Legislature(2015 - 2016)CAPITOL 106
03/31/2015 08:00 AM House 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.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SCR6 | |
| HB160 | |
| HB117 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SCR 6 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 160 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 117 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 31, 2015
8:06 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bob Lynn, Chair
Representative Wes Keller, Vice Chair
Representative David Talerico
Representative Louise Stutes
Representative Max Gruenberg
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
Representative Liz Vazquez
MEMBERS ABSENT
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 6
Proclaiming April 2015 as Sexual Assault Awareness Month.
- MOVED SCR 6 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 160
"An Act relating to the art requirements for certain public
buildings and facilities and to the funding of works of art."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 117
"An Act requiring a report on untested sexual assault
examination kits; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 117(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SCR 6
SHORT TITLE: SEXUAL ASSAULT AWARENESS MONTH:APRIL 2015
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) MEYER
03/02/15 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/02/15 (S) STA
03/10/15 (S) STA AT 8:30 AM BUTROVICH 205
03/10/15 (S) Moved SCR 6 Out of Committee
03/10/15 (S) MINUTE(STA)
03/11/15 (S) STA RPT 5DP
03/11/15 (S) DP: STOLTZE, COGHILL, MCGUIRE,
WIELECHOWSKI, HUGGINS
03/16/15 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/16/15 (S) VERSION: SCR 6
03/18/15 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/18/15 (H) STA
03/31/15 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 160
SHORT TITLE: REPEAL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES REQUIREMENT
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) GATTIS
03/23/15 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/23/15 (H) STA, FIN
03/31/15 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 117
SHORT TITLE: SEXUAL ASSAULT EXAMINATION KITS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) TARR
02/18/15 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/18/15 (H) STA, JUD, FIN
03/26/15 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/26/15 (H) Heard & Held
03/26/15 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/31/15 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
EDNA MORELAND, Staff
Senator Kevin Meyer
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented SCR 6 on behalf of Senator Meyer,
prime sponsor.
PEGGY BROWN, Executive Director
Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified and answered questions during the
hearing on SCR 6.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN GATTIS
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented CSHB 160 as prime sponsor.
ENZINA MARRARI, Curator
Public Arts Program
Municipality of Anchorage
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition during the hearing
on CSHB 160.
SHANNON DAUT, Executive Director
Alaska State Council on the Arts
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition during the hearing
on CSHB 160.
ANNE COATES McGRATH
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition during the hearing
on HB 160.
KESLER WOODWARD
Vice Chair
Alaska State Council on the Arts
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition during the hearing
on CSHB 160.
JUNE ROGERS, Executive Director
Fairbanks Arts Association
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition during the hearing
on CSHB 160.
NANCY DeCHERNEY, Executive Director
Juneau Arts & Humanities Council
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition during the hearing
on CSHB 160.
REPRESENTATIVE GARRAN TARR
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented CSHB 117 as prime sponsor.
RAY FRIEDLANDER, Staff
Representative Gerran Tarr
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed changes in HB 117, Version E, on
behalf of Representative Tarr, prime sponsor.
ORIN DYM, Forensic Laboratory Manager
Alaska Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory
Department of Public Safety
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on
CSHB 117.
DEAN WILLIAMS, Special Assistant
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Public Safety
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
117.
JESSICA CLER, Manager
Alaska Public Affairs
Planned Parenthood Votes Northwest
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on CSHB 117, testified
in support.
NANCY PORTO
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on CSHB 117, testified
in support.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:06:33 AM
CHAIR BOB LYNN called the House State Affairs Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:06 a.m. Representatives Keller, Kreiss-
Tomkins, Stutes, Talerico, and Lynn were present at the call to
order. Representatives Gruenberg and Vazquez arrived as the
meeting was in progress.
SCR 6-SEXUAL ASSAULT AWARENESS MONTH:APRIL 2015
8:07:13 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the first order of business would be
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 6, Proclaiming April 2015 as
Sexual Assault Awareness Month.
8:07:33 AM
EDNA MORELAND, Staff, Senator Kevin Meyer, Alaska State
Legislature, explained that SCR 6 proclaims April 2015 as sexual
assault awareness month which is an annual campaign to raise
public awareness and educate communities and individuals on how
to prevent sexual assault violence across the nation. She
described sexual assault violence as a serious public health
problem affecting one in five women, and one in seventy-one men
in their lifetime. However, in Alaska, the rates are
approximately two and one-half times the national average and,
she noted, statistics do not [accurately] represent the problems
as often victims do not report the violence to the police.
Sexual assault violence can lead to long term physical and
mental health problems; therefore, she pointed out that bringing
awareness to the crime of sexual assault and recognizing the
enormity of the problem can be properly addressed and prevented
by lifting the veil of secrecy hiding these horrific crimes.
8:09:51 AM
PEGGY BROWN, Executive Director, Alaska Network on Domestic
Violence and Sexual Assault, advised that the Alaska Network on
Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault is comprised of
approximately 20 victim service agencies throughout the state.
Sexual assault and sexual abuse of minors is a problem in Alaska
and, she acknowledged there are many people performing good work
in assisting victims and survivors.
CHAIR LYNN asked Ms. Brown to describe two to three hurdles in
reducing sexual violence, and where to start in that people may
be reluctant to report the violence.
MS. BROWN emphasized "prevention, prevention, prevention," in
that sexual assault violence prevention education must be
present in every area that male and female children and/or young
adults reside and [the legislature] should review the criminal
arena for improvement. She pointed out that in 2012 there were
804 reported cases of sexual assault and of those 804, 8 percent
resulted in some type of correction, which sends the message
"why should I report." She said she has asked attorneys in the
legal system, Department of law attorneys, and paralegals,
should they be sexually assaulted would they report, and eight
out of ten said "No, because they just don't want to have to go
through the long process."
8:12:37 AM
CHAIR LYNN interjected "where the victim gets victimized twice."
MS. BROWN agreed, and related that people want to move on even
though they want the "bad guy" caught. She suggested shortening
the time a criminal case is addressed, and truly investing in
prevention work for sexual violence. She noted there has been a
slow reduction in teen sexual violence within the past five
years.
CHAIR LYNN closed public testimony after ascertaining no one
further wished to testify.
8:14:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report SCR 6 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes. There being no objection, SCR 6 was reported from the
House State Affairs Standing Committee.
HB 160-REPEAL ART IN PUBLIC PLACES REQUIREMENT
8:14:26 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the next of business would be HOUSE
BILL NO. 160, "An Act relating to the art requirements for
certain public buildings and facilities and to the funding of
works of art."
8:14:45 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt proposed committee
substitute for HB 160, labeled 29-LS0696\H, as the working
document. There being no objection, Version H was before the
committee.
8:15:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN GATTIS, Alaska State Legislature, said that
between 2004-2013, the Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities, the Department of Education and Early Development,
and the Alaska Court System spent a combined total of $9,129,581
on art programs expenditures. She explained there are two parts
to Version H: enacting a five-year moratorium on one percent
funding for art in public places, July 1, 2015 - July 1, 2020;
enacting a sunset date on the art works in public buildings and
facilities' statute, as well as the art in public place fund.
She pointed out that the original bill did not discuss the
moratorium but the Arts Council requested time in which to
become self-sufficient as it recognized that the goal of the
bill is to no longer fund one percent for arts. She advised
that the compromise of the five-year moratorium is not funding
but allows the Art Council to sell art work and lend art work to
become self-sufficient. She acknowledged that she "read it
backwards," and said Version A repealed all statutes requiring
one percent funding for art in public buildings and facilities,
as well as amending other statutes referencing the one percent
for arts. Version H, she pointed out, changes that requirement
for one percent funding for art in public buildings and
facilities with a five-year moratorium July 1, 2015 - July 1,
2020, it also includes a sunset date on AS 35.27, the art in
public places fund. She advised that the legislature can no
longer afford to offer these nice things, that the legislature
values art and artists, but the state will no longer sponsor
them. She offered hope that the Arts Council will become self-
sufficient.
8:18:50 AM
CHAIR LYNN noted that currently the arts receive one percent and
asked how much money would this put back into the main stream to
be used for other purposes in a time of fiscal shortages.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS responded it would put one percent of the
project ...
CHAIR LYNN restated, in approximate dollars, how much more money
would the state have to spend for other things.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS answered, "I guess ... if you don't have a
project then you don't have any money for that one percent of
that project." She noted that the legislature is considering
not funding capital projects, specifically schools, at this time
and remarked from the schools' standpoint ...
CHAIR LYNN interjected that money not spent on anything will go
back into the general fund to be spent on other necessary items.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS replied that whatever one percent of the
project is, that is how much will be saved.
CHAIR LYNN asked how one qualifies to have a piece of art
displayed.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS responded that it is different in
different places, although, at one time within the Matanuska-
Susitna School District the Wasilla Art Group and the Wasilla
High School Principal chose the art.
CHAIR LYNN surmised that artists submit the art or a description
of the art and someone decides.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS offered the examples of the particular art
program at Wasilla High School, or art being chosen by a school
board, and it can be decided in a different manner within the
same community.
8:21:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO advised he is torn by the fact that the
art, within his involvement with the municipal government, was
created by local artists and Alaska residents, and although
there will be a savings there is also the benefit of allowing
Alaskan artists a market. He said he is struggling with this
bill.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS referred to his comments and stated that
is the reason she compromised with the Arts Council to assist
them in becoming self-sufficient within the next five years.
She put forth that it is not her desire to take away from local
Alaskan artists, but rather to recognize that within these
budgetary times the Arts Council believes it can develop
creative ideas to become self-sufficient.
8:23:55 AM
ENZINA MARRARI, Curator, Public Arts Program, Municipality of
Anchorage, said in the 15 years she has lived in Alaska has
known several individuals who have benefited from the public art
program as they have been awarded opportunities for professional
growth, development, financial sustainability, and exposure both
locally and nationally. Additionally, she said, she has seen
Anchorage and the state benefit from this program by gaining
cultural, social, and economic value. She pointed out that
Alaska was a pioneer in the national movement, such as 8th grade
art work in public buildings and adopting the public arts
statute in 1975. She expressed that losing this legacy would be
a tremendous loss for Alaska and yet would have virtually no
impact on the state's operating or capital budgets.
She pointed out that the City of Anchorage and the State of
Alaska aspire to offer areas people prefer to live and visit and
a strong public art expression offers communities a stronger
sense of place and identity. Therefore, she expressed, public
art reflects community and cultural identities and creates
public investment and pride in the city and state. She
explained that funds from percent for art commissions also
support fabricators, electricians, welders, engineers, and other
skilled workers. According to Americans for the Arts, cities
with an active and dynamic cultural scene are more attractive to
individuals and businesses. She said that public art stimulates
learning about art, environments, inter-connected lives, and the
social sphere as a whole. Investing helps to diversify the
state's art economy through recognition of the roles artists
play as small business owners. Lastly, she advised, HB 160 will
not impact the state's overall operating or capital budgets
because percent for art funds are specifically allocated to
construction budgets and would likely be reallocated to other
construction expenses within each individual project.
CHAIR LYNN advised that the bill is not for or against art, but
is a moratorium on one percent for art.
8:30:50 AM
SHANNON DAUT, Executive Director, Alaska State Council on the
Arts, explained that at the time one percent for art was passed,
the State of Alaska was 16 years old, and a pioneer in the
movement of integrating public art into public buildings.
Thereby, she said, creating a more open and assessable
environment for interaction within public spaces. Through the
years an incredible collection of assets has been developed
reflecting the state's cultural history and, she pointed out,
these assets are the sole part of construction budgets that
appreciates over time. She then discussed the role the program
plays for artists in making a living, improving Alaska's
financial picture, quality of life, and outlined the national
standards that the Alaska State Council on the Arts adheres to
when presenting a commission. She expressed that the council
understands the budget situation and everyone feels like "they
are in this together," but this moratorium would
disproportionally cut the arts and artists, and the percent for
arts program was designed to contract when the capital budget
shrinks, "it's kind of built in, in the cake."
8:35:09 AM
CHAIR LYNN asked for clarification as to whether Ms. Daut stated
"art is part of the eco-system."
MS. DAUT responded that artists must be smart in creating a
career for themselves as independent sole proprietor and within
this eco-system there are a variety of different things that
assists artists in moving forward. She related that it
includes: professional development, gallery sales, gallery
representation, working in schools with children, teaching at
universities or in schools, and that public art is a significant
component of that. Finances are just one piece, as within each
of the projects contractors, fabricators, welders, are hired,
and often artists going through the process of public commission
are able to hone their skills with a greater level of
sophistication in which they approach their businesses. Lastly,
she said, the public art commission can help gain exposure for
artists nationally and internationally.
8:37:31 AM
ANNE COATES McGRATH, Anchorage, Alaska, said she grew up in
Anchorage, is a graphic designer and artist, and that her mother
Pam Coates was very involved in the percent for arts program.
She said the rich culture and environment inspired her to become
an artist, so she traveled to Los Angeles to attend an arts
school for design, and returned to Alaska a few years ago due to
the naturally rich beauty and culturally rich communities. She
related that public art provides access to everyone, and can be
inspirational through its stories in a manner beyond the reach
of common language. It is important to provide children access
to art even though their parents may not be deeply involved, as
some of the children continue on and become artists, architects,
and designers, which impacts the world in positive ways. She
stressed that public art is essential to communities and she
would be disappointed to see the rich cultural element hampered
in any manner.
8:41:29 AM
KESLER WOODWARD, Vice Chair, Alaska State Council on the Arts,
said he is testifying on his own behalf and as the president of
the Alaska Arts and Culture Foundation, not for profit. He
fervently urged the committee not to be lulled into believing
that the five year moratorium will have an effect other than to
kill this highly successful work program, and that the
moratorium will have no positive impact on state budgets. He
pointed out that 40 years ago, when Alaska was a young and
visionary state, Alaska became the third state in the country to
adopt the percent for art law and currently more than half of
the states have thriving programs of this sort. He related that
he has a sense of what Yogi Berra famously called "Déjà vu all
over again," as over the decades legislation has been proposed
several times to repeal this law. The issue of the cost of the
program has been raised over the decades and, he remarked, the
issue was successfully explained in that repeal of this law
would not save the state any money because the statute requires
that one percent of existing "state capital construction
budgets" be used for art in public buildings. He pointed out
that repealing this law will not lower the cost of state
buildings and will only impoverish the "built" environment. He
reminded the committee that it has received compelling
testimonies from councils and artists on these facts, and
reiterated that there is no state funding on top of existing
capital construction budgets.
8:45:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER referred Mr. Woodward and other
testimonies that [repeal] would have absolutely no effect on the
operating or capital budget. He stressed that while he deeply
appreciates the value of art and the enrichment of Alaskans,
there is a portion of state revenue being spent. He opined that
the blanket statement goes too far by declaring it has no
effect.
MR. WOODWARD answered that state building cost what they cost
and allocations are made within the capital construction budget,
and those figures are set. He explained that one percent is not
added on top of that capital construction budget in order to buy
art as that art comes out of that budget the same as "everything
else." It goes for the same things the rest of the construction
budget goes for such as, design, engineering, and outfitting of
those buildings. He said if this one percent was not spent on
art, it would be spent on such things as windows, flooring, and
bathrooms. He offered that a successful case has been made over
the years that eliminating this program won't save any money and
that it is a false belief to think that the building will cost
one percent less, as the building will cost just the same.
8:47:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER commented that he has a construction
background and if there is a one percent requirement on the
cost, assuming this is all operated on a bid system, it does
have an impact on the bids. He referred to Mr. Woodward's
statement that 40 other states have similar programs, and asked
whether they are all state sponsored programs.
MR. WOODWARD clarified that he said just over half of the states
in the country now have a program of this sort, and 26 states
with a percent for arts program mandates that a small percentage
of funding is included for state funded buildings.
8:49:40 AM
CHAIR LYNN passed the gavel to Vice Chair Keller as he had to
leave and present a bill in the Senate State Affairs Standing
Committee. He advised that he supports CSHB 160, and would like
to move it out of committee.
8:50:11 AM
JUNE ROGERS, Executive Director, Fairbanks Arts Association,
expressed concern for CSHB 160, and acknowledged the dire
circumstances before the legislature and is grateful for their
pursuit of budget solutions. However, she said, she cannot
support the advancement of this bill as the economics of budget
decisions do not hold up to scrutiny. Repealing the act would
not bring new dollars to the budget, rather it would be
reallocated to other costs in each individual capital project
budget. She pointed out that when investing state dollars in
public art or enhancements, it is important to understand the
results expected. Artists are a significant segment of a
community's diversity of economics, she described, and their
work is important to the advancement of their own small business
ventures and those of their suppliers. She pointed out that the
appreciation of a piece of art is something to think about, and
questioned which segment of Alaska's economy is expendable.
There are areas of excess in the budget that can and should have
been cut before being compelled to reckon with the current
budget problems, she expressed.
8:53:05 AM
NANCY DeCHERNEY, Executive Director, Juneau Arts & Humanities
Council, referred to the questions regarding whether the state
is saving money by eliminating the percent for art, and advised
that simply because "it is a percentage of something that if
there is no ... a percent of zero is still zero." She opined
that she does not know whether there is an analysis of the
income actually seen from having public art in Alaska's airports
and public buildings, and noted that the Juneau State Capitol
Building is a source of tourist destination having to do with
its history and also the beautiful building with pieces of art.
The business of jobs has come forward and the amount of work
developed by local artists and they are working hard to use the
arts in a creative fashion to make Juneau a center for Northwest
Coast art, she explained. Ms. DeCherney suggested the committee
to not only consider the one percent savings over a period of
time, but to also contemplate what might be lost over a period
of time by not investing art into Alaska's public.
VICE CHAIR KELLER closed public testimony after ascertaining
that no one further wished to testify.
8:55:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered that his step-father was an
artist and his art work appears in San Francisco, and somewhat
in Alaska. He said he has no financial interest in this, but
has a spiritual interest and agrees with those who have weighed
in against this bill.
8:57:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS offered concerns about the bill,
and although he appreciates the intent and motivation of the
sponsor given the current climate, opined that this would be
looking in the wrong direction. He referred to Representative
Talerico's comments in that with one percent for the art there
are very small commissions parceled out to local artists. He
said that not only does this money stay local, it stays "ultra-
local" and continually recirculates creating a huge amount of
activity proportional to the relatively small amount of money
being discussed. In reviewing the economic sense, he described
a huge return for a small investment. He advised that he spoke
with someone in this building regarding the University of Alaska
system who believes the University of Alaska should be the
University for Alaska. He related differences when comparing
the University of Kansas to the University of Alaska in that
various campuses speak to programs such as, arctic engineering,
GEO physics, and cold climate housing research. He then
referred to buildings in Alaska, public schools, and public
facilities and said it is important that the places Alaskans
live and work do not look like buildings in other states. He
said in growing up around Alaska, the one percent for art
effectively differentiated and presented students with a sense
of place and identity, and possibly patriotism for Alaska.
9:00:01 AM
VICE CHAIR KELLER commented that some of the testimony makes it
appear this is a vote for or against art, which puts everyone in
a bad spot. He opined that the question is whether the state
will subsidize art, even though it has been portrayed as not a
subsidy and rather an innocent requirement that one percent
extra be spent on public buildings. He further opined that it
translates out to subsidy.
9:00:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG commented that his former brother-in-
law, a well-known local artist, sculpted the bear across the
street, the bears at DiPac, and will be sculpting the whale. He
related that everyone in Juneau views those sculptures on a
daily basis. He said he will not be offering amendments.
9:02:18 AM
VICE CHAIR KELLER announced HB 160 was held over.
HB 117-SEXUAL ASSAULT EXAMINATION KITS
9:02:29 AM
VICE CHAIR KELLER announced that the last order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 117, "An Act requiring a report on
untested sexual assault examination kits; and providing for an
effective date."
9:03:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STUTES moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 117, Version 29-LS0386\E, Martin,
3/27/15, as the working document. There being no objection,
Version E was before the committee.
9:03:25 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 9:03 a.m. to 9:04 a.m.
9:04:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARRAN TARR, Alaska State Legislature, in
response to Representative Gruenberg, advised that the previous
version was W.
9:06:25 AM
RAY FRIEDLANDER, Staff, Representative Gerran Tarr, Alaska State
Legislature, advised that the changes in Version E include: page
1, line 7, changed date from July 1, 2015 to September 1, 2015;
page 1, line 13, changed date from September to November 1,
2015; page 2, lines 10-16, the definition of "untested sexual
assault kit" was expanded to include the phrase "with evidence"
(line 11) in order to ascertain the audit is specifically for
kits with evidence, as opposed to kits not utilized by local law
enforcement agencies and state departments. In addition to that
change, she said, the sponsor further elaborated on the
definition to include not only kits that have been collected and
not submitted to the lab, but also collected kits that have been
submitted to the lab and not yet processed with DNA or
serological testing. She reiterated this is to ensure that the
audit only includes kits with evidence, and the expansion of the
definition to encompass the crime lab.
9:09:07 AM
VICE CHAIR KELLER requested the history of where the kits
originated as credit is due, and assumed the motivation was that
the kits would be a tool readily available for medical and
enforcement to ensure the rape was properly investigated.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR responded that this idea was brought to her
attention by a national organization working throughout the
country in addressing the backlog of untested rape kits. The
motivation, she offered, is regarding the violent criminals
still on the streets due to untested kits and the DNA results
not entered into a database associating them with rape or
another crime. She expressed surprise that there is not a
uniform protocol for the 150 law enforcement agencies involved
in the process. She described the legislation as an opportunity
to get everyone on the same page, coordinating the work to
ensure a better understanding of what is happening in this
state, and allowing the state to possibly seek additional
resources. She referred to Mr. Orin Dym's testimony during the
previous meeting, who advised that currently there are
approximately 170 untested rape kits at the crime lab and, she
stated, the audit could reveal a process of seeking outside
funds in addressing the backlog. Representative Tarr referred
to Ms. Brown's earlier testimony that it can be difficult for a
victim to participate in the ongoing criminal procedures due to
the length of time taken to process cases, and thereby being re-
victimized on a continual basis by reliving the traumatic event.
9:13:21 AM
VICE CHAIR KELLER stated that the rape kits are different in
every state and are not standardized. Currently, the kits are
available as a voluntary tool and that parts of the kit can be
used [for other incomplete kits] and, he asked whether
Representative Tarr had considered that formalizing the process
may have an unintended consequence. He posed a scenario of
medical staff not using parts of the kit due to the paperwork
imposed.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR advised that there is a standardized process
once a kit is open and medical staff collects evidence. She
related that there is not a standard process as to what happens
next in terms of whether the kit is put on an evidence shelf and
sits there for a long period of time until the case moves
forward, or whether the kit is always sent in for testing. The
audit will identify best practices and provide a more
standardized process and, in the event a piece hindered the
process, she opined that the public safety people are available
to avoid that from happening.
9:15:18 AM
VICE CHAIR KELLER referred to the term "collected" in the bill,
and noted that within the audit process it must be decided
whether or not "collected" means that is it there for evidence,
or whatever. He pointed out that the audit will force things
such as that, and noted the term "collected" is not defined in
the bill and suggested that possibly it should be included,
rather than using it as a lever for reform.
MS. FRIEDLANDER replied, with regard to the term "collected,"
Legislative Legal and Research Service expanded on it with the
phrase "with evidence." She explained it is a kit that has been
collected with evidence.
VICE CHAIR KELLER related that as he read the definition it was
not clear, "with evidence," although, if the definition stopped
there he would understand it. He said that parts 1 and 2
discuss, "that have been collected ... and have been collected
and submitted," and asked whether that language is sufficient.
He offered that possibly it is enough to put it on the record,
and wanted to be sure it was on the table.
9:17:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR advised that Dean Williams, Department of
Public Safety, is available to address Chair Keller's concerns.
VICE CHAIR KELLER restated his question and asked whether a
definition of "collected," is necessary, or whether to define
the nexus between "what is evidence and what is collected."
9:18:06 AM
ORIN DYM, Forensic Laboratory Manager, Alaska Scientific Crime
Detection Laboratory, Department of Public Safety, answered that
with regard to the term "'collected,' once a sexual assault kit
is used for the collection of evidence, I find the meaning
clear" as they are counting kits once the seals are broken and
evidence is collected.
VICE CHAIR KELLER surmised that once the hospital uses a kit it
is automatically evidence as far as Mr. Dym is concerned.
MR. DYM answered correct, in that once it is collected it
becomes evidence.
VICE CHAIR KELLER asked whether that is a new definition here.
He noted, from the previous hearing, there are cases within
enforcement where a piece may have used out of a kit and the
alleged victim decided not to proceed. Therefore, there is
collected evidence that hasn't been processed properly by the
state and, thereby, perhaps exacerbated the problem the
committee is trying to fix, he suggested.
MR. DYM said whether or not a case is prosecuted doesn't change
the fact that it is still evidence, and whether or not it is a
prosecutable cases has no bearing on the fact that it is still
evidence collected from a crime scene.
9:20:04 AM
VICE CHAIR KELLER restated his question, and asked whether
currently there is evidence that is not being considered
evidence because it was not forwarded. He pointed out that if a
piece of the kit is used, that is evidence as far as Mr. Dym is
concerned, which means the Department of Public Safety must keep
the kit and warehouse it forever. He opined that that is not
how the kits are really being used, but he could be wrong.
MR. DYM said he was trying to understand [the question], and
remarked that if a kit is utilized to collect biological
material, that kit is evidence. In the event a partial kit is
utilized, he explained, that is still evidence. Within the
process of identifying kits that have not been submitted to the
laboratory (kits utilized in the collection of evidence) if a
piece of the kit has been utilized in evidence collection and is
removed from the kit that may be difficult to identify, and he
does not have an answer for that question.
VICE CHAIR KELLER asked Mr. Dean Williams whether his
understanding of evidence is correct.
9:22:03 AM
DEAN WILLIAMS, Special Assistant, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Public Safety, responded that from the perspective
of the Department of Public Safety (DPS), the language is clear
in terms of what is being counted. He described it as a good
effort because DPS does not know to what extent there may be a
problem but if there is one, even a small one, DPS should be
aware and develop a plan. He remarked that DPS knows what it is
dealing with in terms of untested kits, and if there is evidence
in a kit there may be a good reason why the kit was not tested,
but DPS should perform a hand count and audit. He said DPS is
supportive of the efforts for these reasons.
9:23:13 AM
VICE CHAIR KELLER surmised that Mr. Williams was discussing the
entire bill, and asked whether he was specifically discussing
the new definition in Version E, Section 1, page 2, lines 10-16,
which read [original punctuation provided]:
(d) In this section, "untested sexual examination
kit" means a sexual assault examination kit with
evidence that
(1) has been collected but that has not been
submitted to a laboratory operated or approved by the
Department of Public Safety for either a serological
or DNA test; or
(2) has been collected and submitted to a
laboratory operated or approved by the Department of
Public Safety but that has not had a serological or
DNA test conducted on the evidence.
MR. WILLIAMS answered that he discussed the changes with
Representative Tarr and is comfortable with the definition and
that DPS has a good sense of what it means.
9:24:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG referred to Section 1, page 2, lines 7-
9, which read [original punctuation provided]:
(c) The Department of Public Safety shall deliver
a copy of the report prepared under (b) of this
section to the senate secretary and the chief clerk of
the house of representatives and notify the
legislature that the report is available.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG pointed out that subsection (c) is not
necessary in that a few additional words included in subsection
(b) would suffice and would eliminate verbiage.
9:24:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR, in response to Chair Keller, stated that
the bill has two additional committee referrals, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee and the House Finance Committee.
VICE CHAIR KELLER noted that he and Representative Gruenberg can
work on the bill within the House Judiciary Standing Committee,
should he choose to move the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested considering an amendment.
VICE CHAIR KELLER opened public testimony.
9:25:13 AM
JESSICA CLER, Manager, Alaska Public Affairs, Planned Parenthood
Votes Northwest, said she is a lifelong resident of Alaska, and
currently lives in Anchorage. She stated she is testifying in
support of CSHB 117, on behalf of the sexual assault survivors
in Alaska awaiting closure and justice. There are approximately
400,000-500,000 untested sexual assault examination kits within
the United States, which not only means that sexual predators
can evade justice and re-offend, but also leaves thousands of
sexual assault survivors without closure. In a state with
tragically high sexual assault rape numbers it is crucial that
all rape kits are collected, submitted, and tested within a
timely manner. She highlighted that CSHB 117 begins the process
of addressing the backlog because the state needs to know the
number of kits sitting on shelves waiting for analysis. She
pointed out that this bill gives law enforcement and the public
the information necessary to tackle the amount of untested rape
kits in Alaska. The cities and states addressing the issue of
their backlog of untested kits have noted significant gains in
that the analysis has identified perpetrators and they are
making gains in prosecuting these individuals. Alaska needs to
follow their lead, she emphasized.
9:27:45 AM
NANCY PORTO stated that this Easter marks a two-year time period
from the moment she experienced a sexual assault. Although, she
went to a hospital and fully consented to a rape kit
examination, the kit has not been processed and she is waiting
on the biological DNA evidence portion of her exam. She
expressed that the event was traumatic as she was asleep before
it happened, and was intoxicated with a narcotic in her system
that she did not knowingly ingest. She stressed she does not
know exactly what happened other than she woke terrified to the
feeling of being touched. She called the police, and at the
hospital was informed of a drug in her system that she did not
take. On top of that, she explained, the man was and continues
to be her sister's boyfriend and that she was living with them
at the time. She expressed that this event destroyed her
family, she experiences extreme difficulty with her college
education, and she was forced into a position of having more
responsibility than she could handle alone at the time. She
related that she knows many other women who have experienced
assault, and in addition to the assault, she is haunted by the
reasons she has to believe that he may have committed crimes
with others in his past. Please support CSHB 117, because it
can truly be a step in the right direction and give many others
closure, she expressed.
VICE CHAIR KELLER closed public testimony after ascertaining
that no one further wished to testify.
9:30:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to report CSHB 117, labeled 29-
LS0386\E, Martin, 3/27/15, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being
no objection, CSHB 117(STA) was reported from the House State
Affairs Standing Committee.
VICE CHAIR KELLER returned the gavel to Chair Lynn.
9:30:30 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 9:30 a.m. to 9:33 a.m.
9:33:06 AM
CHAIR LYNN remarked that due to the importance of this bill he
suggested the committee craft a letter to the Legislative Budget
and Audit Committee regarding earlier expressed concerns [that
fall under the purview of the Legislative Budget and Audit
Committee].
REPRESENTATIVE VAZQUEZ stated that she and Representative
Gruenberg [no longer in the room] support the efforts to be made
regarding HB 117, as amended, which is the audit of the crime
lab.
CHAIR LYNN stated he is glad the bill passed out of committee,
but more must be done.
9:35:11 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 9:35
a.m.