Legislature(2021 - 2022)GRUENBERG 120
04/01/2021 03:00 PM 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 | |
| HB118 | |
| HB106 | |
| HB103 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 118 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 106 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 103 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 1, 2021
3:07 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, Chair
Representative Matt Claman, Vice Chair
Representative Geran Tarr
Representative Andi Story
Representative Sarah Vance
Representative James Kaufman
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative David Eastman
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 118
"An Act relating to state identifications and driver's licenses
for persons in the custody of the Department of Corrections;
relating to the duties of the commissioner of corrections;
relating to living conditions for prisoners; and providing for
an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 106
"An Act relating to missing persons under 21 years of age."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 103
"An Act relating to house rules for assisted living homes."
- MOVED HB 103 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 118
SHORT TITLE: EXPANDING PRISONER ACCESS TO COMPUTERS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) KREISS-TOMKINS
03/01/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/01/21 (H) STA
03/18/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/18/21 (H) Heard & Held
03/18/21 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/23/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/23/21 (H) Heard & Held
03/23/21 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/01/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 106
SHORT TITLE: MISSING PERSONS UNDER 21 YEARS OLD
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
02/19/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/19/21 (H) STA, HSS
03/11/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/11/21 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
03/16/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/16/21 (H) Heard & Held
03/16/21 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/25/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/25/21 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/01/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 103
SHORT TITLE: ASSISTED LIVING HOMES: HOUSE RULES
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
02/18/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/18/21 (H) STA, HSS
03/18/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/18/21 (H) Heard & Held
03/18/21 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/25/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/25/21 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/01/21 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
LINDSAY BIRK, Staff
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an explanation of amendments
during the hearing on HB 118, on behalf of Representative
Kreiss-Tomkins, prime sponsor.
KELLY GOODE, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Corrections
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions pertaining to HB 118.
RANDI BREAGER, Special Assistant
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Public Safety
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions pertaining to HB 106.
KATHY MONFREDA, Director
Division of Statewide Services
Department of Public Safety
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions pertaining to HB 106.
JOHN LEE, Director
Division of Senior and Disability Services
Department of Health and Social Services
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions pertaining to HB 103.
CRAIG BAXTER, Assisted Living Home Manager
Division of Health Care Services
Department of Health and Social Services
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions pertaining to HB 103.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:07:00 PM
CHAIR JONATHAN KREISS-TOMKINS called the House State Affairs
Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:07 p.m.
Representatives Story, Tarr, Vance, Kaufman, Claman, and Kreiss-
Tomkins were present at the call to order.
HB 118-EXPANDING PRISONER ACCESS TO COMPUTERS
3:07:48 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the first order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 118, "An Act relating to state
identifications and driver's licenses for persons in the custody
of the Department of Corrections; relating to the duties of the
commissioner of corrections; relating to living conditions for
prisoners; and providing for an effective date."
3:08:37 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS moved to adopt Amendment 1, [labeled 32-
LS0024\B.2, Radford, 4/1/21], which read:
Page 7, lines 1 - 2:
Delete "[(A) OBTAINING STATE IDENTIFICATION;
(B)]"
Insert "(A) obtaining state identification if one
or more prisoners will not otherwise possess a valid
state identification card upon release;
(B)"
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN objected for the purpose of discussion.
3:09:40 PM
LINDSAY BIRK, Staff, Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins,
Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Kreiss
Tomkins, prime sponsor of HB 118, said the in its current form,
the bill would remove a mandatory tutorial on how to receive a
state identification (ID) card. Amendment 1 would reinsert that
language into the bill, such that a prisoner without a valid ID
would participate in a mandatory tutorial before leaving prison,
which would teach him/her how to receive an ID.
3:10:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether the bill would assist
prisoners with the renewal of their licenses online or by mail
while incarcerated.
MS. BIRK was unsure of the answer.
3:11:25 PM
KELLY GOODE, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Corrections,
explained that state IDs are kept in the prisoners' property to
be distributed upon release. She said institutional probation
officers would work with the releasing inmates on how best to
get a new ID. She added that prisoners would be given a voucher
that allows the Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to bill the
Department of Corrections (DOC) for tasks, such as getting a new
ID picture taken.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE clarified her question, asking whether
license renewals could be accomplished while incarcerated or if
the prisoners would have to wait "until they are under the care of
the probation officer."
MS. GOODE explained that the institutional probation officers
(IPOs) work with prisoners inside the facilities. She shared
her understanding that there would be no action taken on a
request for a license renewal; however, the IPO would work with
prisoners prior to release on the best way to get a valid ID.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE observed that being unable to renew one's
license while incarcerated could be an unrecognized hurdle,
which creates further obstacles once released. She surmised
that assisting with renewals could ease some of the burden that
this legislation is attempting to address.
MS. GOODE clarified that DOC is capable of assisting with a
prisoner's ID renewal when necessary.
3:15:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN sought to clarify the purpose of the
following language in Amendment 1: "if one or more prisoners
will not otherwise possess a valid state identification card
upon release".
MS. BIRK said the language indicates that if a prisoner
[possesses a valid ID], he/she would not have to participate in
the tutorial. She began to address the phrase "one or more" and
asked whether that is Representative Claman's specific concern.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN confirmed. He shared his belief that "one
or more" wouldn't add anything to the bill because it's likely
that, systemwide, there's at least one prisoner that may not
have a valid ID card upon release.
MS. BIRK was unsure whether "one or more" adds to or detracts
from the bill.
3:16:58 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 3:16 p.m. to 3:18 p.m.
3:18:25 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS stated his understanding that the language
in question suggests that if 100 percent of the releasing
prisoners had ID cards, the training requirement would not
apply; however, if one or more of the prisoners did not possess
a valid ID, the tutorial would be required. He noted that in
conversations with reentry groups, this was the preferred
language.
3:20:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN proposed replacing "one or more" with
"any." He asked whether that would satisfy the sponsor's
intent.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS agreed that "any" would imply the same
substantive meaning; however, he expressed no interest in
changing the language.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN voiced his support for the existing
language in Amendment 1, as reentry groups had emphasized it's
importance.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS agreed.
3:21:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN withdrew his objection to the adoption of
Amendment 1. Without further objection, Amendment 1 was
adopted.
3:21:23 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS moved to adopt Amendment 2, [labeled 32-
LS0024\B.3, Radford, 4/1/21], which read:
Page 4, lines 16 - 22:
Delete all material and insert:
"(11) make a good faith effort, in
consultation with the commissioner of administration,
to ensure [ASSIST] a prisoner has [IN OBTAINING] a
valid state identification card upon the prisoner's
release; if the prisoner does not have a valid state
identification card before the prisoner's release, [;]
the department shall pay the application fee for the
identification card; and"
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN objected for the purpose of discussion.
3:21:43 PM
MS. BIRK informed the committee that Amendment 2 would clarify
the bill's purpose by streamlining the language.
3:22:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked whether removing the language that
requires DOC to assist prisoners serving terms of imprisonment
"exceeding 120 days" would create problems for department.
MS. GOODE said if the last 4 lines of Amendment 2 would allow
the department to continue providing vouchers to prisoners who
release in under 120 days, the department is supportive of the
amendment. She asked if she interpreted the language correctly.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN deferred to the department's expertise.
3:24:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE questioned whether removing the 120-day
timeframe could increase the fiscal note due to an increased use
of vouchers.
MS. GOODE shared her belief that there would not be a
significant difference in cost, adding that vouchers are already
provided to any [inmate] who may need one.
3:25:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN removed his objection to the adoption of
Amendment 2. Without further objection, Amendment 2 was
adopted.
3:25:43 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that HB 118, as amended, was held
over.
HB 106-MISSING PERSONS UNDER 21 YEARS OLD
3:25:57 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 106, "An Act relating to missing persons
under 21 years of age."
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS invited questions from the committee.
3:27:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked why the bill pertains to missing
persons under the age of 21 as opposed to 18.
3:27:55 PM
RANDI BREAGER, Special Assistant, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Public Safety, indicated that recent changes in
federal law require amending Alaska statutes for consistency.
She deferred to Ms. Monfreda for further explanation.
3:28:35 PM
KATHY MONFREDA, Director, Division of Statewide Services,
Department of Public Safety, explained that federal law was
changed to require the reporting of missing people under the age
of 21 primarily based on Suzanne's Law, which was designed to
provide extra protection for people [between the ages of 18 and
21] in the vulnerable college-age population. She shared her
belief that age 21 was chosen because it is viewed as the
threshold of adulthood.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE questioned what vulnerabilities exist among
the 18-21 age group that lawmakers should be aware of.
MS. MONFREDA stated her understanding that the age group is more
vulnerable to coercion due to the decision-making ability and
gullibility at that age.
3:31:01 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS opened public testimony. After
ascertaining that no one wished to testify, he closed public
testimony.
[HB 106 was held over.]
HB 103-ASSISTED LIVING HOMES: HOUSE RULES
3:31:13 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the final order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 103, "An Act relating to house rules for
assisted living homes."
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS questioned whether HB 103 would affect
operations for any subset of assisted living facilities and
whether they would struggle to meet the standards that would be
codified in the bill.
3:33:08 PM
JOHN LEE, Director, Division of Senior and Disability Services,
Department of Health and Social Services, reported that 650 of
the 700 assisted living facilities that are licensed by the
state are currently in compliance. He said he anticipates no
significant challenges from non-compliant providers, as the
required changes are minor.
3:33:53 PM
CRAIG BAXTER, Assisted Living Home Manager, Division of Health
Care Services, Department of Health and Social Services, shared
his belief that the bill would not be burdensome for facilities
that are not in current compliance with the required standards.
He reiterated that approximately 650 of the 705 assisted living
homes are already in compliance because they are state
certified. He said he did not envision the remaining facilities
struggling to implement the changes.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked why the remaining 50 facilities would
choose not to be Medicaid certified.
MR. LEE said the majority of providers in Alaska take Medicaid
clients; however, some providers, for various reasons, focus on
private pay or areas outside the provisions of Medicaid.
MR. BAXTER noted that a handful are new providers that have not
yet applied for certification. He surmised that some facilities
choose to care for specific individuals who are private pay so
there's no need for certification. Additionally, other
facilities that meet licensing standards are unable to meet the
standards for certification. He speculated that there is
probably another small subset of [facilities] that had allowed
their certification to lapse.
3:36:29 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS referenced page 1, lines 11-12, and asked
for a description of the visitation rights provided under 42
C.F.R.441.301(c)(4)(vi)(D).
MR. LEE relayed that 42 C.F.R states that if a facility chooses
to set house rules, the rules must allow individual choice.
More specifically, individuals must be allowed to have visitors
of their own choosing at any time. Therefore, assisted living
homes may not adopt house rules that restrict those rights.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether Mr. Lee had observed
facilities in Alaska with unduly restrictive choice or
individual access.
MR. BAXTER said if the Division of Health Care Services became
aware of that, the division would typically follow up with an
investigation to determine the validity of the complaint. If
the division determined the facility was out of compliance, it
would be notified and required to show a plan of correction. he
added that chronic offenders or a particularly egregious offense
may require enforcement action. He shared that when Medicaid
[facilities] implemented these specific visitation requirements,
there were no issues aside for some pushback from facilities
that expressed logistic concerns.
3:39:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked how the quality care of residents is
ensured in the 50 facilities that are not compliant.
MR. BAXTER said [the Division of Health Care Services] conducts
biannual inspections of most assisted living homes. If a
facility is new or had its license reduced to a provisional
license because of enforcement action, an annual inspection is
conducted. He added that some facilities receive more frequent
inspections due to their history of compliance. He reported
that the division receives 8,000-10,000 critical (indisc.)
reports annually, which are reviewed for compliance purposes to
ensure that the facilities are responding appropriately to
events and occurrences within their home. He approximated that
400 of those annual reports are upgraded to ensure that the
facilities receive on-site investigation of compliance.
Additionally, the division maintains routine contact with
providers through a variety of training efforts. Groups that
participate in on-site visits for that purpose typically
communicate any concerns they may have about the facilities,
which initiates follow-up inspections by the division to ensure
compliance when necessary.
3:41:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked whether the department had ever
required the closure of a facility until the necessary changes
were made.
MR. BAXTER affirmed that every year, a handful of homes are
closed by the department through an immediate revocation or
suspension. Occasionally, settlement agreements or correction
plans are entered into to allow the facilities to reopen;
however, if a facility is closing because of its compliance
history, it's typically beyond what the department considers a
safe home for residents to reside in. He added that typically,
it's abuse, neglect, financial exploitation, failure to require
background checks, or failure to provide adequate fire safety.
He explained that the department implements the policy of
progressive enforcement action, so that by the time closure of
the home or non-renewal of the license is required, it's
justified. He reported that only 14 percent of the facilities
statewide have had substantial complaints against them. He
emphasized that the department's preference is for the facility
to first, fix the problem as opposed to shutting its doors. He
said closure is traumatic because it displaces residents and
puts employees out of work; furthermore, in smaller communities,
closing homes is often detrimental because alternative services
are not available.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY inquired about the compliance deadline.
MR. LEE said the federal government's deadline is March of 2023.
3:45:01 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
3:46:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked what kind of guidance is provided to
assisted living homes that are not state-run facilities
regarding [COVID-19] restrictions for residents.
MR. LEE clarified that the bill is not related to the pandemic.
Nonetheless, he noted that during the pandemic, the state
disaster declaration and the federal government allowed the
suspension of certain regulations. He further noted that the
state produced visitation guidelines.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked if the bill were to pass, what would
happen to the assisted living homes that failed to comply with
the required changes.
MR. BAXTER explained that if a facility were out of compliance,
a finding against the facility would be assembled via a report
of inspection or investigation. The home would then be notified
and asked to make the necessary corrections. Additionally,
should the bill pass, the department would require that the
facility update its house rules to reflect the necessary
changes.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN surmised that this matter pertains to the
federal supremacy clause, such that the homes would lose their
Medicaid funding if they failed to comply with the federal
requirements. He said the state could set any rule they want,
but if the federal government implements a rule that limits
visitation, homes would be forced to follow that rule during the
suspension of regulations. He asked if that is correct.
MR. LEE asked Representative Claman to repeat his question.
3:52:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked whether an assisted living home
receiving federal funds is required to follow federal rule.
MR. LEE said Medicaid certified facilities are required to meet
these statutes.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN interjected and clarified that he had
asked about the COVID-19-related suspension of regulations. He
sought verification that homes must follow federal rules during
a suspension because otherwise, they would lose their federal
funding.
MR. LEE replied these rules were suspended during the federal
public health emergency.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN sought confirmation that the federal
government had provided visitation guidelines.
MR. LEE replied in the affirmative.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN sought confirmation that homes receiving
federal funds must follow the visitation guidelines set by the
federal government.
MR. LEE answered yes. He added that the state had issued
guidelines to the facilities on how to operate safely during the
pandemic.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked whether the facilities in Alaska are
following direction from the federal government or the state on
how to manage visitation during the public health emergency.
MR. LEE said during the pandemic, the federal government allowed
states to relax their rules; therefore, the facilities were
following state guidelines.
3:54:47 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
3:55:16 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS opened public testimony. After
ascertaining that no one wished to testify, he closed public
testimony.
3:55:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN moved to report HB 103 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes. Without objection, HB 103 was moved from the House State
Affairs Standing Committee.
3:56:30 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS provided closing remarks on housekeeping
items.
3:56:57 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:56
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 118 Letter of Support - GHS 3.25.21.pdf |
HSTA 4/1/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 118 |
| HB 103 Letter of Support - MSHF 3.26.21.pdf |
HHSS 4/13/2021 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/1/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 103 |
| HB 103 Letter of Support - AK Regional Hospital 3.26.21.pdf |
HHSS 4/13/2021 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/1/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 103 |
| HB 118 Letter of Support - ACLU 3.25.21.pdf |
HSTA 4/1/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 118 |
| HB 118 Amendments B.2 and B.3 - 4.1.21.pdf |
HSTA 4/1/2021 3:00:00 PM |
HB 118 |