been seeking a position on the Board of Regents,
but when the State Commission on Human Rights contacted her, she
decided a position on the commission would be a good fit because
of her background. In response to a follow-up question, she
said if a position on the Board of Regents comes up again, she
would be interested in it; however, she is currently happy to be
serving on the commission.
MS. BRUCE-KOTRC, in response to Chair Lynn, said the
discrimination seen by the commission is based on issues such as
race, gender, and "lifestyle."
8:10:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON mentioned a contentious decision made by
the commission regarding "the Goldstream store" in the Fairbanks
area. He asked what Ms. Bruce-Kotrc's thought process is in
determining the real issue of each case.
MS. BRUCE-KOTRC told Representative Isaacson that she does not
know what he is referencing because she was not involved. She
stated that it was important to her to ascertain that the
commission is appropriate and follows the law in its processes.
She emphasized how impressed she is with the way the commission
handles people, even while being "tremendously overloaded."
Regarding constitutional rights - not just for individuals, but
also for businesses - she said she does not see any biases, and
thinks the commission tries hard to discover the facts. She
related a recent example in which she said the commission went
out of its way to ensure it treated the complainant fairly and
equitably. She said she has seen this impartial treatment given
to parties on both sides of the issue.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON remarked that all constitutional rights
currently seem to be reinterpreted, and he asked Ms. Bruce-Kotrc
if she frames constitutional rights as popular opinion at the
time.
MS. BRUCE-KOTRC answered that is a topic for a long discussion.
Nevertheless, she said her background has made her proud of the
country's hard work and success where "other countries seem to
be struggling." She said she is protective of fundamental
rights. She opined that Alaska has done a good job with its
constitution, and she stated her intent to honor it and, within
reason, the right of individuals to pursue their dreams without
infringement.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON described situations in which employers
conduct business as they see fit, sometimes with religious
convictions, a focus on public service, or for capitalism, and
employees who feel entitled bring down the business instead of
"moving on to find a job that better suits them or something."
He asked Ms. Bruce-Kotrc, "What's your thought process on this?"
8:17:00 AM
MS. BRUCE-KOTRC stated that Representative Isaacson is keenly
aware of the heart of the issues the commission addresses. She
said a related issue occurred when she first was appointed to
the commission where the consideration was whether it was
necessary or frivolous for the individual involved to "stab" the
business. She stated, "We don't need to treat things
frivolously." She said she thinks the commission did a good job
in that situation by suggesting to the individual that "there
may be a better fit for you." She expressed her hope that the
decisions made by the commission are good decisions for the long
term.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON expressed hope that Ms. Bruce-Kotrc
would remember her words while she serves. When small
businesses are fined - as a result of protecting one individual
- and do not have the funds to pay, the employer and employees
suffer the loss when the business is closed. He opined that it
is important to protect the rights of individuals, while also
delineating "the greater picture." He suggested making fines
appropriate if they are required and considering that not
everyone has a business in a large urban area or can swallow a
large expense.
MS. BRUCE-KOTRC said there is an instance where it is right and
appropriate to let a business know that it needs to handle
things differently, while protecting the rights of the
individual. She said it is a balancing act, but hopefully, at
the end of the process, both parties are wiser, have better
communication skills, and work harder toward resolution.
8:20:07 AM
MS. BRUCE-KOTRC, in response to Chair Lynn, said she does not
know how the fines are set, because she has not been involved
with fines.
8:20:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES concurred with Representative Isaacson's
concern and said she appreciates that both the employer and
employee are people who have human rights.
MS. BRUCE-KOTRC, in response to questions from Representative
Hughes about Ms. Bruce-Kotrc's resume, ventured that the
confirmation hearing date of 3/1/12 shown on the resume may be
related to her finishing out someone else's term. Regarding the
"Project on Social Justice," she explained that she had been
invited by the U.S. State Department to Azerbaijan, where she
was involved with students talking about social issues and
initiating conversations with American children in Alaska. She
stated that the ultimate goal of this type of exchange is to
better people's understanding of the U.S. She said she has been
in several post-Soviet democracies. She offered further
details.
8:25:28 AM
JASON HART, Appointee, State Commission for Human Rights, said
he was born and raised in Anchorage, Alaska, and his family is
Ahtna Athabascan and Menominee Indian. He stated his interest
in serving both the state of Alaska, as well as the Ahtna
people. He said the commission has a rich history, and he would
be honored to serve on it.
MR. HART relayed that he has a Master's degree in Business and a
bachelor's degree in Business Management. He said he currently
works at the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, doing
special projects, and he previously managed the benefits
department and was the plan administrator who handled final
appeals from plan participants. He said he served seven years
in the Air National Guard, was recently appointed to the Zoning
Board of Examiners by Anchorage Mayor Dan Sullivan, and was
confirmed by the municipal board.
8:27:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON asked Mr. Hart what his thought process
is in determining the facts of an issue.
MR. HART answered that it is important to consider all the facts
with equal weight. He said he would put himself in the shoes of
both the person filing the complaint and the party against which
the complaint was filed, and he would strive for impartiality.
In response to a follow-up question, he said the basis for
determining right and wrong would depend on the situation, but
said he thinks "most individuals kind of think the same when it
comes to what's right and what's wrong." He gave an example in
which an employer has discriminated against an employee based on
that employee's race or disability, and he said he thinks "we
all know that that's wrong." He mentioned situations in which
an employee takes advantage of an employer, and he said he
thinks there are "a lot of things that are going to be pretty
clear cut when you listen to the facts of the case."
8:30:20 AM
CHAIR LYNN asked Mr. Hart if he thinks "right" and "wrong" are
[predetermined] or are relative to the facts of a case.
MR. HART answered he thinks right and wrong would be relevant to
each case, as well as be determined by the laws of Alaska and
the governing documents of the commission.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON opined that without standards, somebody
will be treated unfairly. He reiterated his remarks about
entitlement, and he asked Mr. Hart how he would figure out
whether someone is "using the process to punish an employer."
8:32:22 AM
MR. HART reiterated the importance of looking at the facts
pertaining to the particular case and to consider all sides of
the matter. He said it would also be important to look at
previous cases that may have similar circumstances. He ventured
that the reason the commission has seven members is to consider
the views and opinions of multiple people.
8:33:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON asked Mr. Hart what the purpose of fines
is and how they are assessed.
MR. HART offered his understanding, after attending one meeting
of the commission, that the fines are derived by following a
specific formula, for example, whether there was "salary that
the employee, for some reason, wasn't paid" or "a number of days
that the employee wasn't able to be at work." He clarified that
he thinks [the amount of fines] is "defined by the governing
documents for the commission." In response to Chair Lynn, he
offered his understanding that the fines are more compensatory
than punitive.
8:35:35 AM
GRACE MERKES, Appointee, State Commission for Human Rights,
relayed that she has served on the commission for over 10 years,
and she said she thinks it is important for at least some of the
commission members to have some experience with discrimination
law and case practice. Ms. Merkes said she and her husband came
to Alaska in 1956 and have eight children. She referred to her
resume in the committee packet, and said although she does not
have the kind of education other appointees have, her experience
and education is in real life. She said she would like to
remain on the commission because she believes in the importance
of investigating discrimination actions and coming to
conclusions that are unbiased and fair to all. She said she has
background in how Alaska's discrimination law is written. She
said, "If the legislators feel that there needs to be a change
in the law, then we need to pursue that." She stated her belief
that all people are created equal and should be treated thus.
She said she served on the [Kenai] Borough Assembly for 17 years
and has a lot of experience in making unbiased decisions after
studying the issues and listening to the people. She said she
is familiar with the commission's process of investigating a
case and mediating to try to reach a settlement before a case
must go to hearing. She stated she thinks it is important for
Alaskan citizens to have a Human Rights Commission to address
perceived discrimination. She asked the committee to support
her confirmation.
8:39:30 AM
CHAIR LYNN said if he had to choose between education and common
sense, he would chose common sense, which he opined is not all
that common.
8:39:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said having spent 10 years on the
commission, and serving on other commissions, he knows the work
involved. He said Ms. Merkes' experience could be valuable. He
asked her if there is a certain segment of society in which most
of the discrimination cases arise.
8:40:26 AM
MS. MERKES answered that that information can be found in an
annual report produced by the commission. Notwithstanding that,
she estimated that at least 90 percent of the cases that
actually go to hearings are regarding employment and
"nationality." There are cases regarding gender, as well as
some disability cases.
8:41:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER thanked Ms. Merkes for her work and
acknowledged that he has received the reports.
8:42:11 AM
MS. MERKES recollected that a previous speaker had mentioned
fines. She continued:
Personally, I don't really call them fines, but
basically ... I understand ... they are ... based on
... employment, and if someone gets fired for a
certain reasons, a lot of times they call it
retaliation - they're retaliated against because they
reported some kind of discrimination to the
commission. And if they lose their job, then
basically, ... according to the law, they're supposed
to look for another job, but we have to make them
whole up 'till they do find another job, so that's
kind of based on how long it takes them to find a job
and if they were really looking and ... what they were
getting paid. ... We also apply interest to it, and
the interest is also based on the Alaska state
discrimination law.
8:43:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES concurred with Chair Lynn regarding common
sense. She posited that Ms. Merkes is valuable because of her
real life experience, including the raising of eight children.
She thanks Ms. Merkes for her public service and stated the
importance of the institutional knowledge Ms. Merkes brings to
the commission.
8:44:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON opined that Ms. Merkes has an impressive
resume. He asked Ms. Merkes to describe her thought process in
determining who and what is "right."
MS. MERKES responded that the commission must follow the law and
there has to be substantial evidence. The commission has the
opportunity to determine whether a person is being truthful and
what his/her reason for coming forward is. She said
administrative law judges decide the cases and the commissioners
divide the case reviews; therefore, not every commissioner will
know about every case. She relayed one sexual harassment case
that was based on the location and type of job. She said that
type of job in this case made the idea of sexual harassment
different from that in another location with other people. She
said, "That, to me, is kind of using common sense and being
reasonable and what really happens in certain kinds of jobs.
So, those are [the] kinds of things we have to look at. You
know, those aren't black and white." She indicated that she
evaluates each case thoroughly.
CHAIR LYNN stated his assumption that some cases come down to a
"she said/he said." situation.
MS. MERKES confirmed that is correct.
8:48:19 AM
MS. MERKES, in response to Representative Isaacson, said the
standard upon which information presented by attorneys is judged
is the anti-discrimination law. She offered further details
about the hearing process. In response to a follow-up question
regarding retaliation, she said if no discrimination occurred,
then the commission would not get involved.
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON offered a hypothetical situation in
which an employer talks about his religious beliefs and an
employee is offended. He said it is becoming more prevalent
that someone who has been offended perceives that offense as
discrimination. He remarked, "They're using the process to get
back at the employer, and yet the employer put sweat, blood, and
tears ... into building a business so that there's opportunity
for employment."
MS. MERKES indicated she does not think an employee has a case
against an employer who is religious and perhaps is trying to
pass his/her religion on to the employee.
8:53:49 AM
The committee took a brief at-ease at 8:54 a.m.
^Confirmation Hearing(s):
^Alaska State Board of Parole
Confirmation Hearing(s):
Alaska State Board of Parole
8:54:22 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the final order of business was the
confirmation hearing for the appointee to the Alaska State Board
of Parole.
8:54:49 AM
SARAH POSSENTI, Appointee, Alaska State Board of Parole, said
she was born and raised in Fairbanks, Alaska, and attended the
University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), where she earned
undergraduate degrees in justice and in social work. She
relayed that she worked almost 12 years as a probation officer
for the State of Alaska, 8 of those years spent in the field
supervising inmates released back in to the community. She
offered further details. She said following that she worked in
an institution as a probation officer and worked closely with a
treatment center to get inmates into its substance abuse
treatment program and see them through that process. She
relayed that two years ago, she was confirmed to the Alaska
State Board of Parole to fill a vacated seat. She said she
enjoys serving on the board. She said she thinks she brings
good perspective in terms of working in the field and in the
institutions closely with [former] inmates who live in the
community and inmates who are incarcerated for long periods of
time. She stated that she would appreciate the opportunity to
be confirmed for another appointment.
8:56:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER thanked Ms. Possenti for her work and
invited her to bring further insights to committee members. He
said the number of incarcerated is projected to grow and he
thinks there will be a greater emphasis on the board.
8:57:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES referred to a letter "expressing concern
about the make-up of the parole board and those with knowledge
of Alaska Native issues and rural issues." She noted that Ms.
Possenti had training related to those issues, and she said she
would like to hear how that might play a part in her role on the
board.
8:58:25 AM
CHAIR LYNN interjected that a representative from the American
Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Alaska was on line and might
like to speak to that issue.
8:58:40 AM
MS. POSSENTI responded that although she is not an Alaska
Native, she was born and raised in the state and has
appreciation for the issues that are prevalent for the Alaska
Native community. She talked about the considerations given by
the board for all inmates, including Alaska Natives, who, upon
release, may be returning to rural villages that do not offer
rehabilitation programs. To address the issue, she said, there
is a big commitment from the commissioner to educate inmates
while incarcerated, so that when they do get released, they have
already attended some of those rehabilitation programs. She
said she has worked closely with village public safety officers
(VPSOs) regarding this issue. She related that sometimes a
released inmate might have to spend time in an urban area to
complete a rehabilitation program before moving back to his/her
village, and she said there is housing available in urban areas
for this purpose. She said some sex offenders are Alaska
Native, and she works with treatment centers to "base some of
the treatment on what their understanding was" and to consider
"how things would look for their safety plans when they went
back to the rural area that they were from."
9:03:08 AM
CHAIR LYNN stated his assumption that "this" is based on the
challenges an individual may face in his/her community rather
than on race or ethnicity.
MS. POSSENTI answered that is correct. She said there are a lot
of "people who live in rural areas who are Alaska Native, and we
take all of that into consideration." She said decisions are
made based upon consideration of risks and available treatment
and safety plans.
9:04:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES asked, "As you're making decisions
regarding an individual, are you following specific guidelines
in statutes and [regulations] or do you have quite a bit of
flexibility, as far as those decisions?" She said she would
also like to know "how much you interface with workforce
opportunities for those being released."
9:05:08 AM
MS. POSSENTI responded that part of the parole process includes
consideration of the person's history and plans for the future,
both shown in the application and through verbal and nonverbal
communication during a face-to-face interview. She said there
are regulations regarding when a person can apply, based on what
crime has been committed and how much time has been served;
however, she added that "we do have some flexibility in terms of
... maybe making more of a customized release plan for this
person and what it is that they need." Regarding employment,
she said many inmates can earn their general educational
development (GED) and gain hands-on experience in skills that
may help them find a job once they are released. She said it is
possible to make individual release plans rather than a blanket
plan. She emphasized the importance of continuing education or
programing without a gap.
9:09:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES disclosed that she was a contractor in the
prison system who worked with inmates on getting their GEDs and
helping them prepare to enter the workforce. She expressed
concern that a lot of those released from prison break parole
and end up back in prison. Regarding the "Alaska Native
situation," she said "the numbers" are known and are disturbing.
She asked if the parole board has the opportunity to "make
recommendations to help with that assimilation." She expressed
hope that there are non-profit, faith-based groups that are
"trying to help with that," and she asked Ms. Possenti if she
has interaction with those groups in attempting to "improve
those statistics and not have so many breaking parole."
MS. POSSENTI replied that there are a number of programs
available linking parolees to housing opportunities and groups
available to help, such as the Native Justice Re-entry Program,
in Anchorage, Alaska. She stated that it would be nice to see
more of these programs in the rural areas. She reemphasized the
importance of providing "some kind of program" to those inmates
being released. Ms. Possenti related there is a much lower
recidivism rate - 7-9 percent - in those inmates who apply for
discretionary parole as compared to those who are released by
mandatory parole. She said [the board] has interaction with
those who have applied for discretionary parole, but does not
see those who are released on mandatory parole.
9:14:05 AM
TOM STENSON, Legal Director, American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU) of Alaska, introduced himself.
CHAIR LYNN directed attention to the second paragraph of a
letter in the committee packet [written by Jeffrey Mittman,
Executive Director of the ACLU of Alaska], dated 2/27/13, and
read, "The purpose of our letter is intended to prompt
discussion of the [Alaska State] Parole Board's general function
and how parole board members are selected generally." He
indicated that Mr. Stenson wrote in the letter that "this has
nothing to do with Ms. Possenti personally." He stated his
understanding that the purpose of the confirmation hearing was
to discuss the qualification of the appointees, not to discuss
"the general function." He said he was hoping that Mr.
Stenson's comments pertained particularly to Ms. Possenti. He
directed attention to page 2 of the letter and read, "The ACLU
would urge the committee to reject the proposed applicant and
push for appointment of members familiar with daily village
life, et cetera." He stated, "We do not discriminate against
applicants based on race or ethnicity or where they happen to
live in the state of Alaska." He invited Mr. Stenson to make
his statement "with those comments in mind."
9:16:10 AM
MR. STENSON said he is not asking the committee to discriminate
based on ethnicity or race, nor did he state in the letter that
an Alaska Native must be appointed. He said what he did point
out in the letter is that there is a legal requirement that "the
governor shall make appointments to the board with due regard
for the representation on the board of the ethnic, racial,
sexual, and cultural populations of the state." He said that is
a legal requirement that the legislature produced, and he asked
the legislature to consider that requirement in considering
whether or not an appointment is appropriate.
MR. STENSON questioned Chair Lynn's statement that no
discrimination shall be made based on where people come from
within the state, because the same statute makes a firm
requirement that there shall be at least one parole board member
from the first judicial district, at least one from the third
judicial district, and at least one from the second or fourth
judicial district. He said that requirement is there to prevent
the existence of a board whose members are made up solely with
representation from Anchorage or the Southcentral region. He
said that requirement does not embody the belief that everyone
from Anchorage is bad; it is there because of the belief that
the board functions best when it has a wide variety of opinion
and represents the broad spectrum of Alaskans. He said, "If Ms.
Possenti were from the third judicial district and her
nomination would leave the parole board with no one from the
second or fourth district, I think it would be appropriate for
me to draw that requirement to the committee's attention, and
this is a similar statutory requirement."
9:19:01 AM
MR. STENSON expressed concern that in Alaska, where 18 percent
of the population is Alaska Native, 35-36 percent of those in
custody are Alaska Native, and while 25 percent of parolees and
probationers are Alaska Native, 43 percent of those who return
to prison are Alaska Native. Mr. Stenson said he is not making
accusations or leveling allegations, he is asking tough
questions.
MR. STENSON, in response to Chair Lynn, said there are five
members of the board. Currently, three of those members are
from the third judicial district, from Kenai, Wasilla, and
Anchorage; one member is from the first judicial district, from
Juneau, and Ms. Possenti, the fifth member, is from the fourth
judicial district, from Fairbanks. In response to a follow-up
question, he said if Ms. Possenti is reappointed or someone else
from the second or fourth judicial districts is appointed, then
"the composition would be appropriate under the requirement that
all districts be represented." He said, "I was using that as an
analogy towards this requirement that the government shall make
appointments with due regard to representation on the board of
the ethnic, racial, ... sexual, and cultural populations of the
state."
9:21:04 AM
CHAIR LYNN said the committee's task today is to consider the
appointment of one person, Ms. Possenti, to the board, and he
said he does not think it is within the committee's purview to
consider "this other issue, if it is an issue."
MR. STENSON responded that ultimately the vote will be whether
to move the appointees forward to a joint session of the House
and Senate, but, as he noted for previous appointees, the
committee has broad authority to ask whatever questions it
likes.
9:22:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER expressed appreciation for Mr. Stenson's
testimony, but said he concurs with Chair Lynn that it is not
germane to whether or not the committee shall "put this name
forward."
9:23:15 AM
MR. STENSON concluded that nothing will change if "we" don't
look at these statistics and ask hard questions. He expressed
his hope that the committee will follow up appropriately on the
concerns raised in the aforementioned letter.
CHAIR LYNN expressed his hope that matters of incarceration and
parole are never treated in a discriminatory manner.
9:24:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER indicated that the Department of
Corrections came before the House Judiciary Standing Committee
with information akin to that presented by Mr. Stenson in the
ACLU of Alaska's letter, and legislators are struggling to
respond appropriately to the alarming information that was
brought forward. He said he does not want Mr. Stenson to think
or say that [the legislature] is not concerned.
CHAIR LYNN echoed Representative Keller's remark.
9:25:16 AM
CHAIR LYNN, after ascertaining that there was no one else who
wished to testify, closed public testimony.
9:25:41 AM
CHAIR LYNN reviewed the legislative confirmation process.
9:26:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON said each of the appointees has his/her
own distinctive perspective and appears to be qualified.
9:26:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ISAACSON moved to advance the names of Sarah
Possenti, appointee to the Alaska State Board of Parole, and
Christa Bruce-Kotrc, Jason Hart, Grace Merkes, appointees to the
Alaska Commission on Human Rights, for consideration in joint
session by the House and Senate. There being no objection, the
names were advanced.
9:27:42 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 9:28
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Human Rights Bruce-Kotrc.PDF |
HSTA 2/28/2013 8:00:00 AM |
Gov Appointee - Commission Human Rights - Bruce-Kotrc |
| Human Rights - Hart.PDF |
HSTA 2/28/2013 8:00:00 AM |
Gov Appointee - Commission Human Rights - Hart |
| Human Rights - Merkes.PDF |
HSTA 2/28/2013 8:00:00 AM |
Gov Appointee - Commission Human Rights - Merkes |
| Board of Parole - Possenti.PDF |
HSTA 2/28/2013 8:00:00 AM |
Gov Appointee - Board of Parole - Possenti |