Legislature(2017 - 2018)SENATE FINANCE 532

04/18/2018 09:00 AM FINANCE

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

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
<Bill Hearing Canceled>
Heard & Held
Heard & Held
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
                 SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE                                                                                       
                      April 18, 2018                                                                                            
                         9:08 a.m.                                                                                              
9:08:14 AM                                                                                                                    
CALL TO ORDER                                                                                                                 
Co-Chair  MacKinnon  called  the  Senate  Finance  Committee                                                                    
meeting to order at 9:08 a.m.                                                                                                   
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
Senator Lyman Hoffman, Co-Chair                                                                                                 
Senator Anna MacKinnon, Co-Chair                                                                                                
Senator Click Bishop, Vice-Chair                                                                                                
Senator Peter Micciche                                                                                                          
Senator Donny Olson                                                                                                             
Senator Gary Stevens                                                                                                            
Senator Natasha von Imhof                                                                                                       
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
ALSO PRESENT                                                                                                                  
Representative  Steve  Thompson,   Sponsor;  Lynette  Bergh,                                                                    
Staff,   Representative  Steve   Thompson;  Sara   Chambers,                                                                    
Division   of  Corporations,   Business,  and   Professional                                                                    
Licensing,  Department of  Commerce, Community  and Economic                                                                    
Development;  Representative  Chuck   Kopp,  Sponsor;  Erick                                                                    
Cordero  Giorgana, Staff,  Representative  Chuck Kopp;  Sara                                                                    
Race,   Director,   Permanent    Fund   Dividend   Division,                                                                    
Department  of  Revenue;  Doug  Wooliver,  Deputy  Director,                                                                    
Alaska Court System.                                                                                                            
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE                                                                                                    
Karen  Tarver, State  Board of  Public Accountancy,  Juneau;                                                                    
Chuck Johnson,  State Board  of Accountancy,  Fairbanks; Don                                                                    
Rulien,  Former Chair,  State Board  of Public  Accountancy,                                                                    
Anchorage;  Taylor  Winston,   Office  of  Victims'  Rights,                                                                    
SSHB 147 PUBLIC ACCOUNTING                                                                                                      
          SSHB 147 was HEARD and HELD in committee for                                                                          
          further consideration.                                                                                                
CSSSHB 216(FIN) am                                                                                                              
          CRIMES;RESTITUTION;DIVIDEND FUND                                                                                      
          CSSSHB 216(FIN) am was HEARD and HELD in                                                                              
          committee for further consideration.                                                                                  
Co-Chair MacKinnon informed that  committee members would be                                                                    
moving in  and out  of the committee  meeting as  they dealt                                                                    
with legislation  advancing for  consideration in  the other                                                                    
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 147                                                                                     
     "An Act  relating to the  Board of  Public Accountancy;                                                                    
     relating to  the licensure  of public  accountants; and                                                                    
     relating to the practice of public accounting."                                                                            
9:09:33 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE STEVE  THOMPSON, SPONSOR, stated that  HB 147                                                                    
had  come  about  when  members   of  the  Board  of  Public                                                                    
Accountancy  had  contacted his  office.  He  read from  the                                                                    
Sponsor Statement (copy on file):                                                                                               
     The   National   Association   of   State   Boards   of                                                                    
     Accountancy  (NASBA)  and  the  American  Institute  of                                                                    
     Certified  Public  Accountants   (AICPA)  provided  the                                                                    
     Alaska   Board   of   Public  Accountancy   under   the                                                                    
     Department   of  Commerce,   Community,  and   Economic                                                                    
     Development with  a summary of  areas where  the Alaska                                                                    
     statutes and regulations  for public accountancy differ                                                                    
     from  the Uniform  Accountancy Act  or AICPA's  Code of                                                                    
     Professional Conduct.                                                                                                      
     The  proposed statute  changes  will  align the  Alaska                                                                    
     statutes  and regulations  for public  accountancy with                                                                    
     these national organizations.                                                                                              
9:12:25 AM                                                                                                                    
LYNETTE BERGH, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE STEVE THOMPSON,                                                                            
discussed the Sectional Analysis (copy on file):                                                                                
     Section 1.  Amends AS  08.04.080    Removes requirement                                                                    
     for  the  board to  mail  full  paper copies  to  every                                                                    
     licensee/interested party  to notice proposed  rules or                                                                    
     Section 2.  Amends AS 08.04.110    Removes  minimum age                                                                    
     Section 3. Amends AS 08.04.195(a)    Removes the number                                                                    
     of  years of  prior  public  accounting experience  and                                                                    
     examination   for   out-of-state  applicants   as   the                                                                    
     applicants    must     meet    accounting    experience                                                                    
     requirements   as   established   by   the   Board   by                                                                    
     Section 4.  Amends AS  08.04.565 -  Adds a  new section                                                                    
     that  delineates prohibited  acts. An  individual under                                                                    
     AS 08.04.105  may not perform attest  functions through                                                                    
     a partnership,  limited liability  company, corporation                                                                    
     or other business entity  unless those groups mentioned                                                                    
     above hold a valid permit under AS 08.04.240.                                                                              
     Section  5. Amends  AS 08.04.622Amends   the exceptions                                                                    
     to  confidential  communication by  adding  information                                                                    
     that  is disclosed  under applicable  state or  federal                                                                    
     laws or  as required  by the Public  Company Accounting                                                                    
     Oversight Board.                                                                                                           
     Section  6. Amends  AS  08.04.680(1)  by expanding  the                                                                    
     definition of  "attest function" to  include procedures                                                                    
     in accordance with the  standards developed by national                                                                    
     accountancy organizations  and adopted by the  board in                                                                    
     Section 7.  AS 08.04.680(19)  is amended  by clarifying                                                                    
     the  definition of  "report". The  definition was  also                                                                    
     amended to conform with the drafting rules.                                                                                
     Section  8.  Amends  AS 08.04.680(20)  definitions  for                                                                    
     "state"  by adding  the  Northern  Mariana Islands  and                                                                    
     clarifying  language  for   the  United  States  Virgin                                                                    
     Section 9. Repeals AS 08.04.120(b), 08.04.180,                                                                             
     08.04.580, 08.04.590, 08.40.595 and 08.04.598.                                                                             
Co-Chair MacKinnon  asked about  Section 9  of the  bill and                                                                    
what was being repealed.                                                                                                        
9:15:43 AM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
9:16:27 AM                                                                                                                    
Ms.  Bergh  confirmed  that  AS  08.04.120(b)  pertained  to                                                                    
education   and   experience  requirements;   AS   08.04.180                                                                    
referenced  applicant  license  requirements;  AS  08.04.580                                                                    
pertained  to partnership  posing as  accountants; 08.04.590                                                                    
dealt  with a  corporation using  a name  without a  current                                                                    
permit; 08.40.595 pertained  to use of a  title with limited                                                                    
liability; and  08.04.598 had  to do with  a title,  name or                                                                    
other legal entity.                                                                                                             
Co-Chair MacKinnon  asked about the rationale  for repealing                                                                    
the sections listed. She understood  that the change related                                                                    
to educational experience.                                                                                                      
Ms. Bergh asked to defer the question to a board member.                                                                        
KAREN  TARVER, STATE  BOARD  OF  PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY,  JUNEAU                                                                    
(via  teleconference), informed  that she  was in  her fifth                                                                    
year  as  a member  of  the  board.  She detailed  that  the                                                                    
section  pertaining to  prior  applicants  was a  carry-over                                                                    
that  was  outdated  and  no  longer  required  due  to  new                                                                    
Co-Chair MacKinnon  asked if there were  working accountants                                                                    
that the statute applied to.                                                                                                    
Ms.  Tarver stated  that the  section would  be relevant  to                                                                    
applicants that  had applied for  licensure before  1960 and                                                                    
pertained to taking  the exam. The exception  was related to                                                                    
the number of  credits required to take the exam  and was no                                                                    
longer needed to apply to current standards.                                                                                    
Co-Chair MacKinnon  asked if Ms.  Tarver could speak  to the                                                                    
other sections proposed to be repealed.                                                                                         
Ms. Tarver  stated that the remaining  sections proposed for                                                                    
repeal were  all related to the  use of names. With  the new                                                                    
proposed section,  the entities were lumped  together rather                                                                    
than having separate sections.                                                                                                  
9:20:42 AM                                                                                                                    
Senator  Stevens asked  for clarification  on the  repeal of                                                                    
sections relating to educational requirements.                                                                                  
Ms.  Tarver   elucidated  that  the  bill   did  not  repeal                                                                    
educational  requirements.  Rather,  the  bill  proposed  to                                                                    
remove  the particular  exception  for  applicants prior  to                                                                    
1960.   The   current   educational  requirement   was   for                                                                    
applicants to  have 150 semester  hours. The board  had felt                                                                    
that the  group of people  the exception had applied  to had                                                                    
decreased over time.                                                                                                            
Co-Chair  MacKinnon surmised  that 08.04.120(b)  was a  two-                                                                    
part section on educational  requirements, and the 150 hours                                                                    
were  still  required.  Section   (b)  was  proposed  to  be                                                                    
removed, was  related to  the exception  for those  that had                                                                    
applied prior to 1960.                                                                                                          
Ms. Tarver answered in the affirmative.                                                                                         
Co-Chair  MacKinnon  asked  if   AS  08.04.120  remained  in                                                                    
statute and read from existing statute:                                                                                         
     The  education  and   experience  requirements  for  an                                                                    
     applicant are a baccalaureate  degree or its equivalent                                                                    
     conferred by a college  or university acceptable to the                                                                    
     board   and   additional   semester  hours   or   post-                                                                    
     baccalaureate  study  so  that  the  total  educational                                                                    
     program   includes  at   least  150   hours,  with   an                                                                    
     accounting  concentration or  equivalent as  determined                                                                    
     by the board  by regulation to be  appropriate, and two                                                                    
     years  of  accounting  experience satisfactory  to  the                                                                    
9:24:03 AM                                                                                                                    
Senator Stevens  wondered if the sponsor  could elaborate on                                                                    
the  proposed changes  to the  educational requirements.  He                                                                    
asked about the definition  of an acceptable institution and                                                                    
assumed it would be accredited.                                                                                                 
Representative Thompson  stated that  there were  some older                                                                    
regulations  that allowed  for  Certified Public  Accountant                                                                    
(CPA) applicants prior to 1960  to apply without meeting the                                                                    
established  educational  requirements.   He  discussed  the                                                                    
current educational requirements.                                                                                               
Mr. Tarver stated that  Representative Thompson was correct.                                                                    
She offered  to provide  a list of  acceptable institutions,                                                                    
which were based on the guidelines by NASBA and AICPA.                                                                          
Vice-Chair   Bishop  observed   that  there   could  be   an                                                                    
accounting recruiting  problem in  the state.  He referenced                                                                    
Section 2  and Section  3 of  the bill.  He wondered  if the                                                                    
board  was trying  to use  best  practices to  shore up  the                                                                    
shortfall in the profession.                                                                                                    
Representative  Thompson  thought  the  bill  was  repealing                                                                    
older exceptions and had also incorporated new standards.                                                                       
9:27:34 AM                                                                                                                    
CHUCK JOHNSON,  STATE BOARD  OF ACCOUNTANCY,  FAIRBANKS (via                                                                    
teleconference),  addressed   the  comments   by  Vice-Chair                                                                    
Bishop. He  informed that there were  about 54 jurisdictions                                                                    
that administered the CPA test.  He furthered that Section 3                                                                    
of the  bill would allow  for more mobility  between states.                                                                    
He thought the bill was  a cleanup of reciprocity. He opined                                                                    
that older  regulations had been  more restrictive,  and the                                                                    
bill would increase mobility  of out-of-state accountants in                                                                    
Alaska. At  statehood it was  possible to pass the  CPA exam                                                                    
without  going  to college.  He  thought  that removing  the                                                                    
exception would not affect potential license applicants.                                                                        
9:30:09 AM                                                                                                                    
Vice-Chair  Bishop understood  reciprocity  and thanked  Mr.                                                                    
Johnson for his comments.                                                                                                       
Mr. Johnson spoke  to Section 4 and noted  that the statutes                                                                    
had evolved  as corporations  and partnerships  were formed.                                                                    
He discussed the changes and  updates to statutes over time.                                                                    
He referenced the fiscal note  and stated that the board was                                                                    
trying to be  consistent with other boards in  the state. He                                                                    
discussed  the expenses  of mailing  regulation updates  and                                                                    
the utility of the internet.                                                                                                    
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if Mr.  Johnson was in favor of the                                                                    
Mr. Johnson answered in the  affirmative. He stated that the                                                                    
board was unanimous in support of the bill.                                                                                     
Co-Chair  MacKinnon stated  that  her  staff had  experience                                                                    
with  a  previous  bill  in  2008,  which  had  adopted  new                                                                    
standards  and put  in a  grandfather  clause provision  for                                                                    
those that were completing degrees.                                                                                             
9:33:00 AM                                                                                                                    
Co-Chair MacKinnon OPENED public testimony.                                                                                     
KAREN  TARVER, STATE  BOARD  OF  PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY,  JUNEAU                                                                    
(via teleconference), testified in  support of the bill. She                                                                    
stated  that  the  board  worked  closely  with  the  Alaska                                                                    
Society of CPAs.                                                                                                                
9:34:13 AM                                                                                                                    
DON   RULIEN,   FORMER   CHAIR,  STATE   BOARD   OF   PUBLIC                                                                    
ACCOUNTANCY,  ANCHORAGE   (via  teleconference),   spoke  in                                                                    
support  of the  bill. He  relayed that  the board  had been                                                                    
working on the  changes for almost two years.  The board had                                                                    
worked closely  with the  Alaska Society  of CPAs  to ensure                                                                    
that all parties were in accord with the proposed changes.                                                                      
9:35:14 AM                                                                                                                    
Co-Chair MacKinnon CLOSED public testimony.                                                                                     
Vice-Chair  Bishop discussed  FN  1 from  the Department  of                                                                    
Commerce,  Community and  Economic Development  (DCCED). The                                                                    
cost in FY 19 would be  $4,000. He read from the Analysis on                                                                    
page 2 of the fiscal note:                                                                                                      
     If the bill passes, the following expenses will be                                                                         
     Services: $4.0 (printing, postage and legal costs for                                                                      
     regulation project)                                                                                                        
     Professional licensing programs  within the Division of                                                                    
     Corporations, Business  and Professional  Licensing are                                                                    
     funded by Receipt Supported  Services, fund source 1156                                                                    
     Rcpt  Svcs (DGF).  Licensing fees  for each  occupation                                                                    
     are set per AS 08.01.065 so the total amount of                                                                            
     revenue    collected     approximately    equals    the                                                                    
     occupation's actual regulatory costs.                                                                                      
Co-Chair  MacKinnon noted  that there  was an  error in  the                                                                    
fiscal note.                                                                                                                    
Representative Thompson  disclosed that  his wife was  a CPA                                                                    
and a past member of the board.                                                                                                 
Co-Chair  MacKinnon asked  for clarification  on the  fiscal                                                                    
note. She wondered if there was an inaccurate title.                                                                            
SARA  CHAMBERS,  DIVISION  OF  CORPORATIONS,  BUSINESS,  AND                                                                    
PROFESSIONAL  LICENSING, DEPARTMENT  OF COMMERCE,  COMMUNITY                                                                    
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT,  was not aware of an  error in the                                                                    
fiscal note.                                                                                                                    
9:38:17 AM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
9:38:22 AM                                                                                                                    
Co-Chair MacKinnon clarified that there  was not an error on                                                                    
the fiscal note.                                                                                                                
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked  if there had been  feedback on the                                                                    
repeal  of  a  section  that required  a  copy  of  proposed                                                                    
regulations  be mailed  to all  licensees, or  if there  was                                                                    
general  understanding and  acceptance  from  people in  the                                                                    
Ms. Chambers  answered in the  affirmative. She  stated that                                                                    
the bill  would bring the  board's regulations in  line with                                                                    
others in the  division. She stated that  the division would                                                                    
continue to mail a one-page  alert to relevant licensees and                                                                    
interested  parties.  The   proposed  change  would  provide                                                                    
modernization,  had been  vetted  by the  Department of  Law                                                                    
(DOL), and had received no negative feedback.                                                                                   
Co-Chair  MacKinnon  stated  that her  office  had  received                                                                    
regulation review notifications frequently,  and it was hard                                                                    
to follow what transpired. She  was not sure that condensing                                                                    
information to one page would be advantageous.                                                                                  
Ms. Chambers  stated that  the division's  goal was  to make                                                                    
the  public processes  engaged  in  by the  board  to be  as                                                                    
transparent  as possible.  With  the  action described,  the                                                                    
division  would provide  more  information  online that  had                                                                    
explanations  in plain  language. One  of her  goals was  to                                                                    
continue to  make the process  adhere to best  practices and                                                                    
avoid the sentiments that  Co-Chair MacKinnon had described.                                                                    
She relayed  that the division  had recently added  a second                                                                    
regulations specialist  after having only one  on staff. She                                                                    
expressed a desire  to work with Co-Chair  MacKinnon and her                                                                    
staff to glean more feedback.                                                                                                   
Co-Chair     MacKinnon     appreciated     Ms.     Chambers'                                                                    
responsiveness.  She  elaborated  that  confusion  could  be                                                                    
caused   by  providing   incomplete  information   regarding                                                                    
regulation changes.                                                                                                             
9:41:35 AM                                                                                                                    
Senator Stevens asked  for a brief explanation  of the board                                                                    
members' experience and length of term.                                                                                         
Ms. Chambers  believed the board  had 7 members.  All boards                                                                    
were made up  of a mix of licensees and  public members. All                                                                    
boards had a limitation of  two terms served without a break                                                                    
in  service. Board  members  could then  be  appointed at  a                                                                    
later time if there was a break in service.                                                                                     
Co-Chair MacKinnon  asked if Mr.  Johnson could  confirm the                                                                    
Ms. Johnson had been on the  board for 7 years and would end                                                                    
his second  term on the  Board of Accountancy  the following                                                                    
February. He  believed that two  other members  were serving                                                                    
second terms as well.                                                                                                           
Senator Stevens asked about term  limits. He surmised that a                                                                    
board  member could  serve for  two  four-year terms  before                                                                    
having to take a term off.                                                                                                      
Mr.  Johnson   agreed.  There  was  a   public  member  from                                                                    
Kotzebue.  He  stated  that the  board  endeavored  to  have                                                                    
diverse geographical representation within the state.                                                                           
SSHB  147  was  HEARD  and HELD  in  committee  for  further                                                                    
Co-Chair MacKinnon set aside SSHB  147. She asked members to                                                                    
submit proposed amendments or concerns by noon.                                                                                 
9:45:08 AM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
9:48:23 AM                                                                                                                    
CS FOR SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 216(FIN) am                                                                      
     "An  Act  relating  to  restitution;  relating  to  the                                                                    
     office of  victims' rights; relating to  transfers from                                                                    
     the  dividend fund;  creating  the restorative  justice                                                                    
     account;   relating   to    appropriations   from   the                                                                    
     restorative  justice  account   for  services  for  and                                                                    
     payments  to  crime  victims, operating  costs  of  the                                                                    
     Violent   Crimes  Compensation   Board,  operation   of                                                                    
     domestic violence  and sexual assault  programs, mental                                                                    
     health  services  and  substance  abuse  treatment  for                                                                    
     offenders,   and  incarceration   costs;  relating   to                                                                    
     contributions  from dividends;  relating to  delinquent                                                                    
     minors; and providing for an effective date."                                                                              
9:48:23 AM                                                                                                                    
Co-Chair MacKinnon read the full title of the bill.                                                                             
Co-Chair MacKinnon  stated that the committee  would like to                                                                    
hear about what the bill was trying to solve.                                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK  KOPP, SPONSOR, stated that  the Senate                                                                    
had unanimously  passed a  similar bill  in 2014.  He stated                                                                    
that  the bill  attempted to  solve the  problem of  getting                                                                    
restitution  back to  victims of  crimes. He  referenced the                                                                    
many outstanding  restitution orders for which  there was no                                                                    
mechanism in place to complete.  The Alaska Criminal Justice                                                                    
Commission's   (ACJC)  December   2016   report  on   victim                                                                    
restitution highlighted the need  for restoration to victims                                                                    
of property crime. He stated that  the bill was a summary of                                                                    
an  effort  to  analyze  the  problems  in  the  restitution                                                                    
system.  He detailed  that the  Court  System reported  that                                                                    
there  was over  $120 million  in outstanding  court-ordered                                                                    
restitution. With  the exclusion of a  large restitution for                                                                    
the Alyeska  pipeline, the amount equaled  approximately $80                                                                    
Representative Kopp  continued that  the bill would  get the                                                                    
Crime Victim  Compensation Fund back to  its original state.                                                                    
In 1988, the  legislature had implemented a  vehicle to help                                                                    
deliver  restitution. Those  persons convicted  of a  felony                                                                    
(or persons with  a second or third  misdemeanor) during the                                                                    
qualifying  year  for  the Permanent  Fund  Dividend  (PFD),                                                                    
would be  ineligible to receive  a dividend, and  the monies                                                                    
would   instead  be   directed  toward   the  Crime   Victim                                                                    
Compensation Fund  for victim restitution. Over  the past 30                                                                    
years,  other  eligible entities  had  been  added, and  one                                                                    
inclusion was  the cost of incarceration  and probation. The                                                                    
fund was no longer  primarily for victim's compensation, but                                                                    
rather  was   known  for  paying   for  inmate   health.  He                                                                    
emphasized that  only two percent  of the fund  went towards                                                                    
victims of crime.                                                                                                               
9:52:29 AM                                                                                                                    
Representative Kopp  continued discussing the  rationale for                                                                    
the  bill.  He  specified  that HB  216  would  establish  a                                                                    
priority order for funding similar  to that of the Technical                                                                    
Vocational   Educational   Fund,   which   had   established                                                                    
percentages  to go  towards the  eligible entities.  A total                                                                    
percentage  of  the  fund  would   go  to  various  victim's                                                                    
services agencies,  and a  priority order  would be  set. He                                                                    
discussed the Crime Victim  Compensation Board, which helped                                                                    
individuals  affected by  violent crime  with funding  up to                                                                    
$40,000 per  incident. The second  priority for  funding was                                                                    
the  Office  of  Victim's  Rights (OVR),  which  would  help                                                                    
people with restitution  orders. The bill proposed  to put a                                                                    
vehicle  in  the   law  for  the  legislature   to  make  an                                                                    
appropriation  of   money  that  could  be   applied  toward                                                                    
restitution orders,  which averaged between $500  and $1000.                                                                    
He  reported  that some  individuals  had  been waiting  for                                                                    
restitution for up to 20 years.                                                                                                 
Representative Kopp  stated that the bill  did not alleviate                                                                    
an  offender   from  paying   the  state   back.  Additional                                                                    
priorities  went to  domestic  violence  and sexual  assault                                                                    
service  agencies, behavioral  and  mental health  treatment                                                                    
for  substance  abuse,  and the  Department  of  Corrections                                                                    
(DOC). The  bill set percentage  ranges based  on historical                                                                    
use that would  keep DOC "relatively whole."  With the range                                                                    
in the  bill, DOC  could still receive  the majority  of the                                                                    
fund needed to pay for  inmate healthcare. The priority list                                                                    
would  provide guidance  for the  Office  of Management  and                                                                    
Budget during  the time appropriations were  made. He stated                                                                    
that  the bill  was  unanimously endorsed  by the  Anchorage                                                                    
Municipal   Assembly  and   the  Anchorage   Peace  Officers                                                                    
9:56:11 AM                                                                                                                    
ERICK  CORDERO GIORGANA,  STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE  CHUCK KOPP,                                                                    
discussed the  presentation "House  Bill 216  - Establishing                                                                    
the Restorative Justice Account and Prioritizing Help for                                                                       
Victims of Crimes" (copy on file).                                                                                              
Mr. Cordero looked at slide 2, "Legislative Intent":                                                                            
     Restoring  crime  victims  to a  pre-offense  condition                                                                    
     through the Criminal Fund established in 1988.                                                                             
Mr. Cordero showed slide 3:                                                                                                     
     ?  59%  of  adult  women  in  Alaska  have  experienced                                                                    
     domestic violence  or sexual violence  throughout their                                                                    
     lifetime. (CDVSA Report)                                                                                                   
     ?  Compensation  claims  continue to  increase  yearly.                                                                    
     (VCCB  Report) and  in 2017,  the  majority of  victims                                                                    
     were women and children.                                                                                                   
     ?  The outstanding  balance  of  restitution orders  is                                                                    
     over $129 million.                                                                                                         
Mr. Cordero discussed the state's  leading rates of domestic                                                                    
violence and  child abuse. He  thought the bill  was another                                                                    
way the legislature could address the matter.                                                                                   
Mr.   Cordero    reviewed   slide   4,    "Compensation   vs                                                                    
     Emergency  funds  that   innocent  victims  can  obtain                                                                    
     without waiting for a conviction                                                                                           
    Court - ordered payments to victims post conviction                                                                         
Mr. Cordero  informed that compensation  was money  that was                                                                    
available before the court ordered  a restitution payment to                                                                    
a  victim.  Compensation  was available  right  away,  while                                                                    
restitution could be delayed for quite some time.                                                                               
Mr.  Cordero showed  slide 5,  "Criminal Fund  Use Over  the                                                                    
Years," which showed the historical  use of the fund From FY                                                                    
08  through FY  16.  He pointed  out that  at  one time  the                                                                    
fund's use  was largely  even between  DOC and  the agencies                                                                    
that  provided  services  to victims;  while  currently  the                                                                    
services to  victims received only a  very small percentage.                                                                    
He  noted that  the amount  of the  funds available  changed                                                                    
from year to year depending upon the size of the PFD.                                                                           
Mr. Cordero  spoke to slide  6, "Sample  Appropriations from                                                                    
the  Criminal   Fund,"  which  showed   a  bar   graph  that                                                                    
highlighted an example of how  the funds were used. The blue                                                                    
line depicted the  services to victims and had  at one point                                                                    
included  the  Council  on   Domestic  Violence  and  Sexual                                                                    
Assault  and the  operating  costs of  OVR  and others.  The                                                                    
yellow showed the funding going to DOC.                                                                                         
Mr. Cordero  reviewed slide 7, "Violent  Crimes Compensation                                                                    
Board,"  which  showed  a  bar  graph.  The  Violent  Crimes                                                                    
Compensation Board reported  that even with a  rise and fall                                                                    
in  violent   crimes,  there  was   a  steady   increase  of                                                                    
individuals applying  for compensation payments.  He pointed                                                                    
out a steady rise in  news claims received over the previous                                                                    
17 years.                                                                                                                       
Mr. Cordero discussed slide  8, "Violent Crimes Compensation                                                                    
Board," which  showed a  pie chart  entitled 'New  Claims By                                                                    
Crime Type.' He pointed out  that the majority of claims for                                                                    
compensation  were from  the  crimes  of domestic  violence,                                                                    
homicide,  and child  abuse.  He noted  that  most cases  of                                                                    
child abuse involved sexual abuse of children.                                                                                  
9:59:17 AM                                                                                                                    
Mr. Cordero showed slide  9, "Annual Outstanding Restitution                                                                    
Balances,"  which  showed a  line  graph.  He discussed  the                                                                    
spike  on  the  graph  in 2003  pertaining  to  the  Alyeska                                                                    
pipeline incident.  The majority  of persons were  owed less                                                                    
than  $1,000.   He  informed  that   there  was   a  $10,000                                                                    
restitution cap  in the bill  based on information  from the                                                                    
Alaska Court System.                                                                                                            
Vice-Chair  Bishop asked  about eligibility  for restitution                                                                    
and  assumed  that  it  would  require  a  court  settlement                                                                    
delivered by a judge.                                                                                                           
Representative  Kopp  stated  that an  individual  would  be                                                                    
automatically in a queue for  compensation given there was a                                                                    
police   report,  victimhood   was   established,  and   the                                                                    
individual   met   the  minimum   eligibility   requirements                                                                    
established  Violent Crimes  Compensation  Board. The  board                                                                    
considered  factors   such  as   whether  a  person   was  a                                                                    
participant in  the crime situation,  or rather a  victim in                                                                    
the  classic sense.  A restitution  order  came after  cases                                                                    
were adjudicated, which could take up to years.                                                                                 
10:01:10 AM                                                                                                                   
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
10:02:46 AM                                                                                                                   
Co-Chair  MacKinnon mentioned  eligibility requirements  and                                                                    
the process for restitution.                                                                                                    
Representative Kopp  stated that  there was a  $10,000 award                                                                    
for each individual and event. The  award would be made as a                                                                    
result of a court process by  due process of law, at the end                                                                    
of which  an adjudication of  guilt was given and  the court                                                                    
determined if  there was a  monetary restitution  award owed                                                                    
the  victim. There  was  protection in  the  law before  the                                                                    
amount of  the award was  arrived at, and the  victim's loss                                                                    
must be proved to the court.                                                                                                    
Co-Chair  MacKinnon asked  if the  perpetrator of  the crime                                                                    
was held responsible to pay the restitution to the state.                                                                       
Representative Kopp  answered in the affirmative.  He stated                                                                    
that previous  legislation required probation and  parole to                                                                    
set-up  payment   and  restitution  as  a   requirement  for                                                                    
successful completion.  He reiterated  that no  liability of                                                                    
the perpetrator was alleviated by the bill.                                                                                     
Co-Chair MacKinnon  asked if a  person had to  be identified                                                                    
in order for restitution to take place.                                                                                         
Representative Kopp  stated that a restitution  order had to                                                                    
identify  a  responsible  party.  He  thought  it  would  be                                                                    
possible  for  the  legislature to  appropriate  restitution                                                                    
funds  for  cases  in  which a  responsible  party  was  not                                                                    
identified,  but it  would be  complex. A  restitution order                                                                    
would  not  be  written  by  a court  unless  there  was  an                                                                    
individual that was successfully prosecuted.                                                                                    
10:05:51 AM                                                                                                                   
Senator Stevens asked if restitution  funds paid back by the                                                                    
perpetrator went back into the  compensation fund or back to                                                                    
the General Fund.                                                                                                               
Mr. Cordero  informed that the  repaid funds  currently went                                                                    
to  the  General Fund,  but  the  bill would  authorize  the                                                                    
legislature to  appropriate the recovered funds  into a fund                                                                    
that was created in Section 6 of the bill.                                                                                      
Co-Chair  MacKinnon  informed   that  the  presentation  was                                                                    
available online.                                                                                                               
Mr.  Cordero informed  that he  would  review the  Sectional                                                                    
Analysis, which  would address  the last  two slides  of the                                                                    
Mr. Cordero reviewed the Sectional Analysis (copy on file):                                                                     
     Section 1 - AS 12.55.045(m)                                                                                                
     Section 1 establishes that the  Alaska Court System can                                                                    
     accept  restitution  payments  or  prepayments  at  any                                                                    
     time. Language  that is explicitly stated  in Section 2                                                                    
    regarding the Alaska Department of Law is removed.                                                                          
     Section 2 - AS 12.55.051(f)                                                                                                
     Section 2  includes the process  that the  Alaska Court                                                                    
     System will use to  share information about restitution                                                                    
     orders  with  other  state   agencies.  It  amends  the                                                                    
     current statute to allow the  Office of Victims' Rights                                                                    
     to receive and share  information with the Alaska Court                                                                    
     System  consistent with  all the  rules  of privacy  as                                                                    
     required  by   law.  This   section  also   amends  the                                                                    
     notification  requirement  for  victims by  the  Alaska                                                                    
     Department of  Law to include information  on receiving                                                                    
     assistance  from  the  Office of  Victims'  Rights  and                                                                    
     information on how to apply for that assistance.                                                                           
     Section 3 - AS 12.55.051(g)                                                                                                
     Section 3  requires a notification from  the Department                                                                    
     of Law to victims about  their right to assistance with                                                                    
     collecting  restitution  payments  and  it  amends  the                                                                    
     period  from   30  to  90   days,  from  the   time  of                                                                    
     notification, for  a victim  to opt-out  from receiving                                                                    
     automatic  assistance. This  section allows  victims to                                                                    
     stop receiving assistance at any time in the future.                                                                       
Representative Kopp  informed that Section 3  incorporated a                                                                    
recommendation from the ACJC's  restitution report. The opt-                                                                    
out  would give  victim's more  time to  assess their  needs                                                                    
10:08:54 AM                                                                                                                   
Vice-Chair Bishop asked if the bill section allowed a                                                                           
victim to opt out of the process.                                                                                               
Representative  Kopp  stated   that  extending  the  opt-out                                                                    
period  would  allow for  a  victim  to  have more  time  to                                                                    
determine  an actual  loss and  whether assistance  from the                                                                    
state was needed.                                                                                                               
Mr. Cordero continued to address the Sectional Analysis:                                                                        
     Section 4  AS 24.65                                                                                                        
     Section  4 enables  the Office  of  Victims' Rights  to                                                                    
     assist  victims with  restitution payments,  subject to                                                                    
     appropriation,  from  the Restorative  Justice  Account                                                                    
     based   on   priority:   a  natural   person,   private                                                                    
     businesses, and state and local governments.                                                                               
     It  authorizes   the  Office  of  Victims'   Rights  to                                                                    
     establish  a  process  to assist  victims  through  the                                                                    
     Restorative  Justice Account  and  caps  the amount  of                                                                    
     funds that a victim can receive.                                                                                           
     Section 5  AS 43.23.028                                                                                                    
     Section 5  delineates the duties  of the  Department of                                                                    
     Revenue  to administrate  the  permanent fund  dividend                                                                    
     payments,  regulations,  timelines, and  deadlines  and                                                                    
     allows cooperation  with other  state agencies  and law                                                                    
     enforcement. It  requires the department to  pay annual                                                                    
     dividends   from   the   dividend  fund   to   eligible                                                                    
     recipients.  The  Department  of  Corrections  and  the                                                                    
     Department   of   Public   Safety  will   provide   the                                                                    
     Department  of  Revenue  with  a  list  of  individuals                                                                    
     ineligible for  a dividend in  order to  transfer these                                                                    
     funds  into the  Restorative Justice  Account. It  also                                                                    
     clarifies language about public disclosures.                                                                               
     Section 6  AS 43.23.048                                                                                                    
     Section 6  establishes the Restorative  Justice Account                                                                    
     as a  separate account in  the dividend fund.  It tasks                                                                    
     the  Commissioner of  Revenue  every  year to  transfer                                                                    
     from  the  dividend  fund to  the  Restorative  Justice                                                                    
     Account an  amount equal that  would have been  paid to                                                                    
     ineligible individuals if they had been eligible.                                                                          
     This section  allows the legislature to  prioritize use                                                                    
     of the  funds through  appropriations with  services to                                                                    
     victims as  the highest  priority by  using percentages                                                                    
     and ranges.                                                                                                                
     The section further clarifies  that a defendant ordered                                                                    
     to  pay  restitution  is   still  liable  for  payments                                                                    
     regardless of  whether a victim receives  help from the                                                                    
     Restorative  Justice   Account.  The   Legislature  may                                                                    
     appropriate   restitution   payments  back   into   the                                                                    
     Restorative Justice Account.                                                                                               
     The  section  clarifies  the bill  does  not  create  a                                                                    
     dedicated fund.                                                                                                            
Mr.  Cordero  informed  that  there   was  a  legal  opinion                                                                    
contained  in the  members' bill  packet that  informed that                                                                    
the legislature always had the  discretion whether or not to                                                                    
appropriate funds.                                                                                                              
10:13:10 AM                                                                                                                   
Mr. Cordero continued to address the analysis:                                                                                  
     Section 7  AS 43.23.055                                                                                                    
     Section  7  defines  the  process  and  duties  of  the                                                                    
     Department  of   Revenue  regarding   the  calculation,                                                                    
     eligibility,   and  distribution   of  permanent   fund                                                                    
     dividends. The  bill adds  language for  the department                                                                    
     to establish regulations pertaining to the Restorative                                                                     
     Justice Account created in Section 6.                                                                                      
     Section 8  AS 43.23.062(a)                                                                                                 
     Section 8  authorizes the Department of  Revenue to add                                                                    
     the crime  victims' compensation  fund, managed  by the                                                                    
     Violent  Crimes  Compensation  Board, to  the  list  of                                                                    
     entities that qualify for the Pick.Click.Give program.                                                                     
     Section 9                                                                                                                  
     Section  9  defines the  duties  of  the Department  of                                                                    
     Revenue regarding the list of  entities that qualify to                                                                    
     receive  donations   through  Pick.Click.Give's  public                                                                    
     database.   The  section   adds   the  crime   victims'                                                                    
     compensation fund to the list.                                                                                             
     Section 10                                                                                                                 
     Section  10 authorizes  the  Department  of Revenue  to                                                                    
     charge a  processing fee to  the entities  that receive                                                                    
     donations  through   permanent  fund   dividends.  This                                                                    
     section also  exempts this fee  from donations  made to                                                                    
     the crime victims' compensation fund.                                                                                      
     Section 11  AS 47.12.160(f)                                                                                                
     Section  11  authorizes  the Court  System  to  receive                                                                    
     payments  and pre-payments  from a  minor or  a minor's                                                                    
     parent  at any  time.  This  section removes  redundant                                                                    
     Section 12  AS 47.12.170(c)                                                                                                
     Section  12  authorizes  the  Alaska  Court  System  to                                                                    
     forward copies  of restitution orders to  the Office of                                                                    
     Victims' Rights and the Department  of Health of Social                                                                    
     Services.  It  instructs  the   DHSS  to  inform  crime                                                                    
     victims that they may qualify  for services through the                                                                    
     Office of Victims' Rights.                                                                                                 
     Section  12 also  requires that  information considered                                                                    
     confidential by law, remains confidential.                                                                                 
     Section 13 47.12.170(d)                                                                                                    
     Section  13 clarifies  that the  opt-out  period for  a                                                                    
     victim is extended  from 30 to 90 days from  the day of                                                                    
     notification  and instructs  the  Department of  Health                                                                    
     and Social  Services to notify victims  of their rights                                                                    
     to assistance.                                                                                                             
     Section 14                                                                                                                 
     Section 14 establishes an effective date.                                                                                  
10:14:47 AM                                                                                                                   
Co-Chair MacKinnon stated she  was contemplating the idea of                                                                    
Pick.Click.Give  contributions  to   state  government.  She                                                                    
mentioned a bill  that passed the Senate  that addressed the                                                                    
same subject.                                                                                                                   
Senator von Imhof asked if slide 12 had been addressed.                                                                         
Mr. Cordero stated  that the highlights of  law mentioned on                                                                    
the slide were the items covered in the Sectional Analysis.                                                                     
Senator von Imhof  asked about the reasoning  for creating a                                                                    
secondary fund when there was a fund already.                                                                                   
Representative Kopp  stated that  the fund  was a  line item                                                                    
rather than a true fund. The  bill would create the fund and                                                                    
use it as a  tool so that monies would go  into the fund for                                                                    
the  purpose of  the  appropriations based  on the  priority                                                                    
order proposed in the bill.                                                                                                     
Mr. Cordero added that the  bill would allow the legislature                                                                    
to  make  appropriations  to the  fund  from  repayments  by                                                                    
offenders, which would then be available for future use.                                                                        
10:17:24 AM                                                                                                                   
Co-Chair MacKinnon OPENED public testimony.                                                                                     
Co-Chair MacKinnon CLOSED public testimony.                                                                                     
Co-Chair  MacKinnon noted  that the  Director of  the Alaska                                                                    
Permanent Fund  Dividend Division and a  representative from                                                                    
the Court System were present.                                                                                                  
SARA  RACE,  DIRECTOR,  PERMANENT  FUND  DIVIDEND  DIVISION,                                                                    
DEPARTMENT OF  REVENUE, stated  that she  had a  fiscal note                                                                    
that outlined  how the proposed bill  would administratively                                                                    
change the  Crime Victims Compensation Fund.  She referenced                                                                    
the   way  dividends   were   calculated   for  felons   and                                                                    
misdemeanants.  She   mentioned  the   proposed  Restorative                                                                    
Justice  Account,  from  which   garnished  funds  would  be                                                                    
appropriated for victim's compensation.                                                                                         
Co-Chair  MacKinnon  asked if  the  bill  would provide  any                                                                    
additional burden for the division.                                                                                             
Ms.  Race stated  that the  division and  DOR would  take on                                                                    
additional  transactions if  the  bill were  to pass.  Money                                                                    
coming out  of the dividend  was itemized, but  the division                                                                    
was not involved in ensuring  the transfers occurred. If the                                                                    
bill were  to pass,  funds would flow  into the  new account                                                                    
and DOR  and the  division would  be responsible  for making                                                                    
sure money appropriated through  legislative process went to                                                                    
the correct  accounts. Likewise, transactions of  funds into                                                                    
the account  would be  under the  purview of  the department                                                                    
with the help of the Court System.                                                                                              
Co-Chair  MacKinnon  stated  that usually  regulations  cost                                                                    
between   $2,500  and   $4,000;  while   the  division   was                                                                    
requesting $5,000. She  asked Ms. Race to address  FN 7, OMB                                                                    
component 981.                                                                                                                  
Ms.  Race  stated  that  the first  year  after  the  bill's                                                                    
passage the  division would  be setting  up the  account and                                                                    
creating a  reporting process. In the  outgoing years, there                                                                    
was  $15,000 listed  on the  fiscal note  as there  would be                                                                    
transactions coming  in and out  (depending upon  the number                                                                    
of accounts).                                                                                                                   
10:21:58 AM                                                                                                                   
Senator Micciche  surmised that Ms. Race  was asserting that                                                                    
the  division  would  be  the payer  of  the  program  going                                                                    
Ms. Race stated that the  division had not completely worked                                                                    
out  the  logistics,  but  thought  the  division  would  be                                                                    
working  with  the  Court System  and  other  entities  that                                                                    
worked   with  individuals   directly.  She   suggested  the                                                                    
division would be working agency-to-agency.                                                                                     
Vice-Chair  Bishop referenced  Section  8  on the  Sectional                                                                    
Analysis. He  asked about the  addition of the board  to the                                                                    
entities qualified for the Pick.Click.Give program.                                                                             
Ms. Race  stated that the  Crime Victim's  Compensation Fund                                                                    
would operate  similarly to the  Survivor's Fund  within the                                                                    
program. The fund would not be  subject to the $250 fee or 7                                                                    
percent charge as part of the registration process.                                                                             
10:23:44 AM                                                                                                                   
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked for the  Court's perspective on the                                                                    
bill and the protentional impact on the department.                                                                             
DOUG WOOLIVER, DEPUTY DIRECTOR,  ALASKA COURT SYSTEM, stated                                                                    
that  the  bill  would  affect   the  Court  System,  as  it                                                                    
collected restitution  from defendants  to pass on  to crime                                                                    
victims. He  informed that  the collections  division within                                                                    
the DOL had  been closed, after which the  Court System took                                                                    
over the  task. Over the  previous year, the  department had                                                                    
disbursed over $2 million  in restitution payments. Payments                                                                    
were made  frequently by  incarcerated individuals,  and the                                                                    
Court  System  worked  with DOC  to  facilitate  restitution                                                                    
payments  from  prisoner  funds. The  Court  System  tracked                                                                    
amounts payed and owed.                                                                                                         
Mr. Wooliver  continued, and relayed  that after  passage of                                                                    
the Court  System would  need to  communicate with  both OVR                                                                    
and  DOR in  order to  share  information and  be in  accord                                                                    
about the  balance owed to  victims. The Court  System would                                                                    
continue to collect restitution and  would send the money to                                                                    
the appropriate  account. The bill  would affect  the extent                                                                    
to which  the court  system communicated with  the entities,                                                                    
and a  system would need to  be set up. He  thought that OVR                                                                    
might not  have a  system in  place, and  thought it  had an                                                                    
associated fiscal note.                                                                                                         
Mr. Wooliver continued to discuss  the bill's impacts on the                                                                    
courts. He asserted  that the bill would  have a significant                                                                    
impact if  the payments were  up to millions of  dollars per                                                                    
year due  to the  amount of  records that  would need  to be                                                                    
updated. The inverse was also true.                                                                                             
10:27:20 AM                                                                                                                   
Co-Chair  MacKinnon asked  if Mr.  Wooliver had  issues with                                                                    
any of the language in the bill.                                                                                                
Mr. Wooliver answered in the negative.                                                                                          
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if even  though the courts demanded                                                                    
restitution  as  part   of  the  process,  if   the  act  of                                                                    
collection should be the purview of the court.                                                                                  
Mr.  Wooliver stated  that the  Court System  only collected                                                                    
restitution to  pass on to  victims because DOL  had stopped                                                                    
doing  it. He  discussed the  importance of  restitution. By                                                                    
collecting restitution, the  Court System reduced additional                                                                    
workload by  diminishing its  potential caseload  of victims                                                                    
using the execution process to claim restitution.                                                                               
Co-Chair  MacKinnon reminded  that  the  bill proposed  that                                                                    
Courts   work  with   OVR,   which   would  perhaps   pursue                                                                    
restitution with  more vigor than was  previously attempted.                                                                    
She asked how he viewed working with the office.                                                                                
Mr.  Wooliver stated  that  the only  work  that the  system                                                                    
would share  with OVR was  the weekly sharing of  reports on                                                                    
restitution balances.                                                                                                           
10:29:28 AM                                                                                                                   
Senator  Micciche  read the  fiscal  note  and thought  that                                                                    
there  was  a  question  of whether  the  Court  System  was                                                                    
covered with  appropriate resources.  Hi liked the  bill. He                                                                    
asked Mr.  Wooliver to  speak to  the degree  of probability                                                                    
that the  department could absorb the  costs associated with                                                                    
passage of the bill.                                                                                                            
Mr. Wooliver  stated that  in the early  stages of  the bill                                                                    
the Court System  had tried to estimate  how much additional                                                                    
funding  OVR would  have to  make restitution  payments. The                                                                    
bill put a mechanism in  place by which OVR could facilitate                                                                    
the  payment   of  restitution.   He  stated  that   if  the                                                                    
department was required  to update 200 records  per week, it                                                                    
would  require  a full  position.  If  the amount  of  funds                                                                    
available to  OVR was  minimal, the  impact would  be small.                                                                    
Creation of a  fiscal impact note from  the department would                                                                    
depend upon  how much money the  legislature appropriated to                                                                    
the project.                                                                                                                    
Co-Chair   MacKinnon    referenced   the    interchange   in                                                                    
communication proposed in the bill.                                                                                             
TAYLOR WINSTON,  OFFICE OF  VICTIMS' RIGHTS,  ANCHORAGE (via                                                                    
teleconference), stated  that OVR fully supported  the bill.                                                                    
The  office had  observed extended  restitution orders  over                                                                    
the years made by the court  for victims, many of which were                                                                    
never  fulfilled (particularly  for  property victims).  She                                                                    
noted  an increase  in  property crime  and  noted the  only                                                                    
secondary recourse in pursuing  restitution was onerous. She                                                                    
thought that  the plan for the  proposed Restorative Justice                                                                    
Fund  would be  incredibly  helpful. She  stated that  there                                                                    
were  victims that  had been  waiting almost  20 years  from                                                                    
amounts of restitution in the range of $1500 to $2000.                                                                          
Ms. Winston  thought Mr.  Wooliver had  accurately described                                                                    
the   nature   of   future   communication   for   verifying                                                                    
restitution  orders and  other details.  She noted  that the                                                                    
verification  would  be a  new  function  for OVR,  and  the                                                                    
fiscal note  incorporated the addition of  a case management                                                                    
system for restitution files as  well as a position to enter                                                                    
the cases into  the system. Once payment had  been made, the                                                                    
Court system would need to update files.                                                                                        
10:34:26 AM                                                                                                                   
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if OVR's  role had expanded to help                                                                    
property  victims through  the bill,  or if  it already  was                                                                    
able to do so.                                                                                                                  
Ms. Winston stated that under  current statute, OVR was able                                                                    
to  help all  property  victims of  felony-level crime.  The                                                                    
statute  did   not  allow  for  assistance   to  misdemeanor                                                                    
property victims.  If the legislature wanted  to contemplate                                                                    
OVR addressing restitution  for misdemeanor property crimes,                                                                    
she thought it would require a change in statute.                                                                               
Co-Chair  MacKinnon asked  for a  dollar value  that made  a                                                                    
property crime a felony.                                                                                                        
Ms. Winston thought the amount  had been changed through the                                                                    
passage of SB 91 and  was approximately $2500. She continued                                                                    
that  OVR  could  help  with victims  of  vehicle  theft  or                                                                    
burglary,  regardless of  the amount  of  property that  was                                                                    
taken. Arson  and embezzlement  were other  conditions under                                                                    
which OVR could assist with restitution.                                                                                        
Co-Chair  MacKinnon stated  that the  committee would  check                                                                    
the dollar  value that made  a property crime a  felony. She                                                                    
thought  a  secondary  bill had  lowered  the  amount  after                                                                    
passage of SB  91 due to public outcry  that property crimes                                                                    
had not been taken seriously.                                                                                                   
CSSSHB  216(FIN)am  was  HEARD  and HELD  in  committee  for                                                                    
further consideration.                                                                                                          
Co-Chair  MacKinnon   asked  members  to   provide  proposed                                                                    
amendments by then  end of the following  day. She discussed                                                                    
the agenda for the afternoon meeting.                                                                                           
10:38:24 AM                                                                                                                   
The meeting was adjourned at 10:38 a.m.                                                                                         

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB 147 Sectional Analysis ver J .pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 147
HB 147 Summary of Changes ver A to ver J.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 147
HB 147 Sponsor Statement ver J.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 147
HB 147 Supporting Documents.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 147
HB 216 Legal Opinion Regarding Repayments 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
Hb 216 Legal Opinion Regarding Appropriation Priorities withough a fixed amount 18-057mlp 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB 216 Additional Documents Criminal Fund Use Over the Years with Percentages 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB216 Additional Documents Difference Bertween Restitution and Compensation 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB216 Additional Documents FY14 Felons Memo 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB216 Additional Documents FY15 Felons Memo 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB216 Additional Documents FY16 Felons Memo 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB216 Additional Documents FY17 Felons Memo 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB216 Additional Documents FY18 Felons Memo 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB216 Additional Documents HB245 from 1988 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB 245
HB216 Additional Documents Victim Restitution Reform in Other States Research 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB216 Additional Materials Restitution Statistics from ACS 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB216 Reference Document LRS Report of 2017 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB216 Restitution Sectional 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB216 Sponsor Statement 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB216 Support Documents 4.14.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216
HB 216 Additional Documents PowerPoint Presentation 4.18.2018.pdf SFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
HB 216