Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120

03/13/2018 03:15 PM STATE AFFAIRS

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

Audio Topic
03:19:49 PM Start
03:22:16 PM HB325
04:14:31 PM Indirect Expenditure Hearing
05:13:22 PM HB400
05:37:09 PM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+= HB 325 PRISONER COMPUTER USE; REENTRY SERVICES TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
+ Indirect Expenditure Hearing TELECONFERENCED
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
+= HB 310 MARRIAGE AND MINIMUM AGE FOR MARRIAGE TELECONFERENCED
Scheduled but Not Heard
+= HB 400 FEES FOR FIRE PREVENTION MEASURES TELECONFERENCED
Heard & Held
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
             HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                           
                         March 13, 2018                                                                                         
                           3:19 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, Chair                                                                                   
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Vice Chair                                                                                     
Representative Chris Tuck                                                                                                       
Representative Adam Wool                                                                                                        
Representative Chris Birch                                                                                                      
Representative DeLena Johnson                                                                                                   
Representative Gary Knopp                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative Andy Josephson (alternate)                                                                                       
Representative Chuck Kopp (alternate)                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 325                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to computer use by prisoners; and relating to                                                                  
an exemption from the State Procurement Code for contracts for                                                                  
rehabilitation and reentry services."                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
INDIRECT EXPENDITURE HEARING                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 400                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to the collection of fees by the Department of                                                                 
Public Safety for fire and explosion prevention and safety                                                                      
services."                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 310                                                                                                              
"An Act relating to the minimum age of eligibility for                                                                          
marriage."                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     - SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 325                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: PRISONER COMPUTER USE; REENTRY SERVICES                                                                            
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
02/02/18       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/02/18       (H)       STA, JUD                                                                                               
02/13/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
02/13/18       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/13/18       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
03/13/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 400                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: FEES FOR FIRE PREVENTION MEASURES                                                                                  
SPONSOR(s): STATE AFFAIRS                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
02/28/18       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/28/18       (H)       STA, FIN                                                                                               
03/01/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
03/01/18       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/01/18       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
03/08/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
03/08/18       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/08/18       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
03/13/18       (H)       STA AT 3:15 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
DEAN WILLIAMS, Commissioner                                                                                                     
Department of Corrections (DOC)                                                                                                 
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented HB 325 on behalf of the House                                                                  
Rules Committee by request of the governor and summarized the                                                                   
issues to be addressed by the proposed legislation.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BROOKE IVY, Staff                                                                                                               
Representative Jason Grenn                                                                                                      
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided information on the recommendations                                                              
of the  House Finance Committee's Subcommittee  on the Department                                                               
of Administration (DOA) during the indirect expenditure hearing.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
HEATHER HEBDON, Executive Director                                                                                              
Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC)                                                                                         
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified during the indirect expenditure                                                                
hearing.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHERI LOWENSTEIN, Director                                                                                                      
Division of Administrative Services (DAS)                                                                                       
Department of Administration (DOA)                                                                                              
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   Testified  during the  indirect expenditure                                                             
hearing.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
GREG SMITH, Staff                                                                                                               
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux                                                                                                 
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided  information on the recommendations                                                             
of the  House Finance Committee's Subcommittee  on the University                                                               
of Alaska (UA) during the indirect expenditure hearing.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
ALEXEI PAINTER, Fiscal Analyst                                                                                                  
Legislative Finance Division (LFD)                                                                                              
Legislative Affairs Agency (LAA)                                                                                                
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Provided  information on the recommendations                                                             
of the  House Finance Committee's Subcommittee  on the Department                                                               
of  Revenue  (DOR) and  answered  questions  during the  indirect                                                               
expenditure hearing.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MILES BAKER, Associate Vice President of Government Relations                                                                   
University of Alaska (UA)                                                                                                       
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:    Answered questions  during  the  indirect                                                             
expenditure hearing.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
DAVID TYLER, Director State Fire Marshall                                                                                       
Division of Fire and Life Safety (DFLS)                                                                                         
Department of Public Safety (DPS)                                                                                               
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions  during the hearing on HB                                                             
400.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
LLOYD NAKANO, Assistant State Fire Marshal                                                                                      
Division of Fire and Life Safety (DFLS)                                                                                         
Department of Public Safety (DPS)                                                                                               
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  Answered questions  on during the hearing on                                                             
HB 400.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CATHY SCHLINGHEYDE, Staff                                                                                                       
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins                                                                                          
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   Presented the  forthcoming Amendment  2 on                                                             
behalf  of  the House  State  Affairs  Standing Committee,  prime                                                               
sponsor of HB 400.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel                                                                                                    
Alaska Court System (ACS)                                                                                                       
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:    Answered  questions  on  the  forthcoming                                                             
Amendment 2 during the hearing on HB 400.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:19:49 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  JONATHAN KREISS-TOMKINS  called  the  House State  Affairs                                                             
Standing   Committee    meeting   to    order   at    3:19   p.m.                                                               
Representatives Tuck,  Wool, Birch,  Johnson, Knopp,  and Kreiss-                                                               
Tomkins  were  present at  the  call  to order.    Representative                                                               
LeDoux arrived as the meeting was in progress.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
          HB 325-PRISONER COMPUTER USE; REENTRY SERVICES                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:22:16 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  announced that the first  order of business                                                               
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 325,  "An Act relating to computer use by                                                               
prisoners;  and   relating  to   an  exemption  from   the  State                                                               
Procurement  Code for  contracts for  rehabilitation and  reentry                                                               
services."                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                              
3:22:54 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DEAN  WILLIAMS, Commissioner,  Department  of Corrections  (DOC),                                                               
explained  that  the  community residential  center  (CRC)  -  or                                                               
halfway house - model has been  in existence for 20 years with no                                                               
changes.   The  CRCs are  where inmates  go who  are exiting  the                                                               
prison  system; some  are  on furlough;  some  are on  electronic                                                               
monitoring; they  are trying to find  a job and a  place to live.                                                               
He stated  that currently there  is one option for  where inmates                                                               
can live while  transitioning from prison to home  or to wherever                                                               
they will live; and that is within the CRC halfway house model.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS stated that the  problem with the CRC model                                                               
is that there has been a  60-65 percent recidivism rate in Alaska                                                               
for the  past 15-20 years  despite changes in the  prison system.                                                               
He asserted that when people don't have  a place to live or a job                                                               
when they  have finished their  sentences, the chance  of failure                                                               
is  high.   He  said that  almost half  of  these failures  occur                                                               
within the first six months of  release.  This occurs because the                                                               
process of  transitioning from a  "hard cell" environment  to one                                                               
in  which the  person is  productive  must have  a strategic  and                                                               
stepdown plan; Alaska does not have that.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS said that  another reason the halfway house                                                               
model  is  fundamentally "broken"  is  the  "walk-away" rate,  or                                                               
escape  rate.    Every  time someone  escapes  from  the  halfway                                                               
facility, it  could result in  a felony  charge.  In  2016, there                                                               
were 222  escapes from halfway  houses; under his  leadership and                                                               
with the  assistance of staff, that  number was reduced to  83 in                                                               
2017;  however,  every one  of  those  escapes represents  a  new                                                               
potential felony charge  against the person who  walked away from                                                               
the halfway house.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  WILLIAMS  related  a  third  reason  for  a  broken                                                               
system:    the cost  of  the  CRC  halfway  house model  is  very                                                               
expensive.   He recommended that  the committee members  not look                                                               
at the  budgeted rate  for a  halfway house bed  but look  at the                                                               
actual cost.   He offered to share the breakout  of the cost with                                                               
the  committee.    He  gave  examples:   at  Cordova  Center  [in                                                               
Anchorage], the  bed rate is $117  per day per person;  at Tundra                                                               
Center  in Bethel,  the  rate  is $312  per  day  per person;  at                                                               
Northstar  Center in  Fairbanks, the  rate  is $176  per day  per                                                               
person; at Seaside  Center in Nome, the rate is  $145 per day per                                                               
person; and at  Glacier Manor Half-Way House in  Juneau, the rate                                                               
is $206  per day per  person.  He concluded  that it is  a costly                                                               
model, which is the reason he is looking for innovations.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS  continued by relating other  problems with                                                               
the model:   the inmates don't want to go  to the halfway houses;                                                               
it is difficult to fill the  beds due to problems at the facility                                                               
such  as  drug  trafficking;  and  there  isn't  enough  for  the                                                               
residents  to do.    He maintained  that without  work  to do  or                                                               
places to go, the temptation is to escape or use drugs.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
3:27:48 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS passed the gavel to Vice Chair LeDoux.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  WILLIAMS gave  a final  cause  contributing to  the                                                               
[halfway   house]   model   being  broken:      the   procurement                                                               
requirements that  DOC is currently  under.  He pointed  out that                                                               
the  request  for  proposal  (RFP)  for  DOC  is  150  pages;  it                                                               
represents the  boilerplate procurement procedures;  and anything                                                               
over  $100,000  requires  a   very  cumbersome  and  bureaucratic                                                               
process.   He maintained that  the places where he  wants inmates                                                               
to  go when  exiting  prison are  smaller  locations and  smaller                                                               
facilities.  People  do much better in those  locations, and they                                                               
are cheaper.   He referred to testimony during  the 2/13/18 House                                                               
State Affairs  Standing Committee meeting from  operators of some                                                               
of those small places.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS summarized by saying  that it is his desire                                                               
that the committee members understand  the scope of the issue and                                                               
why  there are  problems with  the  current halfway  houses.   He                                                               
mentioned that he appreciated the  discussion and concerns raised                                                               
during  the 2/13/18  committee meeting  hearing.   He  maintained                                                               
that he is requesting an  exception to the procurement rules, not                                                               
for the entire  department but just for a small  amount of money,                                                               
$17-18 million, to allow him to pilot a different model.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  WILLIAMS  stated  that   the  model  in  place  has                                                               
benefited  the  DOC contractor  for  20  years, and  millions  of                                                               
dollars are  "on the line."   He emphasized that  this initiative                                                               
in no  way is meant  to disrespect the  DOC contractor:   this is                                                               
the contract  DOC requested; it is  the bid DOC awarded;  and the                                                               
contractor provided  the service.   He maintained that  DOC could                                                               
do better.   He is requesting  to be allowed an  exception to the                                                               
procurement  rules -  if  not  for $17-18  million,  then for  $5                                                               
million  -  to  try  a  pilot  project  to  demonstrate  improved                                                               
results.   He said,  "Put requirements  on me  if you  must about                                                               
where that  money was spent and  how that was put  together."  He                                                               
reiterated that  the current  model is not  working, and  that is                                                               
why he is making this request to the committee.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
3:30:59 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  JOHNSON   referred  to   Commissioner  Williams's                                                               
testimony that  there are drugs  inside the halfway houses.   She                                                               
asked if  there is  legal action  that could  be taken  against a                                                               
contractor if drugs are allowed inside the halfway house.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  WILLIAMS  answered  that  the  contractors  are  as                                                               
deeply concerned about  this issue as is he.   He maintained that                                                               
the problem lies in the halfway house model:  it houses                                                                         
 50  people with  no common  purpose;  some are  using drugs  and                                                               
bring  them into  the  halfway house;  some  are recovering  drug                                                               
addicts that don't  want to have drugs around.   He asserted that                                                               
the contractors  are not allowing  the presence of drugs  but are                                                               
fighting it like he is.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   JOHNSON   expressed    her   concern   regarding                                                               
establishing a halfway house in  a neighborhood without notice to                                                               
the   neighborhood  and   the  possibility   that  the   proposed                                                               
legislation would  allow the requirement  of public notice  to be                                                               
circumvented.    She  added  that  halfway  house  residents  are                                                               
criminals   and    putting   them   into    neighborhoods   would                                                               
understandably make residents unhappy.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  WILLIAMS  replied  that  the  proposed  legislation                                                               
would  not  preclude  any   local  ordinances,  requirements,  or                                                               
controls regarding  the locations of  the halfway houses.   There                                                               
would  be   discussions  at  the  municipal   level,  prospective                                                               
providers would be heard, as well  as objections, and it would be                                                               
a community  decision.  He  stated that another  consideration is                                                               
that the  residents of the  halfway houses are being  released to                                                               
the  communities  regardless.    He  offered  that  his  proposal                                                               
addresses a  choice:  either  an inmate  will spend the  last six                                                               
months of his/her  sentence in a halfway house with  a 65 percent                                                               
recidivism  rate  upon release  due  to  insecure employment  and                                                               
housing; or the  inmate will live in a  local, innovative housing                                                               
unit that is smaller, under  the control of local ordinances, but                                                               
where escapes  and drugs are less  likely.  He added  that people                                                               
in  the smaller  locations  have problems,  but  there are  fewer                                                               
problems.  There are many more  problems in the large places with                                                               
50-100 men,  who have  nothing in common;  some want  to continue                                                               
trafficking in drugs and some want to get well.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
3:35:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KNOPP  expressed  his  concern  that  if  halfway                                                               
houses are placed in communities  with no economic opportunities,                                                               
an  inmate who  was not  productive before  prison, would  not be                                                               
productive  upon  release  even  if   he/she  was  in  a  smaller                                                               
residential  facility.   He  offered that  if  procurement is  an                                                               
issue, it  could be addressed  administratively.  He  referred to                                                               
the  communities -  Bethel, Cordova,  and Nome  - and  questioned                                                               
what could be done in a  halfway facility - whether it housed six                                                               
or  sixty  men  -  that  would  result  in  the  residents  being                                                               
productive.     He maintained  that there  are drugs  in prisons,                                                               
hospitals, and schools;  the size of the facility  would not make                                                               
a  difference; if  the  residents  are using  drugs,  then it  is                                                               
impossible to keep  the drugs out of the facility.   He concluded                                                               
that he  is unable  to make  the connections  between procurement                                                               
codes, smaller living facilities,  and the type of rehabilitation                                                               
that Commissioner Williams is seeking.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS replied that  research shows that for peer-                                                               
oriented returning  citizens, who have  a common issue  that they                                                               
are  working on  together, a  six-bed facility  is better  than a                                                               
sixty-bed facility.  He described the larger halfway houses:                                                                    
sixty people housed  in one place; four to six  people to a room;                                                               
varied sleeping  and employment schedules; and  residents who are                                                               
not  working.    He  stated  that they  are  a  "hodge-podge"  of                                                               
individuals who don't have "a lot pulling together."                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  WILLIAMS   said  that   the  reason   that  smaller                                                               
locations  work  better is  because  the  residents support  each                                                               
other;  they  help  each  other  find jobs;  and  they  are  held                                                               
accountable by a  house parent.  He said that  this model is used                                                               
in  Norway; the  recidivism rate  is 25  percent.   He maintained                                                               
that  the success  in that  country is  not just  because of  the                                                               
money that is spent on  prison treatment programs.  Their prisons                                                               
are not that  much better that those of the  U.S., although there                                                               
are a few things they do better.   He said, "What they are better                                                               
at is how they  step people down."  The prisoners  start out at a                                                               
maximum-security facility; they work their  way out; they go into                                                               
a halfway  house in downtown Oslo  with a maximum of  15-20 beds;                                                               
and they  all have jobs.   He continued by saying  that finishing                                                               
one's  prison  sentence in  one  of  these  halfway houses  is  a                                                               
privilege; the residents  all have a lot to lose.   He reiterated                                                               
that  the research  on  the success  of  the small  peer-oriented                                                               
facilities  is  very clear;  and  the  operators of  these  small                                                               
facilities have testified that the results are good.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  WILLIAMS mentioned  a facility  in the  Kenai area:                                                               
it  is a  faith-based organization;  there are  three individuals                                                               
just out of prison at the  facility; the operator is helping them                                                               
to secure  jobs and "keep  on track";  and the individuals  go to                                                               
Narcotics  Anonymous Alcoholics  Anonymous (NAAA)  meetings.   He                                                               
maintained that the operator is  barely able to keep the facility                                                               
operating.  He  stated, "It's all on a shoestring.   It's amazing                                                               
the  results."    He  asked  to  be  given  the  opportunity  and                                                               
flexibility  to pilot  this initiative,  because he  sees already                                                               
that it is working.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP  commented that he  has put many of  the men                                                               
whom Commissioner Williams  referenced to work and  has seen very                                                               
limited success.   He said that the men worked  for a while; they                                                               
did  very  well; they  were  hard-working  and smart;  they  were                                                               
happier than they had ever been;  and they were making more money                                                               
than they had  ever made.  He stated that  after about 30-60 days                                                               
of good  paychecks, they don't  make it  to work on  Monday; then                                                               
lose  more  days   of  work;  then  don't  show   up  again;  and                                                               
Representative   Knopp  gets   a   phone  call   that  they   are                                                               
incarcerated.  He maintained that he  is not as optimistic as the                                                               
faith-based  [organization] that  is doing  this work  every day.                                                               
He conceded  that there have  been a  few successes with  the men                                                               
being actively involved with the church.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:41:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH  referred to  sixty men  in a  halfway house                                                               
with ten  units and  six people to  a unit.   He conceded  that a                                                               
small  housing  unit  offers  a more  normal  lifestyle  for  the                                                               
residents  but  suggested that  there  would  be efficiencies  in                                                               
having 60  men under one  roof; having  the men in  ten different                                                               
properties would  be very labor intensive  and require additional                                                               
oversight, administration, and management.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS  responded that  the larger  facility might                                                               
be operationally  efficient; however, it  is not economical.   He                                                               
said  that  the   larger  facilities  are  very   costly  due  to                                                               
requirements regarding  cameras, doors, staffing, and  many other                                                               
"hard" costs.   He reiterated  that he  has broken out  the costs                                                               
and can demonstrate the actual cost of the beds.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  WILLIAMS relayed  that the  other consideration  is                                                               
that the  failure rate is  high [for  the large facilities].   He                                                               
maintained   that   the   smaller  nonprofits   are   better   at                                                               
transitioning inmates  back into  society:  these  facilities are                                                               
in smaller  peer-oriented communities; the facilities  are run by                                                               
well-intentioned  and seasoned  people  who are  in recovery  and                                                               
have  been  for  five  to  ten  years;  the  involvement  of  the                                                               
operators  in   helping  people  reenter  society   is  not  only                                                               
different, but better.  He explained  that inmates do not want to                                                               
go to halfway  houses, and their issues and  concerns about going                                                               
to halfway houses are "real."                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  WILLIAMS  expressed  his belief  that  the  current                                                               
halfway house model is the  cornerstone of the failure to control                                                               
the high recidivism  rate; and his staff is convinced  of this as                                                               
well.  He said that when asked  why he is not putting more people                                                               
in halfway houses,  he responds that there is a  problem with the                                                               
model;  the  model  was  developed   for  relief  for  population                                                               
control; it  is no longer  used for that  purpose but as  a step-                                                               
down unit.   He summarized that the easiest course  of action for                                                               
him  is to  do nothing;  however, continuing  to follow  the same                                                               
failed model after  20 years will not  produce different results.                                                               
He stated that his job is  to bring problems to the forefront and                                                               
attack them with  new solutions.  He asked the  committee for its                                                               
help and for any suggestions it might offer.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
3:45:45 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH  stated that  his principle objection  to HB                                                               
325 is  bypassing the procurement  guidelines.  He  expressed his                                                               
belief  that   there  are  administrative  remedies,   which  the                                                               
Department of  Law (DOL) could  provide.  He offered  that absent                                                               
the  procurement waiver  proposed by  HB 325,  a competitive  bid                                                               
document could  be drafted  by DOC that  defines exactly  what is                                                               
wanted.  He expressed that  Commissioner Williams appears to have                                                               
a very  clear idea  of what  he wants for  DOC and  that it  is a                                                               
model that  Representative Birch supports.   Representative Birch                                                               
offered  his belief  that  there are  people  willing to  operate                                                               
small halfway houses  who could meet the  standard established by                                                               
DOC, and the  competitive bid process would work.   He maintained                                                               
that  the state  gets  into trouble  when  it waives  procurement                                                               
guidelines; it has at times had a poor track in that area.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:47:41 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   WOOL  expressed   that   he  understands   being                                                               
intimidated by a  ream of paper with requirements.   He commented                                                               
that  the halfway  house model  is  broken, as  evidenced by  the                                                               
recidivism  rates,  and the  state  should  not allow  "some  old                                                               
methodology  of 100  pages of  procurement" stop  it from  trying                                                               
something  new.   He  mentioned  that  he  spoke to  Kara  Nelson                                                               
[Director, Haven  House Juneau] who testified  during the hearing                                                               
on  HB 325  [during the  House State  Affairs Standing  Committee                                                               
meeting of 2/13/18].   He referred to the  public television [360                                                               
North]   documentary,  [entitled   "Inside  Out   Leaving  Prison                                                               
Behind"];  he  recommended that  the  committee  members see  the                                                               
documentary.  He repeated the  question he asked Ms. Nelson after                                                               
the  meeting,  which  was:     Haven  House  is  operating  well;                                                               
therefore, what is the problem?                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS  replied that the  scope of the  problem is                                                               
expecting someone  from Haven House to  work through an RFP.   He                                                               
said that  he appreciates the  suggestion to shorten the  RFP but                                                               
maintained that he doesn't know how to  do that.  Even if the RFP                                                               
is soliciting  a proposal for a  six-bed facility, if the  bid is                                                               
for over $100,000, the entire process must still be followed.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS stated that he is  working on a "Plan B" if                                                               
HB 325 doesn't  pass.  He maintained that there  is a reason that                                                               
the small  facility operators  don't apply  and expend  the great                                                               
effort.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  said that he  learned [from Ms.  Nelson] the                                                               
state can't  pay Haven  House to  house inmates  transitioning to                                                               
life  outside, because  the organization  has  not fulfilled  the                                                               
procurement obligation; Haven House  is operating on a volunteer,                                                               
nonprofit, donation basis;  and it is not getting  money from the                                                               
state.   He  mentioned that  the  state is  paying the  Northstar                                                               
Center in Fairbanks, $176 per day  per person.  He added that the                                                               
center is  across the  street from his  business; the  center has                                                               
"walk-aways",  but that  doesn't  impact him  because they  don't                                                               
stay in  the area.  He  mentioned that in the  neighborhood where                                                               
he lives, there are a couple  group homes for troubled youth, and                                                               
he doesn't really notice them either.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL maintained  that  he likes  the Haven  House                                                               
model as  a method of  transitioning prisoners to  functioning on                                                               
the outside world.   He asserted that he does  not agree with the                                                               
statement,  "Because  they're  once  prisoners,  they're  forever                                                               
deemed unproductive,  and you can  never get them  functioning in                                                               
society."    He  stated  that  he  knows  people  who  have  been                                                               
incarcerated  and are  now out  of prison  and functioning  well.                                                               
There are  different reasons for  people to  go to jail;  not all                                                               
are destined to a life  of nonproductivity; people can be helped,                                                               
as  Norway has  demonstrated.    He said  that  he believes  that                                                               
downsizing and allowing for closer  interactions is a good model.                                                               
He said  that he applauds  Commissioner Williams for  exploring a                                                               
different model;  and he  supports circumventing  the procurement                                                               
codes to  allow for a  limited pilot  project.  He  said, "What's                                                               
the hurt in trying, because we're  doing pretty poorly as it is?"                                                               
He mentioned the expense of  one person supervising six residents                                                               
but maintained that there is a  high cost associated with a 60-70                                                               
percent recidivism  rate, that  is, the  added expense  of public                                                               
safety, court, and prison.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
3:52:56 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Vice  Chair LeDoux  stated  that before  supporting  HB 325,  she                                                               
wants  to  hear someone  from  the  Department of  Administration                                                               
(DOA) say  that there is  no way for  smaller projects to  have a                                                               
fast track or "lighter" procurement  policy.  She maintained that                                                               
if there  is no way,  then that is a  problem.  She  offered that                                                               
rather than  address this problem on  a department-by-department,                                                               
project-by-project  basis, there  should  be a  mandate that  the                                                               
administration   adopt   realistic   procurement  codes.      She                                                               
maintained  that   she  supports  the  model   that  Commissioner                                                               
Williams has  presented; however, she  claimed that she  wants to                                                               
make  sure there  is  no way  the  change could  be  made in  the                                                               
procurement code.   She  stated that she  would rather  spend her                                                               
legislative  time  on  something   that  resulted  in  a  simpler                                                               
procurement  code so  that the  requests from  departments didn't                                                               
come  in one  by one  and each  need separate  legislation.   She                                                               
offered  that  projects  under  a certain  amount  could  have  a                                                               
streamlined procurement process.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  WILLIAMS   responded  by  saying  that   for  under                                                               
$100,000, there is  a fast track; however, that  amount is spread                                                               
out between three to five years.   He gave an explanation using a                                                               
hypothetical situation:   DOC signs a contract  with Haven House;                                                               
it awards  Haven House  $50 per night  per individual;  there are                                                               
four to five  people who are still serving sentences  but are now                                                               
housed  at Haven  House;  the amount  exceeds  $100,000 over  the                                                               
course of three to five years -  the length of the contracts.  He                                                               
suggested that  perhaps there should  be more flexibility  on the                                                               
fast track dollar amount.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS said  that $17 million is  spent on halfway                                                               
houses.    He  asked  that  as an  alternative  to  the  proposed                                                               
legislation, he  be allowed to  bypass the procurement  rules for                                                               
$5 million;  institute a pilot  project; track the  results after                                                               
three years; and try to improve the halfway house model.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
3:56:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR LEDOUX  maintained that if DOC has a  problem with the                                                               
fast  track,  there  are probably  other  departments  with  that                                                               
problem.   She  suggested  that the  procurement  code should  be                                                               
revised not  just for DOC,  but for all departments;  and without                                                               
that, she cannot support the proposed legislation.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
3:56:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
VICE CHAIR LEDOUX passed the gavel back to Chair Kreiss-Tomkins.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  TUCK acknowledged  the high  recidivism rate;  he                                                               
expressed that  he is shocked by  the escape rate at  the halfway                                                               
houses.   He  suggested that  the contracts  require the  halfway                                                               
houses not  to allow  escapes or  to be penalized  for them.   He                                                               
offered that DOC could do better with the escape rate.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  TUCK  stated  that  he  looked  through  the  DOC                                                               
halfway  house RFP  and was  not able  to identify  anything that                                                               
could be  eliminated.  He  mentioned two provisions  - facilities                                                               
must pay  utilities and they  must be  bonded - and  offered that                                                               
they  are necessary.   He  asked what  in the  RFP specifications                                                               
could be  eliminated.  He also  asked why DOC couldn't  write the                                                               
RFP specifications to set a limit  for the number of residents in                                                               
a  halfway  house.    He  maintained  that  a  large  part  of  a                                                               
prisoner's  success  upon  leaving   the  corrections  system  is                                                               
oversight  by  proper  peers  -  parole  officers  and  probation                                                               
officers.    He  conceded  that more  focused  attention  on  the                                                               
inmates  does lose  "economies of  scale";  however, the  greater                                                               
personal attention may help reduce the recidivism rate.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK  summarized the  reasons for the  failures of                                                               
the  current  system:    the  expense per  inmate  is  high;  the                                                               
stepdown plan  is inadequate  stepdown; there is  a high  rate of                                                               
escapees;  people  don't  want  to  live  there  because  of  the                                                               
atmosphere  of drug  trafficking; and  there is  nothing for  the                                                               
residents to do.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
4:00:54 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH  cited Section 3  of HB 325, [page  3, lines                                                               
19-23], which read in part:                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
     (b)   In authorizing a contract  for rehabilitation and                                                                    
     reentry  services made  under AS  36.30.850 and  (a) of                                                                    
     this  section, the  commissioner or  the commissioner's                                                                    
     designee shall  make a  determination that  the payment                                                                    
     for  rehabilitation and  reentry services  will promote                                                                    
     the  use  of  community-based and  culturally  relevant                                                                    
     rehabilitative  and  reentry  services most  suited  to                                                                    
     provide support for the individual                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH  suggested that at  some point DOC  needs to                                                               
quantify  what is  being  asked for  in a  contract:   number  of                                                               
square  feet  for  a  room;   smoke  detectors;  and  supervision                                                               
requirements.   He  maintained that  DOC could  describe what  it                                                               
wants  in  detail;  however, he  conceded  that  quantifying  the                                                               
qualifications  of staff  to provide  rehabilitation and  reentry                                                               
services would  be more  difficult.  He  stated that  he supports                                                               
looking  for options  within the  existing  procurement code;  he                                                               
expressed  his belief  that those  options exist.   He  mentioned                                                               
that the  commissioner's objective  is meritorious;  however, the                                                               
"safest bet" is for DOC to decide  what it wants, put out an RFP,                                                               
and rely on a competitive bid process.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
4:03:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that HB 325 would be held over.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK  asked for the  various ways that  people are                                                               
put into halfway houses.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS answered that  the walk-away rate decreased                                                               
by about  one-third from  the prior year  due to  being "smarter"                                                               
about who  was allowed into a  halfway house.  He  stated that he                                                               
has been  criticized for  not releasing  more inmates  to halfway                                                               
houses; however, he  maintained that to avoid the  escape rate of                                                               
2016, DOC  has pared  down who was  eligible for  halfway houses.                                                               
He relayed  that except  for very  few exceptions,  halfway house                                                               
residents are people  still serving sentences with  six months to                                                               
a  year  remaining.    The  two  main  groups  of  halfway  house                                                               
residents  are  inmates  who are  furloughed,  as  determined  by                                                               
statute, and inmates on electronic monitoring.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   JOHNSON  stated   that  she   got  involved   in                                                               
government   because  of   someone  trying   to  circumvent   the                                                               
procurement  code  and  has reservations  about  allowing  it  to                                                               
happen.  She suggested that  DOA staff provide information on the                                                               
procurement code  and the committee  explore possible  changes to                                                               
the code.   She also suggested that the  committee hear testimony                                                               
from  the  halfway  house  contractors and  get  their  input  on                                                               
possible solutions to the halfway house problems.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
4:06:42 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS concurred with the suggestions.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  referred to the phrase  "culturally relevant                                                               
rehabilitative   and  reentry   services"  and   asked  for   the                                                               
percentage  of halfway  house  inmates who  are  from outside  of                                                               
Alaska's  urban areas,  who might  receive a  greater benefit  by                                                               
being in a  place with people from their  own cultural background                                                               
and closer  to home.  He  mentioned that there are  a fair number                                                               
of  Alaska  Natives  incarcerated;  someone  from  a  rural  area                                                               
paroled  in Anchorage  must  stay  in Anchorage  to  be close  to                                                               
his/her  parole officer;  rural  halfway houses  could help  this                                                               
urban-rural divide,  if there are  such places willing to  bid on                                                               
halfway house contracts.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  WILLIAMS  replied  that   another  reason  why  the                                                               
current model is broken is  that there are not smaller facilities                                                               
in rural  areas; people do  not want to  go to halfway  houses in                                                               
one location and  try to get a job, knowing  that eventually they                                                               
will  be  leaving.   He  added  that even  the  Matanuska-Susitna                                                               
("Mat-Su") Valley does not have stepdown housing.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
COMMISSIONER  WILLIAMS  mentioned  Unalakleet and  similar  rural                                                               
communities   and   emphasized   the  benefits   of   financially                                                               
supporting even one stable home in  such a region to allow Alaska                                                               
Natives to return  to that location.  An operator  of a home that                                                               
size  would never  be  able to  prepare a  bid  according to  the                                                               
current procurement code; the specification  of square footage is                                                               
much less important than the  location of the home; and closeness                                                               
to home  and one's support system  is more important.   He stated                                                               
that the  commissioner of DOC  still has full custody  of halfway                                                               
house inmates;  in the smaller  halfway houses, any  problems can                                                               
be  immediately  and  appropriately  addressed  with  a  measured                                                               
response.  He agreed that the  current halfway house model is not                                                               
culturally  relevant to  many  inmates, and  there  are very  few                                                               
options for finding a culturally relevant environment.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
4:10:36 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KNOPP  clarified his  earlier  question:   For  a                                                               
person who  was nonproductive before  jail, what would  make them                                                               
productive upon  release?  He  expressed his belief  that smaller                                                               
halfway houses would  have no effect on encouraging  an inmate to                                                               
become  productive.   People who  have  had a  lifetime of  being                                                               
productive are likely to be productive after incarceration.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP  stated that there  are two reasons  for his                                                               
disagreement with  the proposal in  HB 325:   one is  waiving the                                                               
procurement  code; the  other is  that  contracting with  smaller                                                               
facilities  loses  economies of  scale.    If the  [hypothetical]                                                               
house in  Unalakleet is not  full, the  price per square  foot or                                                               
per bed would have to increase.   He relayed that the discussions                                                               
on Senate Bill  91, [passed during the  Twenty-Ninth Alaska State                                                               
Legislature  (2015-2016) and  signed into  law 7/11/16],  and the                                                               
discussions of  HB 325 both  noted the  disproportionately higher                                                               
incarcerations  rates of  rural  Alaska Natives  and  a need  for                                                               
culturally  relevant treatment.   He  maintained that  if housing                                                               
inmates in a  small rural community to  attain cultural relevance                                                               
results in  just one or two  inmates, DOC has lost  all economies                                                               
of scale.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP stated  that he does not support  HB 325 for                                                               
two  reasons.    He  maintained  that  he  does  not  support  an                                                               
exception  to  the procurement  code,  however,  would support  a                                                               
review  of the  procurement code.   He  stated that  secondly, he                                                               
does  not  agree  with  the  overall  plan  behind  the  proposed                                                               
legislation.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
[HB 325 was held over.]                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
                   INDIRECT EXPENDITURE HEARING                                                                             
^INDIRECT EXPENDITURE HEARING                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                              
4:14:31 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  announced that  the next order  of business                                                               
would be the Indirect Expenditure  Hearing.  He stated that first                                                               
to be considered  are the recommendations from  the House Finance                                                               
Committee's  Subcommittee  on  the Department  of  Administration                                                               
(DOA)  ("House DOA  budget subcommittee")  related to  the Alaska                                                               
Public  Offices  Commission  (APOC)  and the  Division  of  Motor                                                               
Vehicles (DMV).                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
4:15:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
BROOKE  IVY,  Staff,  Representative Jason  Grenn,  Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature,  reviewed   the  statutory   change  recommendations                                                               
offered by the  House DOA budget subcommittee in  the fiscal year                                                               
2018  (FY  18)  closeout  report,  with the  use  of  a  handout,                                                               
entitled    "Statutory    Recommendations    of    DOA    Finance                                                               
Subcommittee:" included in the committee packet.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS.  IVY relayed  that  the first  two  recommendations refer  to                                                               
APOC.   The  first recommendation  is to  streamline some  of the                                                               
reporting statutes.  She mentioned  that the APOC office has been                                                               
reduced by  six positions  since FY  16; therefore,  workload has                                                               
become a problem.   Five areas of the statute  were identified in                                                               
which  small changes  could be  made to  create efficiencies  and                                                               
streamline the  workload.   A revision  to AS  15.13.374(c) would                                                               
extend  the  response time  for  advisory  opinion requests  from                                                               
seven days to ten working days.   This change would avoid pulling                                                               
staff from time-sensitive projects.   An additional four areas of                                                               
statute  were   identified  for  possible  amendments.     In  AS                                                               
15.13.030(7), the elimination  of the word "all"  would allow the                                                               
agency  some   discretion  in  choosing   the  documents   to  be                                                               
investigated, examined, and  compared for audits.   A revision to                                                               
AS  15.13.040(g)  would extend  to  "groups"  the exemption  from                                                               
certain filings  for contributions  to small campaigns;  it would                                                               
apply to groups  raising no more than $2,500 in  a calendar year.                                                               
There  was  a recommendation  to  repeal  AS 15.13.040(k),  which                                                               
requires  a  filing for  a  report  that  is  redundant.   A  new                                                               
subsection  added  by AS  15.13.090(c)  would  clarify some  size                                                               
requirements for the "paid for by" identifiers.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS.  IVY  relayed  that  the  second  recommendation  relates  to                                                               
exploring  increases  to APOC  fee  collection.    In the  FY  18                                                               
proposed  governor's  budget, there  was  an  effort to  increase                                                               
designated  general fund  (DGF) program  receipts; however,  APOC                                                               
testified  that it  would  be unable  to  collect those  receipts                                                               
unless it has statutory authority to  do so.  Certain user groups                                                               
were  identified as  requiring  the most  significant portion  of                                                               
APOC's  time, and  these  groups were  not  included in  statute;                                                               
therefore,  the  recommendation was  to  ensure  that these  user                                                               
groups were addressed in statute to  be able to collect fees from                                                               
them.  Registration  fees were considered for  other user groups,                                                               
such  as  public  officials,   legislators,  and  candidates  for                                                               
registration, which is addressed under HB 91.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS  asked where  HB  91  is currently  in  the                                                               
process.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS. IVY expressed her understanding that  HB 91 has passed out of                                                               
the House Finance  Committee and is currently in  the House Rules                                                               
Standing Committee.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked Ms. Ivy to identify HB 91.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. IVY  replied that HB  91 was sponsored by  Representative Sam                                                               
Kito;  it creates  fees for  lobbyists filing  with APOC;  and it                                                               
establishes a $50 registration fee  for public officials, with an                                                               
exception for those in communities  of 15,000 population or less.                                                               
She added  that persons  not qualifying as  a group  or non-group                                                               
entity  would be  subject to  a $100  registration fee;  and this                                                               
would include  the previously mentioned entities  not captured in                                                               
statute.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
4:21:22 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   BIRCH    asked   for   clarification    on   the                                                               
recommendations and asked if they support HB 91.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS.  IVY  explained that  the  recommendations  she related  were                                                               
offered by  the House DOA budget  subcommittee in FY 18  based on                                                               
an amendment process  that took place in  the committee; however,                                                               
the subcommittee  is not explicitly  offering support for  HB 91;                                                               
it is simply noting that  the issues raised in the recommendation                                                               
would be being partially addressed by  HB 91.  She added that she                                                               
cannot relay the  rate of the fee, since it  was not addressed in                                                               
the subcommittee.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  added that  the finance  subcommittees look                                                               
at what  the agencies are doing  and try to cut  the budget where                                                               
possible.   Sometimes previous legislatures have  passed statutes                                                               
that direct agencies to perform  activities that are superfluous;                                                               
therefore,  eliminating those  statutes can  help those  agencies                                                               
streamline  and   reduce  the  budget.     He  stated   that  the                                                               
recommendations represent ideas for  the legislators; it is their                                                               
choice whether to act on them.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  BIRCH asked  if these  are just  suggestions from                                                               
some members of the subcommittee.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  answered that  they specifically  came from                                                               
the House  Finance Committee's Subcommittee  on DOA.   He offered                                                               
that the introduction  of HB 400 [which relates to  fees for fire                                                               
prevention measures], resulted from  recommendations of the House                                                               
Finance  Committee's Subcommittee  on  the  Department of  Public                                                               
Safety (DPS).   He  maintained that  some of  these ideas  can be                                                               
rolled into  a committee bill and  be acted upon; however,  it is                                                               
at the discretion of the committee.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
4:24:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP  explained that in the  finance subcommittee                                                               
process,  one of  the  conversations was  about  expenses of  the                                                               
state,  but it  also  addressed [lost]  revenue called  "indirect                                                               
expenditures"  due  to  subsidies,  waivers,  or  exemptions  for                                                               
something for which  the state would typically charge a  fee.  He                                                               
maintained that  the process of looking  at indirect expenditures                                                               
is  to determine  if they  are being  utilized, if  the state  is                                                               
being too generous  with them, and whether  they should continue.                                                               
He added  that HB 91,  also referred  to as the  "lobbyist bill,"                                                               
addresses the recommendations for generating revenues for APOC.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS concurred.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
4:25:23 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
HEATHER  HEBDON,   Executive  Director,  Alaska   Public  Offices                                                               
Commission  (APOC),  stated  that  APOC  is  in  support  of  the                                                               
statutory  recommendations, which  would  alleviate  some of  the                                                               
heavy workload due to staff reduction.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
4:26:06 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  IVY referred  to the  second page  of the  handout, entitled                                                               
"Statutory  Recommendations   from  DOA   Finance  Subcommittee:"                                                               
included  in the  committee  packet, to  describe  the third  and                                                               
fourth recommendations,  which relate to  DMV.  She  relayed that                                                               
the third  recommendation is to  amend AS 18.65.310(g)  to change                                                               
eligibility  for  identification (ID)  card  fee  waiver from  60                                                               
years  of age  and older  to  65 years  of  age and  older.   She                                                               
explained  that it  currently is  a $15  waiver.   She said  that                                                               
making this change would make  the age for this waiver consistent                                                               
with the  other DMV  related waiver -  the $100  registration fee                                                               
waiver  - specified  in  AS  28.10.411(f).   She  added that  the                                                               
Legislative Finance Division (LFD) supported this change.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:28:08 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHERI  LOWENSTEIN, Director,  Division of  Administrative Service                                                               
(DAS),  Department  of  Administration  (DOA),  relayed  that  by                                                               
establishing the $15 waiver at age  65 instead of 60, there would                                                               
be approximately  11,925 ID  cards that would  not be  waived for                                                               
the  next  five   years,  which  would  amount   to  $178,875  in                                                               
additional revenue to the state.                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS.  IVY stated  that the  fourth recommendation  is to  amend AS                                                               
28.10.421(d)  to  increase  the   vehicle  registration  fee  for                                                               
municipal governments  and charitable  organizations from  $10 to                                                               
$50; under  the current waiver, they  pay $10 - a  $90 deduction.                                                               
She added that there are many users of that exemption.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MS. IVY relayed that the  fourth recommendation includes also the                                                               
repeal  of  AS 28.10.481(i),  which  would  remove the  $100  per                                                               
vehicle exemption for those with amateur mobile radios.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  referred to the 5,543  vehicles mentioned in                                                               
the handout as the number of  vehicles for which the discount was                                                               
used.  He asked Ms. Ivy if she  has a breakdown of the vehicles -                                                               
municipal versus charitable.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  IVY replied  that  she did  not have  that  breakdown.   She                                                               
mentioned that the  numbers on the handout are  directly from the                                                               
closeout  report from  the House  DOA budget  subcommittee.   She                                                               
said  that  she  has  since  learned that  the  total  number  of                                                               
vehicles in  FY 17 for  which the  exemption was used  was 9,008,                                                               
but it was for a period of over two years.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MS. LOWENSTEIN responded  that she did not have  the breakdown of                                                               
vehicles  receiving   the  exemption   but  would   provide  that                                                               
information.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:31:25 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL  referred to  the  $498,870  in lost  annual                                                               
revenue incurred by  the $90 discount per vehicle,  stated on the                                                               
handout,  and  said  that  by  reducing the  discount  to  a  $50                                                               
discount, DMV will not recoup  the full half a million [dollars].                                                               
He asked if Ms. Ivy had the revised revenue amounts.                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MS. IVY  answered that she has  calculated the FY 15  savings; an                                                               
additional $40  per vehicle  would have  resulted in  $221,720 in                                                               
additional revenue.   She stated that  these recommendations were                                                               
passed  via  the  amendment  process  in  the  House  DOA  budget                                                               
subcommittee.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS clarified  by saying  that eliminating  the                                                               
exemption  entirely  would result  in  about  half of  a  million                                                               
dollars in  savings; changing the  exemption to $50  would result                                                               
in about quarter of a million dollars in savings.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS. IVY concurred.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
4:33:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS stated  that the  recommendations from  the                                                               
House  Finance  Committee's  Subcommittee on  the  University  of                                                               
Alaska (UA) ("House UA budget  subcommittee") would be presented,                                                               
which  relates  to  the   Alaska  "Washington,  Wyoming,  Alaska,                                                               
Montana, and Idaho" (WWAMI) Program.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
4:33:47 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
GREG SMITH, Staff, Representative  Gabrielle LeDoux, Alaska State                                                               
Legislature,  referred to  the  handout,  entitled "2018  Session                                                               
Operating  Budget Statutory  Change Proposal,"  and reviewed  the                                                               
recommendations of  the House UA  budget subcommittee  related to                                                               
the WWAMI  Program.   He relayed  that the  recommended statutory                                                               
change would  impact AS 14.43.510(a); currently  students that do                                                               
not return  to the state  pay 50  percent of the  state financial                                                               
assistance; under  the proposal,  students would pay  100 percent                                                               
of the  state assistance.   He explained that  currently students                                                               
pay 50  percent of what can  be $150,000 state share,  if they do                                                               
not return  to practice in  the state.   He expressed  his belief                                                               
that they  must also pay 100  percent if they don't  complete the                                                               
schooling.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. SMITH stated  that he has heard that  graduates not returning                                                               
to the state  pay about $400,000 annually;  however, he expressed                                                               
his belief that  even with doubling the  percentage of repayment,                                                               
the amount to be paid would not double due to "behavior change."                                                                
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS asked  for a  restatement of  the statutory                                                               
recommendation.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. SMITH  stated that  the purpose of  the recommendation  is to                                                               
increase the amount that a WWAMI  student, who does not return to                                                               
the state, must pay from 50 percent to 100 percent.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS  asked  what   the  fiscal  impact  of  the                                                               
proposed change would be.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. SMITH referred to page  51 of the Indirect Expenditure Report                                                               
[January 2017, LFD],  included in the committee  packet, and said                                                               
that  the   estimated  revenue  impact   stated  in   the  report                                                               
represents the  total loan forgiveness  for WWAMI  graduates; for                                                               
those students  returning to  Alaska, a  percentage of  the state                                                               
assistance [owed] is removed every  year depending on the student                                                               
being in  a rural  or urban  setting.  He  said that  the amounts                                                               
shown on  the report account  for that adjustment.   He expressed                                                               
his  belief that  doubling the  percentage owed  by non-returning                                                               
WWAMI  students  would not  result  in  the state  recouping  the                                                               
approximately $1.5 million  in estimated revenue for  FY 15 shown                                                               
on the  report [page  51(8)].   He said  that WWAMI  students not                                                               
returning to  the state are  currently paying about  $400,000 per                                                               
year;  with the  repayment at  100 percent,  the amount  would be                                                               
close to $800,000;  however, the question is,  "Would some return                                                               
if the full amount was being required?"                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
4:37:43 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS  asked  for  the estimated  impact  of  the                                                               
statutory change.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
4:37:55 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ALEXEI  PAINTER,  Fiscal  Analyst, Legislative  Finance  Division                                                               
(LFD),  Legislative  Affairs  Agency  (LAA),  answered  that  the                                                               
estimate  would have  to be  determined  via a  fiscal note;  the                                                               
behavioral  change is  difficult  to estimate.    He stated  that                                                               
currently students  are awarded "forgiveness" based  on the years                                                               
that  they  practice  medicine   in  Alaska;  therefore,  if  the                                                               
benefits of  doing that are  significantly larger,  more students                                                               
would do  that.   He maintained  that it  would be  misleading to                                                               
assume  that the  state would  "capture" all  those savings.   He                                                               
said that the $400,000 figure  is the current amount of repayment                                                               
going into the general fund  (GF); it represents the repayment of                                                               
students not returning  to the state.  He added  that the size of                                                               
WWAMI was increased  in 2007 from 10 students to  20 students per                                                               
year;  therefore, there  should be  larger classes  and a  larger                                                               
impact over time.   The impact would have to  be determined via a                                                               
fiscal  note.   The numbers  in the  report are  from FY  15, and                                                               
therefore, outdated.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
4:39:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  BIRCH  stated  that   he  is  uneasy  about  this                                                               
recommended  change.   Alaska has  no law  school and  no medical                                                               
program, and  the WWAMI  Program has had  a [positive]  impact on                                                               
UA.  He maintained that he  would like input from UA to determine                                                               
if  the  proposed change  would  compromise  a program  that  has                                                               
worked very  well.  He asked  if UA has been  contacted regarding                                                               
the proposal.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  answered that the recommendation  came from                                                               
the   House  Finance   Committee's   Subcommittee   on  UA,   and                                                               
Representative LeDoux offered the amendment.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH asked  for the genesis of the  proposal.  He                                                               
opined that it is not a good idea  and asked if the sponsor has a                                                               
specific reason for proposing it.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE KNOPP  expressed his understanding that  the WWAMI                                                               
Program  offers  students a  loan  to  attend Western  Washington                                                               
University (WWU); currently if the  students do not return to the                                                               
state,  they  must  repay  50  percent of  the  loan;  under  the                                                               
amendment, they  would be  required to repay  100 percent  of the                                                               
loan.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR.  PAINTER  explained  that  through  the  WWAMI  Program,  the                                                               
students pay tuition  at an in-state rate; all the  states in the                                                               
program  pay  a  cost  per  student as  a  member  of  the  WWAMI                                                               
cooperative.   He continued  by saying that  the State  of Alaska                                                               
considers half of the cost to be  a loan, and that loan is repaid                                                               
by  the  students  unless  they return  to  Alaska  and  practice                                                               
medicine for three  years in rural Alaska or five  years in urban                                                               
Alaska.  He stated that the  other half of the cost is considered                                                               
a subsidy and  is not repaid.  He summarized  that the payment is                                                               
structured as a loan but is  really a subsidy for which the state                                                               
requires a partial payback.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KNOPP  offered  that the  proposed  change  would                                                               
eliminate the subsidy if the student does not return.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. PAINTER  replied, "That is  correct."   He said that  part of                                                               
the reason LFD recommended a  review rather than made an outright                                                               
recommendation   is  because   it  would   constitute  a   strong                                                               
disincentive to join the WWAMI Program  due to the cost being too                                                               
high.  He  maintained that LFD does  not know if that  is true or                                                               
not.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KNOPP asked,  "Why would  we care  what the  cost                                                               
is?"   He said that the  program was an incentive  program to get                                                               
students  to return  and practice  in the  state and  asked, "Why                                                               
would we pay, if there's no benefit to us?"                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
4:44:10 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   WOOL  clarified   that   the  program   includes                                                               
Washington, Wyoming,  Alaska, Montana, and Idaho.   He reiterated                                                               
that  students   pay  in-state   State  of   Washington  tuition;                                                               
therefore, is not  a "free ride" on tuition.   The cost to Alaska                                                               
is the  cost of  joining WWAMI  so that Alaska  does not  have to                                                               
build  a  medical  school  or create  an  entire  medical  school                                                               
program.    It represents an  additional cost; the fee  would not                                                               
even exist  if the  student attended  the University  of Colorado                                                               
Medical  School, because  there would  be  no state  buy-in.   He                                                               
referred to page 51 of  the Indirect Expenditure Report and cited                                                               
the  amount of  estimated annual  monetary benefit  to recipients                                                               
shown  in  (2)  of  the section  entitled,  "Legislative  Finance                                                               
Analysis per AS  24.20.235," which reports the  amount of $8,641.                                                               
He  asked  for the  cost  per  student  that  Alaska pays  to  be                                                               
included in the WWAMI cooperative.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR. PAINTER replied  that he does not know the  cost per student;                                                               
however, the approximate  cost of the WWAMI Program  to the State                                                               
of Alaska is $3 million; there  are 20 students in each class; it                                                               
is a three-year program, which  calculates to roughly $50,000 per                                                               
student.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  asked what  the "$8,600"  amount represents.                                                               
He asked if it  is the annual payment of a loan  that is paid off                                                               
in 20 years, or if it is  the amount incurred every year while in                                                               
school.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MR. PAINTER  responded that  $8,641 is  the amount  per recipient                                                               
lifetime per  year.   He explained that  if a  student graduates,                                                               
has  a reduced  cost, and  holds the  loan for  many years,  that                                                               
amount represents  the benefit  per year  that the  student holds                                                               
the loan;  there are  183 people  identified holding  these loans                                                               
and the total cost is divided by 183.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  asked for confirmation that  the loan period                                                               
is not a  set number of years; therefore, the  amount owed by the                                                               
student is not known upon graduation.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. PAINTER agreed that he does not know that amount.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  referred to Representative  Knopp's comment:                                                               
Why should  we care?   Why should we  give them any  incentive if                                                               
they're  not  going to  come  back?   He  asked  if  he could  be                                                               
provided with  the difference in  economic impacts for  an Alaska                                                               
student who chooses the WWAMI  Program and most likely returns to                                                               
Alaska,  or for  one who  goes to  Colorado and  doesn't know  if                                                               
he/she will return.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR. PAINTER replied that it is  a discussion for the committee to                                                               
have.  The recommendation was based  on data from FY 15; the cost                                                               
of medical  school has changed  since then; and  the subcommittee                                                               
did not  want to make  a recommendation  that would not  stand up                                                               
over time.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS asked  that the  amounts be  calculated for                                                               
the current fiscal year [FY 18].                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. PAINTER answered that the  figures could be updated; however,                                                               
LFD is not equipped to compare the costs of medical schools.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:48:59 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  BIRCH asked,  "How  much discussion  has gone  on                                                               
between ...  the sponsor of  this proposal and the  University of                                                               
Washington (UW)  or UA or  whoever is ... coordinating  the WWAMI                                                               
Program?"   He  maintained that  there is  great cost  associated                                                               
with starting  a medical school;  Alaska does not have  a medical                                                               
school; and the program has provided Alaska with physicians.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
4:49:57 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MILES BAKER,  Associate Vice  President of  Government Relations,                                                               
University of Alaska (UA), relayed  that the statutory change was                                                               
a recommendation  from the House  UA budget subcommittee;  it was                                                               
not a  recommendation put forward  by UA.   He stated  that there                                                               
have  been many  questions from  legislators this  year regarding                                                               
the  WWAMI Program;  UA has  provided legislators  information in                                                               
response to those questions.  He  offered that the program can be                                                               
complicated:  it is operated by the  UW on behalf of the State of                                                               
Alaska to  allow the state  to be part  of a medical  school; the                                                               
agreement  is  among  the   Alaska  Commission  on  Postsecondary                                                               
Education (ACPE), UW,  and UA.  He relayed that  the state pays a                                                               
fee to  be in the WWAMI  coalition; if a student  does not adhere                                                               
to  the obligation  of serving  in Alaska,  some of  that fee  is                                                               
recouped through an  agreement between ACPE and the  student.  He                                                               
suggested  that  the  committee hear  from  Jane  Shelby,  Ph.D.,                                                               
Director  of  the Alaska  WWAMI  Program,  and Stephanie  Butler,                                                               
Executive Director of ACPE.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  BIRCH  expressed  his interest  in  hearing  from                                                               
people  involved  with  the  WWAMI Program  to  ensure  that  the                                                               
program is not comprised.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
4:53:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KNOPP  expressed  his understanding  that  Alaska                                                               
pays  a fee  for its  students to  participate under  an in-state                                                               
resident  rate; the  fee  Alaska pays  compensates  for the  non-                                                               
resident rate; the  students do, however, pay tuition.   He asked                                                               
for clarification on  the amount that is forgiven  and the amount                                                               
required to be repaid.  He said,  "Is it simply ... if they don't                                                               
return to the  state to practice, they have to  pay 50 percent of                                                               
what  the state  paid to  the organization  for the  non-resident                                                               
rate or  for participation in  the program,  or is part  of their                                                               
tuition's student  loans being forgiven  as well?"   He expressed                                                               
that he  would like  to know  what Alaska  is requesting  to have                                                               
repaid.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MR.  BAKER  responded  that the  WWAMI  Program  was  statutorily                                                               
created  by  the legislature,  because  Alaska  does not  have  a                                                               
medical school.   He maintained  that there are huge  benefits to                                                               
having  a  medical  school,   including  Alaskan  trained  Alaska                                                               
physicians.  The  state has agreed to pay a  fee to subsidize the                                                               
medical  school and  the twenty  slots  that Alaska  gets at  the                                                               
medical school annually.  Alaska  students compete to be accepted                                                               
to one of  the best medical schools  in the country.   They pay a                                                               
tuition;  however, because  Alaska is  in the  WWAMI cooperative,                                                               
the students  pay tuition at  a resident rate.   He said  that as                                                               
the program has  developed over the years, much  of the student's                                                               
training can be done in Alaska.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. BAKER  stated that the "fee"  that is being discussed  is the                                                               
fee that Alaska  pays to be in the coalition;  the fee becomes an                                                               
obligation to  the student,  when the student  does not  agree to                                                               
return to Alaska  to practice either three years  in rural Alaska                                                               
or five years in urban Alaska.   If a student serves part of that                                                               
time, the  50 percent fee obligation  is prorated.  He  said that                                                               
the fee  is really  the cost  to the  State of  Alaska to  have a                                                               
medical school  through UW; the  20 students are  benefiting from                                                               
that  agreement.    He  emphasized  that  the  benefit  does  not                                                               
represent  a  scholarship  or  the  state  paying  the  student's                                                               
tuition;  it  is  the  State  of   Alaska's  fee  to  be  in  the                                                               
cooperative.   If  the students  to not  follow through  with the                                                               
signed  commitment  to  return  to  Alaska  to  practice  for  an                                                               
extended  period,  then   a  portion  of  that   fee  becomes  an                                                               
obligation of the student.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
4:58:14 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL asked  whether  a  Washington resident,  who                                                               
lives  in Washington  and attends  the UA  Medical School,  would                                                               
have the additional "membership" fee or  if that fee is unique to                                                               
students from the other WWAMI states.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. BAKER  replied that for the  students from the states  in the                                                               
coalition,  there  is  reciprocity  in terms  of  practicums  and                                                               
residencies, which can be done in  any of those states during the                                                               
time the  students are in the  program.  He said  that each state                                                               
has a  different arrangement  with UW in  terms of  fee structure                                                               
and whether it is built into the tuition.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL  asked  for  the  actual  fee  assessed  per                                                               
student under the WWAMI Program  - either for the total schooling                                                               
or annually.   He added that  the fee being discussed  is the fee                                                               
that  alleviates  Alaska from  having  to  build and  maintain  a                                                               
medical school.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. BAKER responded  that the fee for Alaska is  $50,000 per year                                                               
per student during the second, third,  and fourth years.  He said                                                               
that 50  percent of  that would  be $25,000,  and over  the three                                                               
years would total about $70,000;  this is the potential repayment                                                               
amount for a student not  meeting the obligations of the program,                                                               
plus interest.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL confirmed that  the amount does not represent                                                               
tuition but the fee for Alaska being in the coalition.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
5:01:32 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX suggested  that  there are  states in  the                                                               
WWAMI coalition that have medical schools - Oregon being one.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR. BAKER confirmed that Oregon was not one of the WWAMI states.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked whether  the other three WWAMI states                                                               
have medical schools.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. BAKER answered that he did not know.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  asked  whether  UW is  the  only  medical                                                               
school that Alaska sends students to under the WWAMI Program.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR. BAKER concurred.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  offered to invite  WWAMI staff to  a future                                                               
committee hearing.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR. BAKER asserted that he  would provide information about other                                                               
WWAMI states having medical schools.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
5:03:40 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS stated  that the  recommendations from  the                                                               
House  Finance  Committee's  Subcommittee on  the  Department  of                                                               
Revenue  (DOR) ("House  Revenue  budget  subcommittee") would  be                                                               
presented.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
5:04:12 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. PAINTER  relayed that the  House Revenue  budget subcommittee                                                               
originally recommended  that the exemption from  studded tire fee                                                               
or lightweight  studs continue.   Currently a  $5 fee  is charged                                                               
upon purchase  of a studded  tire, because they create  more wear                                                               
on the road.   Since the fee  is too low to  dissuade people from                                                               
purchasing studded tires, SB 50  has been introduced to raise the                                                               
fee to $50 per  tire and to change the weight  under which a stud                                                               
can qualify  as "lightweight"  from 1.1  grams to  .5 grams.   He                                                               
concluded  by  saying  that  the   recommendation  was  that  the                                                               
lightweight  stud exemption  be continued,  and the  studded tire                                                               
fee be reviewed.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
5:05:37 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH stated that he loves his studded tires.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KNOPP   relayed  that   he  would  not   want  to                                                               
discourage people from  using studded tires; he  does not support                                                               
an  increased fee.   He  expressed his  belief that  at one  time                                                               
there   was   legislation    addressing   steel   studs;   people                                                               
transitioned then to aluminum studs  - the lightweight studs.  He                                                               
asserted  that the  $5  fee was  to apply  to  the heavier  steel                                                               
studs.  He said that SB 50 was a surprise.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE    KNOPP   stated    that   the    Department   of                                                               
Transportation  &   Public  Facilities  (DOT&PF)   personnel  has                                                               
mentioned  the use  of  a  softer, more  pliable  asphalt mix  to                                                               
address contraction  and expansion  [of roadways].   He suggested                                                               
that  the asphalt  may be  too soft,  causing the  excessive wear                                                               
from tires.   He suggested that consideration be  included in the                                                               
conversation.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL clarified that the  weight of a stud in grams                                                               
refers to steel versus  aluminum and not the size of  a stud.  He                                                               
maintained that a $50  tax on a $90 or $100  tire is punitive and                                                               
ridiculous.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
5:07:54 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS stated  that the  second recommendation  of                                                               
the  House Revenue  budget subcommittee  relates to  recreational                                                               
vehicle (RV) rental tax.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
5:08:05 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. PAINTER  relayed that the  House Revenue  budget subcommittee                                                               
recommended  reconsidering the  rate of  the RV  tax.   He stated                                                               
that  when the  legislature  enacted the  vehicle  rental tax  15                                                               
years ago,  there was concern that  RVs, which cost more  per day                                                               
to rent,  would face a  very high  tax at 10  percent; therefore,                                                               
they  were taxed  at 3  percent, which  was considered  a roughly                                                               
equivalent  per  vehicle  per  day   cost.    He  said  that  the                                                               
recommendation is  for the legislature  to review the  statute to                                                               
determine if the rate is still appropriate.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  asked to be provided  with the undiscounted                                                               
vehicle rental tax rate and the indirect expenditure impact.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. PAINTER answered  that the normal rate is 10  percent and the                                                               
rate for RVs is 3 percent.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH expressed  that he believes the  ratio to be                                                               
appropriate; a car can be rented  for $20 per day and a motorhome                                                               
for $60-$100 per day.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  suggested that renting  an RV from  a rental                                                               
company is  more in the  $200-$225 range; through 1-800-RV  it is                                                               
about $200, depending  on the size.  The rental  cost for a sport                                                               
utility vehicle (SUV) is more like $70-$80 per day.                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  asked how  the taxes  on RVs  compare with                                                               
hotel taxes.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. PAINTER  offered his  belief that  hotel taxes  are municipal                                                               
taxes.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked for the municipal hotel tax ranges.                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MR. PAINTER replied that it varies greatly by community.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  asked for the  rationale for the  tax rate                                                               
being only 3 percent for RVs and 10 percent for cars.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. PAINTER relayed that he  reviewed the legislative hearings on                                                               
the  legislation  creating  the  3   percent  tax  for  RVs;  the                                                               
discussion  was centered  around  ensuring that  RV rentals  were                                                               
charged  the same  tax as  cars even  though RVs  were much  more                                                               
expensive.   He mentioned that  the RV  rental costs at  the time                                                               
were much  lower than they are  today.  The intention  of the tax                                                               
was to generate money to  support tourism; therefore, per visitor                                                               
was more important than per vehicle to create parity.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  commented  that   if  the  tax  were  per                                                               
visitor, the  tax on  an RV  rental would  be greater  because it                                                               
holds more people.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
MR.  PAINTER maintained  that the  intent  was to  make the  cost                                                               
roughly  equal  per vehicle  regardless  of  vehicle type.    The                                                               
easiest way to do  that would have been to charge  a set cost per                                                               
vehicle, but it was not done that way.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
            HB 400-FEES FOR FIRE PREVENTION MEASURES                                                                        
                                                                                                                              
5:13:22 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  announced that the final  order of business                                                               
would be HOUSE  BILL NO. 400, "An Act relating  to the collection                                                               
of  fees  by  the  Department  of  Public  Safety  for  fire  and                                                               
explosion prevention and safety services."                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
[Because of  their length, some  amendments discussed  or adopted                                                               
during the  meeting are  found at  the end of  the minutes  of HB                                                               
400.  Shorter amendments are included in the main text.]                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS referred  to the  forthcoming Amendment  2,                                                               
labeled  30-LS1490\A.2, Bannister,  3/13/18,  which  read:   [The                                                               
text of Amendment  2 is listed at the end  of the 3/13/18 minutes                                                               
of HB 400.]                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
5:14:00 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
DAVID TYLER, Director  State Fire Marshall, Division  of Fire and                                                               
Life Safety  (DFLS), Department of  Public Safety  (DPS), relayed                                                               
that  his  staff suggested  that  DFLS  use the  "fix-it  ticket"                                                               
concept.  [Testimony was suspended due to audio difficulties.]                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
5:15:39 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
LLOYD NAKANO, Assistant State Fire  Marshal, Division of Fire and                                                               
Life Safety  (DFLS), Department of  Public Safety  (DPS), relayed                                                               
that he  is unable to describe  the amendment because he  has not                                                               
seen it.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
5:16:07 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CATHY  SCHLINGHEYDE,   Staff,  Representative   Jonathan  Kreiss-                                                               
Tomkins, Alaska State  Legislature, on behalf of  the House State                                                               
Affairs Standing Committee,  prime sponsor of HB  400, noted that                                                               
the forthcoming  Amendment 2 is  a modification of  the amendment                                                               
introduced during  the 3/8/18 committee  hearing on HB 400.   She                                                               
stated that the new amendment  addresses the concern of committee                                                               
members that it  would be unfair to charge for  an inspection and                                                               
immediately issue  a fine for  violations.  Under Amendment  2, a                                                               
correctable citation  would be issued, called  a "fix-it ticket";                                                               
this would be  like being ticketed for driving  without a license                                                               
and given the option of paying  the ticket or showing the court a                                                               
copy  of  the driver's  license  to  allowing  the ticket  to  be                                                               
waived.  She  maintained that Amendment 2 would  utilize the same                                                               
scheme:   if a  person is  cited for a  fire code  violation upon                                                               
inspection, the  person would  have 30 days  to provide  DPS with                                                               
proof that  the problem was corrected  and that he/she is  now in                                                               
compliance with  the fire code.   Subsequently, DPS  will contact                                                               
the  court and  waive the  ticket.   She referred  to Section  3,                                                               
subsection (k), on page 2 of the amendment, lines 23-29.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MS.  SCHLINGHEYDE  addressed  the   concern  that  DPS  would  be                                                               
motivated to impose fines to put  money into the DPS budget.  She                                                               
explained  that  the  amendment  is written  so  that  the  money                                                               
generated by  the fines go to  the Alaska Court System  (ACS) and                                                               
ultimately to the  general fund (GF) and would  not be designated                                                               
for DPS.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL  expressed his appreciation with  the changes                                                               
to the amendment.  He stated  that he is still concerned with the                                                               
fine levied  per day  of noncompliance and  asked how  that would                                                               
coordinate with  the 30  days.   He maintained  that for  a small                                                               
operator, a  "per day"  fine may  be severe.   He stated  that he                                                               
supports  giving the  fire  marshal and  fire  safety people  the                                                               
authority to fine to pressure people into compliance.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
5:19:55 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
NANCY MEADE,  General Counsel, Alaska Court  System (ACS), stated                                                               
that ACS's position  on Amendment 2 is neutral;  it would require                                                               
ACS court to  establish a schedule of bail amounts,  as stated in                                                               
Section 3, subsection  (m), on page 3, lines 4-8.   She cited the                                                               
language on page 1, lines 12-14,  which read:  "Each day that the                                                               
violation  or noncompliance  continues  is  a separate  offense."                                                               
She offered that  the provision may impose  a logistical problem:                                                               
when  someone gets  a ticket,  it  is immediately  electronically                                                               
filed with  the court and can  be paid online or  later; however,                                                               
the ticket is for the amount on  the ticket, and ACS would not be                                                               
counting days  and assessing an amount  more than what is  on the                                                               
face of  the ticket.   She suggested that  the language may  be a                                                               
remnant  of when  a violation  was a  Class B  misdemeanor.   She                                                               
maintained that the  wording is not wording that she  has seen in                                                               
conjunction with a citation.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MEADE  continued  by  saying  that  ACS  can  accommodate  a                                                               
procedure   that  involves   people  correcting   violations  and                                                               
demonstrating proof of correction to  DPS, and DPS notifying ACS.                                                               
She stated  that the  "30 days"  is the  same timeframe  that ACS                                                               
allows for people  to pay the citation, before  sending a warning                                                               
letter.    She  maintained  that shortening  the  period  in  the                                                               
amendment would  allow ASC  to avoid  sending warning  letters to                                                               
people who  are correcting their  violations within the  30 days.                                                               
She concluded  that ACS  can comply with  everything else  in the                                                               
amendment;  there are  some redundancies,  but they  are drafting                                                               
issues.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
5:23:01 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  WOOL  relayed  that  depending  on  the  type  of                                                               
infraction and the  remedy required, 30 days may or  may not be a                                                               
long time.   He suggested  that instead of shortening  the period                                                               
allowing for a correction, the  "fining" process be started after                                                               
the 30  days if no  correction has  been made, which  would avoid                                                               
letters being sent unnecessarily.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS. MEADE  answered that she  does not  know if DPS  could comply                                                               
with that  procedure, since personnel use  hand-held devices that                                                               
perform automated  downloads to ACS  at the end of  their shifts.                                                               
She stated that she is not  certain if they can reverse citations                                                               
written so that the citations are  not filed with ACS.  She added                                                               
that the  warning letter, sent  to a person  who has not  paid or                                                               
responded to a fine, goes out 30  days after a citation and it is                                                               
required  by statute;  the person  must get  a warning  within 30                                                               
days before  ACS can  issue a  default against  the person.   She                                                               
suggested  that the  citation  could be  dismissed  after the  30                                                               
days, if DPS notifies ACS  that the violation has been corrected;                                                               
however, warning letters would have been issued unnecessarily.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
5:25:03 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KNOPP  relayed  that   he  supports  issuing  the                                                               
warning letter  right at 30  days; the person with  the violation                                                               
has 30 days  to correct it and submit the  proof; if that doesn't                                                               
happen  then the  letter serves  as a  reminder and  notifies the                                                               
person  that  penalties  are forthcoming.    He  maintained  that                                                               
smaller violations  could be remedied  in a  few days or  a week;                                                               
violations  regarding larger  commercial  fire extinguishing  and                                                               
retardant systems may take longer.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE BIRCH  expressed that the proposed  legislation is                                                               
a step in right direction.   He asked whether there is a scenario                                                               
under which HB 400 would impose  multiple-day fines.  He asked if                                                               
his understanding is  correct:  the language that "each  day is a                                                               
separate  offense" is  incorrect; an  infraction incurs  only one                                                               
fine  for up  to  $500;  and the  fines  do  not accumulate  over                                                               
multiple days.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS. MEADE responded  that the language with  respect to citations                                                               
is new to her; ACS does  not typically impose fines that way; and                                                               
under HB  400, ACS  would be  setting the fines  for each  of the                                                               
violations  listed in  AS  18.70.   She  reiterated  that in  her                                                               
experience, she  hasn't seen an "escalation"  clause or "rolling"                                                               
clause;  ACS  will  set  the appropriate  fines  and  the  person                                                               
receiving  the fine  will  owe  the dollar  amount  shown on  the                                                               
citation, and  not a multiple of  that fine based on  the days of                                                               
noncompliance.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  BIRCH  suggested  that  the  amendment  could  be                                                               
corrected to reflect that concern.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
5:28:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   LEDOUX  expressed   her  understanding   of  the                                                               
amendment:  if  the person does not correct  the violation within                                                               
the 30-day  period, he/she is  charged up to  $500 per day.   She                                                               
cited  page  1, lines  12-13,  which  read:  "Each day  that  the                                                               
violation or noncompliance continues is a separate offense."                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS.  MEADE  replied  that  she does  not  believe  that  sentence                                                               
belongs in  the proposed legislation  because it  is incompatible                                                               
with ACS establishing  a bail schedule and setting  an amount for                                                               
an offense, that is, one citation with a single dollar amount.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  KREISS-TOMKINS  suggested  that   the  language  could  be                                                               
revised under a new amendment.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE WOOL referred to  DPS downloading citations at the                                                               
end of a  shift using an automated  devise.  He asked  if that is                                                               
the  case for  fire  marshal  inspections.   He  stated that  his                                                               
recollection  is that  upon inspection  of his  business, he  was                                                               
given a hand-written  booklet by a fire  inspection person, which                                                               
is  different than  being stopped  and cited  by an  Alaska State                                                               
Trooper (AST)  on the  highway.   He asked  if fire  marshals use                                                               
handheld automatically downloadable devices.                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. MEADE  answered that her  understanding is that  the proposed                                                               
legislation would be  the first law that gives  fire marshals the                                                               
authority to  issue citations, as  opposed to  charging violators                                                               
with misdemeanors.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
5:30:59 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR. NAKANO  replied that currently  DFLS does not have  a process                                                               
for issuing  citations; however,  if HB 400  passes, it  will use                                                               
the same process  that AST uses, since deputy  fire marshals that                                                               
conduct fire inspections are police  officers.  They will use two                                                               
electronic devises:   one to conduct the fire  inspection and one                                                               
to issue the citations.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KNOPP mentioned  that the  bail amounts  cited on                                                               
page 3, lines 4-8, would be set  by ACS, and the language on page                                                               
1, lines 12-14,  would be "cleaned up" to clear  up the "per day"                                                               
issue.   He  asked  if his  understanding is  correct:   the  set                                                               
dollar amount  is for the citation  and the bail schedule  is for                                                               
the misdemeanor charge.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
MS. MEADE  referred to the language  on page 3, lines  4-8, which                                                               
read:   "The  supreme court  shall establish  a schedule  of bail                                                               
amounts."   She stated  that the  meaning of  the word  "bail" in                                                               
this  context  is  probably  100   percent  different  from  what                                                               
Representative   Knopp  is   expecting  in   terms  of   criminal                                                               
procedures.  She said that it  would be more appropriate to refer                                                               
to  it  as "fine  amounts,"  but  for  historical reasons  it  is                                                               
referred  to  as  "bail  amounts."     She  maintained  that  ACS                                                               
establishes fine schedules;  for example, it does  so for traffic                                                               
violations  and for  Alaska  Department of  Fish  & Game  (ADF&G)                                                               
violations; the  legislature has  directed ACS to  establish fine                                                               
amounts.  She  stated that under HB 400, ACS  would establish the                                                               
fine amounts for all the  offenses listed in AS 18.70.010 through                                                               
AS 18.70.100, and the fines would be $500 or less.                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS  summarized by  saying that  the legislature                                                               
delegates the responsibility of setting the fine amounts to ACS.                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. MEADE concurred.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  KNOPP  asked  whether  fire  marshals  were  more                                                               
suitable  than ACS  for setting  fine amounts  for the  different                                                               
levels of violations.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS. MEADE responded,  "That's right."  She said that  when ACS is                                                               
assigned  this task  by statute,  it exclusively  works with  the                                                               
agency  involved.   She maintained  that  ACS does  not have  the                                                               
expertise  to determine  appropriate fines;  therefore, it  would                                                               
create  the   bail  schedule  in  conjunction   with  the  agency                                                               
involved.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
5:34:50 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MS. SCHLINGHEYDE  offered that the amendment  was written [giving                                                               
ACS the  task of  setting the bail  schedule] because  there were                                                               
concerns about  regular updates  to the fire  code; if  the fines                                                               
were set  in statute,  the legislature would  have to  review the                                                               
statutes  every   year;  if  ACS   sets  the  bail   schedule  in                                                               
conjunction with  DPS, it  can keep abreast  of the  current fire                                                               
codes.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  asked whether ACS revises  these schedules                                                               
on a regular basis.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MS. MEADE answered,  "No and yes."  She said  that ACS is passive                                                               
and  receptive to  requests from  agencies.   She explained  that                                                               
typically ACS  responds to an agency's  request for a fine  to be                                                               
updated;  the  request  becomes  a  project  assigned  to  staff,                                                               
accompanied  by a  series  of meetings  and  preparation for  the                                                               
revision.                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
The  following  amendment  to  HB 400  was  either  discussed  or                                                               
adopted during  the hearing. [Shorter amendments  are provided in                                                               
the main text only.]                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
AMENDMENT 2 [30-LS1490\A.2, Bannister, 3/13/18]                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     Page 1, line 2, following "services;":                                                                                   
          Insert "and relating to penalties for violating                                                                     
     fire protection and safety requirements and orders"                                                                      
                                                                                                                              
     Page 1, following line 9:                                                                                                  
          Insert new bill sections to read:                                                                                     
        "* Sec. 2. AS 18.70.100(a) is amended to read:                                                                      
          (a)  A [EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN (c) OF THIS                                                                         
     SECTION,  A]   person  who  violates  a   provision  of                                                                    
     AS 18.70.010 - 18.70.100 or  a regulation adopted under                                                                    
     those sections,  or who fails  to comply with  an order                                                                    
     issued under  AS 18.70.010 - 18.70.100, is  guilty of a                                                                    
     violation  and   shall  be  punished  as   provided  in                                                                
     AS 12.55  by a  fine of  not more  than $500.  Each day                                                                
     [CLASS  B MISDEMEANOR.  WHEN  NOT OTHERWISE  SPECIFIED,                                                                    
     EACH  10  DAYS]  that the  violation  or  noncompliance                                                                    
     continues is a separate offense.                                                                                           
        *  Sec. 3.  AS 18.70.100  is amended  by adding  new                                                                  
     subsections to read:                                                                                                       
          (d)  A peace officer or an employee of the                                                                            
     department  who is  authorized by  the commissioner  of                                                                    
     public safety  to enforce AS 18.70.010 -  18.70.100 may                                                                    
     issue a  citation to a  person who commits  a violation                                                                    
     identified under this section.                                                                                             
          (e)  A citation issued under this section must                                                                        
     comply with the standards  adopted under AS 12.25.175 -                                                                    
     12.25.230.  A  person  receiving the  citation  is  not                                                                    
     required to sign a promise to appear in court.                                                                             
          (f)  The time specified in the notice to appear                                                                       
     on  a citation  issued under  this section  must be  at                                                                    
     least  35  working  days  after  the  issuance  of  the                                                                    
     citation.                                                                                                                  
          (g)  The commissioner of public safety is                                                                             
     responsible  for  the   issuance  of  books  containing                                                                    
     appropriate citations  and shall  maintain a  record of                                                                    
     each book and each citation  contained in the book. The                                                                    
     commissioner of public safety  shall require and retain                                                                    
     a receipt  for each book  issued to an employee  of the                                                                    
     department  designated by  the  commissioner of  public                                                                    
     safety  to provide  investigative  services to  enforce                                                                    
     provisions of AS 18.70.010 - 18.70.100.                                                                                    
          (h)  On or before the 10th working day after                                                                          
     issuance of a citation, a  peace officer or an employee                                                                    
     issuing  a citation  under this  section shall  deposit                                                                    
     the original  or a  copy of the  citation with  a court                                                                    
     having jurisdiction over the  alleged offense. Upon the                                                                    
     deposit of  the citation  with the court,  the citation                                                                    
     may be disposed of only by  trial in the court or other                                                                    
     official  action taken  by  the  magistrate, judge,  or                                                                    
     prosecutor. The  peace officer  or employee  who issued                                                                    
     the citation may not dispose  of the original or copies                                                                    
     of the  citation or  of the record  of the  issuance of                                                                    
     the citation  except as required under  this subsection                                                                    
     and (i) of this section.                                                                                                   
          (i)  The commissioner of public safety shall                                                                          
     require the  return of a  copy of each  citation issued                                                                    
     under this section  and of the copies  of each citation                                                                    
     that has  been spoiled  or on which  an entry  has been                                                                    
     made  and  not  issued  to  an  alleged  violator.  The                                                                    
     commissioner of  public safety  shall also  maintain in                                                                    
     connection with  each citation issued  a record  of the                                                                    
     disposition of  the charge  by the  court in  which the                                                                    
     original or copy of the citation was deposited.                                                                            
          (j)  A citation issued under this section is                                                                          
     considered to be a lawful  complaint for the purpose of                                                                    
     prosecution.                                                                                                               
          (k)   If a person to whom a citation is issued                                                                        
     under  (d)  of  this  section  provides  proof  to  the                                                                    
     department  within 30  days after  the issuance  of the                                                                    
     citation that  the person  has corrected  the condition                                                                    
     for which the  citation was issued, the  person may not                                                                    
     be  convicted of  the violation.  The department  shall                                                                    
     notify  the court  if the  department,  within 30  days                                                                    
     after   the   issuance   of  the   citation,   receives                                                                    
     sufficient proof  from a person  to whom a  citation is                                                                    
     issued under  (d) of this  section that the  person has                                                                    
     corrected  the condition  for  which  the citation  was                                                                    
     issued.                                                                                                                    
          (l)  Unless the citation has been voided or                                                                           
     otherwise  dismissed  by   the  magistrate,  judge,  or                                                                    
     prosecutor,  or  bail  has been  forfeited  under  this                                                                    
     section,  a person  who  fails to  appear  in court  to                                                                    
     answer   a   citation   issued  under   this   section,                                                                    
     regardless of  the disposition of the  charge for which                                                                    
     the citation was  issued, is guilty of  failure to obey                                                                    
     a citation under AS 12.25.230(b).                                                                                          
          (m)  The supreme court shall establish a schedule                                                                     
     of  bail amounts.  The maximum  bail forfeiture  amount                                                                    
     for  a  violation  may  not  exceed  the  maximum  fine                                                                    
     specified   under  (a)   of  this   section  for   that                                                                    
     violation. The issuing peace  officer or employee shall                                                                    
     write  on the  citation the  amount of  bail forfeiture                                                                    
     applicable to the violation.                                                                                               
          (n)  If a person cited for a violation for which                                                                      
     a  bail forfeiture  amount has  been established  under                                                                    
     (m) of this section does  not contest the citation, the                                                                    
     person  may,  within 30  days  after  the date  of  the                                                                    
     citation, mail  or personally deliver  to the  clerk of                                                                    
     the court in  which the citation is filed  by the peace                                                                    
     officer or employee                                                                                                        
               (1)  the amount of bail indicated on the                                                                         
     citation for that offense; and                                                                                             
               (2)  a copy of the citation indicating that                                                                      
     the  right to  an appearance  is waived,  a plea  of no                                                                    
     contest is entered, and the bail is forfeited.                                                                             
          (o)  When the cited person has forfeited bail                                                                         
     under  (n) of  this section,  the court  shall enter  a                                                                    
     judgment  of  conviction.  Forfeiture   of  bail  is  a                                                                    
     complete satisfaction  for the violation. The  clerk of                                                                    
     the court  accepting the bail forfeiture  shall provide                                                                    
     the  offender  with  a receipt  stating  that  fact  if                                                                    
     requested.                                                                                                                 
          (p)  A person cited under this section is guilty                                                                      
     of failure to obey  a citation under AS 12.25.230(b) if                                                                    
     the  person fails  to pay  the bail  amount established                                                                    
     under (m) of  this section or fails to  appear in court                                                                    
     as required.                                                                                                               
          (q)  Notwithstanding other provisions of law, if                                                                      
     a  person  cited  for  a violation  for  which  a  bail                                                                    
     forfeiture  amount has  been established  under (m)  of                                                                    
     this section appears in court  and is found guilty, the                                                                    
     court  may  not  impose  a  penalty  that  exceeds  the                                                                    
     forfeiture amount for that violation established under                                                                     
     (m) of this section.                                                                                                       
          (r)  In this section, "department" means the                                                                          
     Department of Public Safety."                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     Renumber the following bill section accordingly.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Page 1, following line 13:                                                                                                 
          Insert a new bill section to read:                                                                                    
        "* Sec. 5. AS 18.70.100(c) is repealed."                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
[End of Amendment 1 - HB 400 was held over.]                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
5:37:09 PM                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
There being no further business before the committee, the House                                                                 
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 5:37                                                                  
p.m.                                                                                                                            

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB400 Sponsor Statement 3.7.18.pdf HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/15/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 400
HB400 Sectional Analysis 3.7.18.pdf HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/15/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 400
HB400 ver A 2.28.18.pdf HSTA 3/1/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/15/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 400
HB400 Fiscal Note DPS 3.1.18.pdf HSTA 3/1/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/15/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 400
HB400 Amendment 1 3.7.18.pdf HSTA 3/8/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/15/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 400
HB400 Amendment2 3.13.18.pdf HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/15/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 400
HB325 Sponsor Statement 2.05.18.pdf HSTA 2/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 325
HB325 Sectional Analysis ver A 2.5.2018.pdf HSTA 2/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 325
HB325 ver A 2.05.18.PDF HSTA 2/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 325
HB325 Fiscal Note DOC 2.05.18.PDF HSTA 2/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 325
HB325 Supporting Document-Letter DHSS 2.13.18.pdf HSTA 2/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 325
HB325 Supporting Document testimony, T Eames CCTHITA 2.15.18.pdf HSTA 2/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 325
HB325 Letter of Support- Michelle Overstreet 3.14.18.pdf HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 325
HB 325- Opposing Document- Letter from AACOP 3.30.18.pdf HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM
HB 325
H STA Indirect Expenditure Hearings 3.13.18.pdf HSTA 3/13/2018 3:15:00 PM