Legislature(2007 - 2008)SENATE FINANCE 532
03/26/2007 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB35 | |
| SB89 | |
| SB105 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 35 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 89 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 105 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
MINUTES
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 26, 2007
9:02 a.m.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Bert Stedman convened the meeting at approximately
9:02:11 AM.
PRESENT
Senator Lyman Hoffman, Co-Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair
Senator Charlie Huggins, Vice Chair
Senator Kim Elton
Senator Donny Olson
Senator Fred Dyson
Senator Joe Thomas
Also Attending: REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT KAWASAKI; SENATOR BILL
WIELECHOWSKI; KAYE KANNE, Certified Direct-Entry Midwife and
Executive Director, Juneau Family Birth Center; SHARLEEN
GRIFFIN, Director, Division of Administrative Services,
Department of Corrections; JOHN WEISE, Staff to Senator Lyman
Hoffman
Attending via Teleconference: From Offnet Locations: CHUCK COPP,
Chief of Police, Kenai Police Department; GARDNER COBB, Captain,
Anchorage Police Department; CAROL COMEAU, Superintendent,
Anchorage School District
SUMMARY INFORMATION
HB 35-EXTEND BOARD OF MIDWIVES
The Committee heard from the bill's sponsor and a representative
of the midwifery profession. The bill reported from Committee.
SB 89-ELECTRONIC MONITORING OF GANG PROBATIONER
The Committee heard from the bill's sponsor, the Department of
Corrections, the Anchorage School District, and representatives
of the Anchorage and Kenai Police Departments. The bill was held
in Committee.
SB 105-REIMBURSEMENT FOR MUNICIPAL DEBT
The Committee heard from the bill's sponsor, and the bill
reported from Committee.
9:03:10 AM
HOUSE BILL NO. 35
"An Act extending the termination date for the Board of
Certified Direct-Entry Midwives; and providing for an
effective date."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-Chair Stedman reminded Members that the Senate companion bill
to this bill, SB 81-EXTEND BOARD OF MIDWIVES, had reported from
Committee on March 13. Absent any objection to the contrary, the
intent is that this bill report from Committee and "join up"
with SB 81 in the Senate Rules Committee.
9:03:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT KAWASAKI, the bill's sponsor, affirmed that
HB 35 and SB 81 were companion bills. HB 35 would extend the
termination date for the Board of Certified Direct-Entry
Midwives eight years, to the year 2015.
Representative Kawasaki advised that this cost-neutral Board
addresses issues pertinent to the current 36 practicing midwifes
in the State. He urged passage of the bill as the Board is
beneficial to the public and the profession. Representatives of
the midwifery profession and the Legislative Budget and Audit
Committee were available to testify to the benefits of
continuing the Board.
Co-Chair Stedman informed the Committee that the fiscal note
accompanying HB 35 differed from the one accompanying SB 81 in
that HB 35's fiscal note correctly depicted the fiscal impact on
the FY 2007 (FY 07) budget. Thus, the intent was to eventually
meld the House fiscal note with the Senate version of the bill.
Co-Chair Hoffman moved to report the bill from Committee with
individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal note.
Senator Huggins objected in order to learn how to properly
pronounce the bill sponsor's name.
Representative Kawasaki complied.
Senator Huggins removed his objection.
Senator Olson objected in order to hear a midwifery
professional's perspective about the Board.
9:08:03 AM
KAYE KANNE, Certified Direct-Entry Midwife, Executive Director
of the Juneau Family Birth Center, and representative of the
Midwifes Association of Alaska, informed the Committee that, in
addition to helping establish the Board, she had served as a
Board member for eight years.
9:08:30 AM
Senator Olson asked the difference between a midwife and a
certified direct-entry midwife.
Ms. Kanne divulged that, while most countries only have one
midwife classification, the United States has two: certified
nurse midwifes and certified direct-entry midwifes who are also
referred to in some states as licensed midwifes. Originally,
certified nurse midwifes worked in hospitals under a physician's
supervision. Eventually, the midwifery profession was expanded
as the need "to serve women in their homes" was recognized.
Ms. Kanne informed that the two midwifery classifications are
melding today. Certified direct-entry midwifes have become more
professional and a licensure process has been established in
practically every state. Certified nurse midwives are now
working in birth centers as well as managing home births.
Ms. Kanne disclosed that because certified direct-entry midwifes
were originally apart from the medical profession, their
clinical training requirements are more extensive than a
certified nurse midwife "or even a physician". The midwifery
licensure requirements include attending a specified number of
births and apprenticeship programs.
Senator Olson removed his objection.
There being no further objection, HB 35 was REPORTED from
Committee with previous zero fiscal note #1 from the House
Finance Committee for the Department of Commerce, Community and
Economic Development.
Co-Chair Stedman reiterated that the intent was to eventually
attach HB 35's fiscal note #1 with SB 81.
9:10:24 AM
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 89(JUD)
"An Act relating to requiring electronic monitoring as a
special condition of probation for offenders whose offense
was related to a criminal street gang."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
9:11:04 AM
SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, the bill's sponsor, explained that
this legislation would require gang members on probation or
parole to wear electronic monitoring ankle bracelet devices.
Increased gang activity in and around the Anchorage area in
recent years and the concern that such activity would spread to
other areas of the State were factors in this effort.
Senator Wielechowski reported that 122 gang related cases were
reported in 2006 and 20 have been reported to date in 2007.
Senator Wielechowski informed that this legislation, which is
modeled on the "innovative approach" San Bernardino California
has taken to deter gang activity, is an effort to address
citizens requests that "something be done". Requiring gang
members on parole or probation to wear electronic ankle
monitoring devices has proven to be a successful deterrent in
San Bernardino.
Senator Wielechowski explained that the movements of the
individual wearing the ankle bracelet would be tracked by global
positioning system (GPS) technology.
Senator Wielechowski noted that several monitoring options were
available, including one that could trigger an alarm and alert
the probation officer if the parolee or probationer entered a
restricted zone, such as a high school. The probation officer
could either contact the parolee or send police to the area. He
stressed that GPS monitoring systems have been successful in
prohibiting gang members on parole or probation from re-
associating with other gang members.
Senator Wielechowski advised that the Anchorage Police
Department, the Municipality of Anchorage and the Anchorage
School District considered this legislation a top priority".
Letters of support from the Anchorage and Fairbanks Police
Departments are included in Members' packets [copies on file].
"They recognize that it's better to nip this problem in the bud
rather than see it spread into outlying areas." He thought it
unlikely that the gang problems being experienced today in the
State would have been foreseen 20 years ago.
Senator Wielechowski spoke to the bill's indeterminate fiscal
note. Two types of expenses are associated with this program.
The first is the cost of the ankle monitoring device, which
ranges from eight dollars to $17 per day. That cost "would be
paid by the parolee or probationer.
Senator Wielechowski identified the second expense as being the
cost of monitoring individuals. The original version of the bill
called for "continuous monitoring". That effort would require
having a person monitor paroled or probationary gang member's
movements 24 hours a day. One individual could realistically
monitor 15 to 20 individuals. Either police or a probation
officer would respond the moment an individual traveled into a
prohibited zone.
9:15:25 AM
Senator Wielechowski communicated that the Senate Judiciary
Committee considered continuous monitoring to be too expensive,
and opted for computer monitoring rather than live monitoring.
Computer monitoring technology has advanced to a level that
could easily monitor of up to 100 individuals. This system would
send an alarm to an authorized individual via a small
communications device, such as a Blackberry, when someone moved
into a restricted area. That individual could either call the
offending individual or send a probation officer or a police
officer, depending on the severity of the situation.
Senator Wielechowski stated that the Judiciary Committee
supported a more passive monitoring approach primarily to
contain program costs. The analysis section of the Department of
Corrections indeterminate fiscal note #5 depicted the costs
associated with each of the three monitoring options. The costs
ranged from $157,000 to $195,000.
9:17:09 AM
Senator Olson asked whether those were annual costs.
Senator Wielechowski affirmed.
Senator Olson inquired to the length of time a probationer would
be required to wear a monitoring device.
Senator Wielechowski advised that the length of an individual's
probation or parole period would be the determining factor.
9:17:46 AM
Senator Dyson understood that, to date, the State has not
experienced "classic patterns" of gang activity such as turf
wars or "the control of a particular criminal activity" such as
drug distribution or prostitution.
Senator Dyson declared that this technology could be useful in
monitoring individuals who had committed other types of crimes
such as sexual assault and domestic violence. To that point, he
asked the reason that the scope of the bill was limited to
individuals associated with gang activity.
Senator Wielechowski agreed that the devices could be effective
in controlling other crimes. They have been successful in other
places in deterring "sexual offenders; particularly sex
offenders of little children". The devices could be programmed
to alert authorities when the wearer crossed into a place such
as a school zone.
Senator Wielechowski qualified that the bill's focus on gang
related offenders was strictly in consideration of cost. While
he would not object to expanding the scope of the bill to
include other criminal activities, he cautioned that doing so
would significantly increase the fiscal note.
Senator Wielechowski suggested that monitoring parolee and
probationer activities be considered a first step. If
successful, it could be expanded to include other offenses.
9:19:49 AM
Senator Dyson concluded from discussions with law enforcement
personnel that gang related activities in Alaska were not
geographically centered and is spreading outside of the area
where the parolee or probationer might reside. Thus, effective
monitoring activities might be limited.
Senator Dyson asserted that restraining orders on domestic
violence (DV) "have very little demonstrated effectiveness on
keeping the abusers from going where they shouldn't go". Law
enforcement often responds after the "order has been violated
and or the damage is done…" Thus, while he thought that this
legislation would assist in curtailing gang related activities
in the future, he thought "it would have marginal affect on the
criminal gang activity now". The monitoring device "could be
hugely helpful, particularly in DV cases and the other ones
where somebody has been terrorized by sexual assault and has no
clear way without this of knowing where their perpetrator is in
relationship to them".
9:21:23 AM
Senator Wielechowski agreed that this type of monitoring would
be effective in addressing DV cases. Nonetheless, utilizing the
device to address gang related activities was the top priority
of the Anchorage and Fairbanks Police Departments, the Anchorage
School Board, and the Municipality of Anchorage including people
in his Senate District. He stressed that monitoring gang related
parolees and probationers would be a "strong deterrent" in
containing gang related activities.
9:22:14 AM
Senator Thomas asked whether research has shown that monitoring
paroled gang members is effective in reducing the pressure on
such an individual to re-associate with a gang.
Senator Wielechowski communicated there being "strong indicators
that when gang members get out of jail, there is a tremendous
tremendous peer pressure" to rejoin the gang. However, research
indicates that gang members seek to avoid having someone who is
being monitored around them, as that person's movements could be
tracked. This has assisted the paroled gang member "to get back
into society" and distance themselves from a gang.
Senator Thomas asked whether the cost of expanding the bill to
include the monitoring sex offenders had been investigated.
Senator Wielechowski replied in the negative.
9:23:50 AM
SHARLEEN GRIFFIN, Director, Division of Administrative Services,
Department of Corrections, spoke to the Department's
indeterminate fiscal note #5. The costs of three different types
of monitoring options were depicted in the fiscal note analysis.
The experience of San Bernardino with the continuous monitoring
system or "active GPS" monitoring" is one monitor per 15
offenders. The expense associated with that system is likely the
reason the Senate Judiciary Committee supported replacing that
system with another monitoring option.
Ms. Griffin explained that "a Passive GPS system with intensive
supervision" would allow a probation officer to monitor 20
probationers. This system was not "real time" though. It would
download a tracking of the probationer or parolee's movements
every 24 hours. However, this system could be programmed to
alert the probation officer "in real time" if the parolee
entered a restricted zone.
Ms. Griffin stated that the third option, Passive GPS without
intensive supervision, would require one probation officer per
40 offenders.
Ms. Griffin stated that fiscal note #5 is an indeterminate
fiscal note because the type of monitoring system and therefore
the number of parolees who would be monitored is unknown.
9:25:42 AM
Senator Elton asked whether the use of the devices would be
limited due to availability.
Ms. Griffin understood otherwise. The State could contract with
a provider for whatever number was required. She could
investigate this further if desired.
Senator Elton asked that the issue be further reviewed. He also
inquired as to which communities could utilize the devices.
Ms. Griffin communicated that electronic monitoring (EM) devices
are currently being utilized in Anchorage, Fairbanks, Ketchikan,
and Kenai. She would investigate whether there were areas in the
State in which EM devices would not work.
Senator Elton inquired to the process for determining who would
be required to wear the monitoring device.
Ms. Griffin responded that the Department currently used EM
devices "as a form of incarceration". The Department was
uncertain as to the number of individuals the Court would
identify for this program.
Senator Elton asked, for sake of clarity, whether the Alaska
Court System or the Department of Corrections would make the
determinations.
Ms. Griffin understood that the Court would make the
determinations. Further questions in this regard should be
directed to the Department of Law.
9:28:10 AM
Senator Wielechowski informed the Committee that, in order to
have an individual wear the EM device, an aggravating factor
must be proven in Court. In other words, it must be proven that
the defendant had been involved in an offense or benefited from
the activity of a criminal street gang.
9:29:07 AM
CHUCK COPP, Chief of Police, Kenai Police Department and Member,
Anchorage Violent Crimes Task Force Law Enforcement
Subcommittee, testified via teleconference from an offnet
location. He noted that the Anchorage Violent Crimes Task Force
was formed to specifically address youth and gang violence in
the city.
Chief Copp voiced his support for the bill. EM is a proven tool
in many states in monitoring violent crime parolees and
probationers. It has specifically been beneficial in allowing
probation officers to monitor the activities of 17 to 22 year
olds as it has allowed officers to "provide positive
reinforcement when their behavior patterns are in compliance".
This age group is "amenable to positive reinforcement when
behavioral patterns do change".
Chief Copp affirmed that the EM device is a deterrent to re-
associating with a gang as gangs do not welcome being monitored
and tracked. "It is a good tool".
Chief Copp informed the Committee that Kenai law enforcement, in
partnership with the Department of Corrections, has been
operating a pilot monitoring program for approximately two
weeks. Up to 15 individuals are effectively being monitored at
this time. Good data would be available in approximately 12
months. The program would be beneficial to other areas of the
State.
9:31:37 AM
Senator Dyson asked the type of individuals being monitored in
the Kenai program.
Chief Copp reminded that the pilot program had only been
operational for two weeks. Offenders being monitored to date
have committed lower level violent crimes such as assault or
crimes determined by the Court to be worthy of monitoring. The
program, which is undergoing an approximate two-month evaluation
period, is utilizing several types of technologies. The system
is functioning properly in regards to monitoring such things as
offender's locations and "the ability to monitor breath samples
remotely". The program would be modified to address higher level
offenders after this initial period.
Senator Dyson understood therefore that the Kenai pilot program
did not currently include gang related offenders. He asked
whether the higher level offenses being referred to would
include violent crimes with victims living in the area.
Chief Copp understood that the program would be expanded to
include individuals who had committed violent sex crimes and
violent assaults. A list of qualifiers has been developed by
adult-probationary officers and the Court.
Chief Copp informed that Kenai, at the moment, did not have many
gang related offenders in its prisons. Kenai law enforcement
officials have worked diligently with the Anchorage Police
Department to deter gang activity from spreading to the area.
Chief Copp reported that Kenai has taken "a very active role" in
implementing this pilot program. In addition to the goal of
having its own program in place, the hope is that this effort
would support the effort to implement a similar program in
Anchorage.
Senator Dyson asked whether the probationers would pay for the
program in Kenai.
Chief Copp was unsure of the manner in which probationers and
parolees would support the program.
9:34:58 AM
Senator Thomas asked whether the Court or law enforcement
agencies might be liable if, due to equipment failure or another
reason, a person being monitored committed a serious crime.
Chief Copp expressed that "government entities will always have
liability" since the nature of their task is to provide for
public safety. The technology has worked well in other parts of
the country and should work in Alaska. He did not anticipate
liability increasing beyond current experience.
9:36:12 AM
CAPTAIN GARDNER COBB, Anchorage Police Department, testified via
teleconference from an offnet location in support of the bill.
He suggested that the narrow scope of this bill would present
the opportunity to determine whether the program would work in
Alaska. If successful, the program could be expanded.
Captain Cobb supported the Active Monitoring method as it would
allow law enforcement officers to catch a parolee or probationer
in the act of violating. There is also value in changing an
individual's behavior and keeping them from re-associating with
a gang.
Captain Cobb attested to the gang problem in Anchorage. There is
no "inexpensive solution to mitigating the violence here".
Because he is the coordinator of the gang response effort in
Anchorage, he is aware of national efforts in this regard. "The
way to get the violence under control to begin with is that you
identify the gang leaders, the hard core members, the ones that
are committing most of the violence, and you put them in jail
for a long long time."
Captain Cobb also announced that in order to counter the
"conveyor belt" that is producing "these hardened thuds that are
committing the violent crimes", investments must be made to help
families at risk.
9:38:35 AM
Senator Dyson concluded that the likely outcome of this
monitoring effort would be to revoke probations rather than to
protecting public safety.
Captain Cobb shared that the experience in Anchorage is that
people out of jail on bail or on probation are committing
violent crimes. This program "would help mitigate that" by
keeping those individuals separate from people and areas which
influence that activity.
Senator Dyson understood therefore that law enforcement
officials would be able "to intercede" were a perpetrator to
approach a victim.
Captain Cobb clarified that the Department of Corrections would
conduct the monitoring activities. APD would respond if the
Department of Corrections required assistance.
9:40:29 AM
CAROL COMEAU, Superintendent, Anchorage School District and
Member, Anchorage Violent Crimes Task Force, testified via
teleconference from an offnet location in support of the
legislation. It would be both an intervention and a preventive
measure to having gang activities on high school grounds. Many
gang "wannabes" are in schools. This bill would assist in
deterring people who are out of high school from getting on
school grounds.
Ms. Comeau advised that many school students are currently
wearing ankle monitoring bracelets for a variety of reasons. The
School District has an excellent relationship with police
officers who work in the schools and probation officers. Passage
of this legislation would provide an additional tool through
which to deter gang related activities.
9:42:08 AM
Senator Elton asked whether the Judiciary Committee action of
including "parole" in the bill would require a title change. He
also asked whether that inclusion would affect the fiscal note.
9:42:29 AM
Senator Wielechowski clarified that the subsection pertaining to
parolees was added by the Senate Judiciary Committee, at the
request of the Department of Law. The expense associated with
that should be included in the fiscal note as it was developed
after that action occurred. The bill title might require a
change to reflect the addition of the parole subsection.
9:43:14 AM
Ms. Griffin stated that the Department would continue to support
an indeterminate fiscal note. The cost would be dependent on the
number of people being monitored and the type of monitoring
methodology.
9:43:38 AM
Co-Chair Hoffman observed that the fiscal note denoted there
being 96 offenders on probation with 36 of those under intensive
supervision. There were 50 juvenile probationers with another 23
pending. He asked whether the monitoring system would focus on
juveniles or adult probationer/parolees.
Senator Wielechowski communicated that the goal would be to
monitor anyone meeting the definition. While this could be
further addressed by the Department of Law or the Department of
Corrections, he thought that the program would apply more to
adults and juveniles tried and convicted as adults under law.
Co-Chair Hoffman asked which of the three monitoring methods was
preferred by the Department of Corrections.
9:45:14 AM
Ms. Griffin stated that the Department's position would depend
on the version of the bill adopted. The Department would likely
support the "passive GPS with intensive supervision" monitoring
system were the word "continuous" not included in the final
version of the bill. The "active GPS with intensive supervision"
monitoring system would be supported otherwise.
Co-Chair Stedman ordered the bill HELD in Committee for further
discussion.
9:46:07 AM
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 105(TRA)
"An Act extending, for purposes of a program of debt
reimbursement to municipalities, the date by which debt
must be incurred for a small boat harbor; and providing for
an effective date."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-Chair Stedman communicated that the intent would be to move
this bill from Committee today unless new information or
unanticipated circumstances were presented.
Co-Chair Hoffman, the bill's sponsor, deferred to staffer John
Weise to present the bill.
JOHN WEISE, Staff to Co-Chair Hoffman, stated that this bill is
a continuum to HB 528, which was passed by the Legislature in
2002. Due to a number of delays, including a lengthy
environmental impact statement (EIS) process, the small boat
harbor project in the City of Unalaska which was specified in
that bill could not be completed by the 2007 deadline.
Mr. Weise displayed a schematic [copy not provided] of the
overall project and communicated that the outer harbor work,
which is a federal project, must be completed before the City of
Unalaska could conduct the inner harbor work addressed in HB
528.
Mr. Weise advised that the funding mechanism for the outer
harbor work that would be conducted by the federal Corps of
Engineers had changed, and the work could not begin until full
federal funding was allocated. This funding was anticipated to
be included in the FFY 2008 appropriation bill with construction
to begin in 2009.
Mr. Weise stated that the total cost of the inner harbor project
work that would be conducted by the City of Unalaska is
estimated to be approximately $12 million dollars. Five million
dollars of that was reimbursable by the State.
9:50:16 AM
In response to a question from Co-Chair Stedman, Mr. Weise
stated that language in the title of the original version of SB
105 mirrored that of HB 528. The intent of this bill was to
extend the 2007 deadline for debt incurred for projects
specified in HB 528 to 2012. The Unalaska small boat harbor
project is the only project included in that bill that has not
incurred debt.
Mr. Weise specified that since the title of the bill could not
specifically denote the Unalaska small boat harbor in its title,
the goal of the committee substitute adopted by the Senate
Transportation Committee was to "make it as tight as possible so
that the funding would only get directed toward a small boat
harbor, and, in this case, Unalaska's".
Senator Huggins concluded therefore, that even though multiple
harbors were identified in HB 528, funding would be limited to
the Unalaska small harbor project.
Mr. Weise expressed that the other harbors would be covered
since they are still in the bill. The distinction is that, with
the exception of Unalaska, debt for the other harbor projects
has been incurred.
Co-Chair Stedman specified that this bill would not incur any
fiscal impact to the State, as the fiscal impacts had been
addressed in HB 528. This bill would simply extend the timeline
of that legislation.
Mr. Weise noted that a representative of the City of Unalaska
was available to answer questions.
9:53:11 AM
Senator Dyson spoke in support of the bill. "Dutch
Harbor/Unalaska is the largest fishing port" in North America
and perhaps the world, in terms of "fish poundage or value".
Fishing in that area is dangerous and it is imperative that
boats have access to safe harbors. The Dutch Harbor/Unalaska
area is the largest fishing industry location in the State and
is a significant supporter of the industry.
Co-Chair Hoffman moved to report the bill from Committee with
individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, CSSB 105(TRA) was REPORTED from
Committee with two previous zero fiscal notes: fiscal note #1
from Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
and fiscal note #2 from the Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities.
AT EASE 9:55:05 AM / 9:55:02 AM
ADJOURNMENT
Co-Chair Bert Stedman adjourned the meeting at 9:55:10 AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|