Legislature(2019 - 2020)SENATE FINANCE 532

05/09/2019 01:30 PM 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
Download Video part 1. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
01:33:44 PM Start
01:36:20 PM HB49
03:22:02 PM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
Heard & Held
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
                 SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE                                                                                       
                        May 9, 2019                                                                                             
                         1:33 p.m.                                                                                              
1:33:44 PM                                                                                                                    
CALL TO ORDER                                                                                                                 
Co-Chair von Imhof called the Senate Finance Committee                                                                          
meeting to order at 1:33 p.m.                                                                                                   
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
Senator Natasha von Imhof, Co-Chair                                                                                             
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair                                                                                                  
Senator Click Bishop                                                                                                            
Senator Lyman Hoffman                                                                                                           
Senator Peter Micciche                                                                                                          
Senator Donny Olson                                                                                                             
Senator Mike Shower                                                                                                             
Senator Bill Wielechowski                                                                                                       
Senator David Wilson                                                                                                            
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
ALSO PRESENT                                                                                                                  
John Skidmore, Director, Criminal Division, Department of                                                                       
Law, In Room; Senator Jesse Kiehl.                                                                                              
CSHB 49(FIN) am                                                                                                                 
          CRIMES; SENTENCING;MENT. ILLNESS;EVIDENCE                                                                             
          CSHB 49(FIN) am was HEARD and HELD in committee                                                                       
          for further consideration.                                                                                            
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 49(FIN) am                                                                                              
     "An  Act  relating  to   criminal  law  and  procedure;                                                                    
     relating to  pretrial services; establishing  the crime                                                                    
     of possession  of motor  vehicle theft  tools; relating                                                                    
     to  electronic   monitoring;  relating   to  controlled                                                                    
     substances; relating to  probation and parole; relating                                                                    
     to  sentencing;  amending   the  definitions  of  'most                                                                    
     serious  felony,' 'sex  offense,'  and 'sex  offender';                                                                    
     relating to registration of  sex offenders; relating to                                                                    
     operating under  the influence; relating to  refusal to                                                                    
     submit to  a chemical test;  relating to the  duties of                                                                    
     the  commissioner of  corrections; relating  to testing                                                                    
     of  sexual   assault  examination  kits;   relating  to                                                                    
     reports  of  involuntary   commitment;  amending  Rules                                                                    
     6(r)(6) and  38.2, Alaska Rules of  Criminal Procedure;                                                                    
     and providing for an effective date."                                                                                      
Co-Chair  von Imhof  explained that  the  Department of  Law                                                                    
(LAW)  would  provide  an overview  regarding  changes.  She                                                                    
stated that  the meeting would  provide an  overview without                                                                    
the fiscal impact discussed.                                                                                                    
1:36:20 PM                                                                                                                    
JOHN  SKIDMORE, DIRECTOR,  CRIMINAL DIVISION,  DEPARTMENT OF                                                                    
LAW, IN ROOM, discussed CSHB 49  (FIN). He noted that the CS                                                                    
drew from  various bills including  the Senate  versions. He                                                                    
looked at the Sectional Analysis:                                                                                               
     ? Eliminate Marriage as a Defense to Sexual Assault                                                                        
     o  Repeals  marriage as  a  defense  to sexual  assault                                                                    
     except in cases where there  is consent and the conduct                                                                    
     is illegal due  to the nature of  the relationship but-                                                                    
     for the marriage  (probation officer/probationer, peace                                                                    
     officer/person in custody, DJJ  officer/person 18 or 19                                                                    
     an under  the jurisdiction of the  Division of Juvenile                                                                    
     ?  Sexual  Abuse  of  a   Minor  in  the  Third  Degree                                                                    
     Sentencing  o Makes  sexual  abuse of  a  minor in  the                                                                    
     third degree  a sexual  felony when there  is a  6 year                                                                    
     age  difference, thus  increasing the  sentencing range                                                                    
     from 0-2 to 2-12 years.                                                                                                    
     ? Enticement of a Minor                                                                                                    
     o   Deletes  "online"   from  the   crime  of   "online                                                                    
     enticement  of a  minor" making  any solicitation  of a                                                                    
     minor to commit sexual acts a B felony.                                                                                    
     ? Indecent Viewing                                                                                                         
     o Makes indecent viewing or  production of a picture of                                                                    
     a  child and  production of  a  picture of  an adult  a                                                                    
     registerable  sex offense  and  sentenced  as a  sexual                                                                    
     felony. Conduct  involving the viewing of  a picture of                                                                    
     an adult would be a class A misdemeanor.                                                                                   
     ? Theft                                                                                                                    
     ? Indecent Viewing involves conduct  such as setting up                                                                    
     a  camera  in a  locker  room  to capture  the  private                                                                    
     exposure of other people.                                                                                                  
     o Removes inflation adjustment.                                                                                            
     ? Failure to  Appear o Removes the 30  day grace period                                                                    
     for FTA  to ensure better enforcement  for ? defendants                                                                    
     appearing in court for the hearings, including trial.                                                                      
     ? Violating Conditions of Release                                                                                          
     o Pre-SB 91:                                                                                                               
     ? Escape                                                                                                                   
     Class A  misdemeanor if the person  violates conditions                                                                    
     while on release  for a felony. Class  B misdemeanor if                                                                    
     the person  violates conditions while on  release for a                                                                    
     misdemeanor. )                                                                                                             
     o Makes it a class C felony                                                                                                
     ?  for  a person  to  tamper  or remove  an  electronic                                                                    
     monitoring device while under  official detention for a                                                                    
     misdemeanor; or                                                                                                            
     ? tamper  or remove an electronic  monitoring device or                                                                    
     leave one's  residence or other  place designated  by a                                                                    
     court as a condition of release before trial.                                                                              
     o   Creates  a   generalized  terroristic   threatening                                                                    
     statute to address threats of harm.                                                                                        
     ? Drugs  o Possession -  First two offenses would  be a                                                                    
     class A  misdemeanor subject to  a sentencing  range of                                                                    
     0-365 days. On the third offense  it would be a class C                                                                    
     o Drug Distribution - Returns  distribution of drugs to                                                                    
     class B and A felonies from  the current C and B levels                                                                    
     and removes quantity as an element.                                                                                        
     o Methamphetamine Manufacturing  and Distribution - Re-                                                                    
     enacts  the  enhanced  sentences  for  those  who  make                                                                    
     methamphetamine around children  or who engage children                                                                    
     in the manufacture of methamphetamine.                                                                                     
     ?  Arraignment  o  Allows  48  hours  after  arrest  to                                                                    
     arraign a defendant and set bail.                                                                                          
     ? Presumptions For Release on Bail                                                                                         
     o  Removes the  presumptions  that are  in current  law                                                                    
     which require the judge to  release unless they find by                                                                    
     clear  and   convincing  evidence  that  there   is  no                                                                    
     nonmonetary condition that  will ensure the defendant's                                                                    
     appearance in  court or Removes  inability to pay  as a                                                                    
     reason for  the court to  review a bail setting;  and o                                                                    
     Makes the risk assessment tool  a factor that the judge                                                                    
     can consider  when determining  bail and  conditions of                                                                    
     ? Pretrial Electronic Monitoring                                                                                           
     o  Prohibits a  court  from granting  credit towards  a                                                                    
     person's   sentence  for   time  spent   on  electronic                                                                    
     monitoring before trial for certain offenses.                                                                              
     ? Probation  Lengths o Increases the  maximum probation                                                                    
     length for  sex felonies to  25 years and 10  years for                                                                    
     all other offenses.                                                                                                        
     ?  Caps  on  Sanctions  for  Technical  Violations  and                                                                    
     Absconding  o Repeals  the caps  on  the sanctions  for                                                                    
     technical violations ( currently 3,  5, and 10 days for                                                                    
     the   first   three    violations   respectively)   and                                                                    
     absconding  (up  to  30 days).  Returns  discretion  to                                                                    
     judges  and  the  parole board  to  impose  a  sanction                                                                    
     appropriate for  the offender,  the type  of violation,                                                                    
     and the underlying offense.                                                                                                
     ? Early  Termination Of Probation And  Parole o Returns                                                                    
     to  a true  recommendation of  the probation  or parole                                                                    
     officer instead  of a  mandated recommendation  after 1                                                                    
     or 2 years without violation.                                                                                              
     ?   Felony  sentences   -Increases  A   and  B   felony                                                                    
     presumptive ranges by approximately 1 year.                                                                                
     ? A Misdemeanor Sentencing  o Remove 30-day presumptive                                                                    
     sentence for  A misdemeanors and returns  discretion to                                                                    
     judges  to  impose  0-365   days.  Also  increases  the                                                                    
     sentencing range  for B misdemeanors from  0-10 days to                                                                    
     0-30 days.                                                                                                                 
     ? Presumptive  Sex Offense Sentencing o  Clarifies that                                                                    
     any  prior   felony  counts  as  a   prior  felony  for                                                                    
     presumptive  sentencing  purposes  in sex  cases.  This                                                                    
     means  prior felonies,  even when  they  are a  non-sex                                                                    
     felony, trigger  an increased  presumptive range  for a                                                                    
     sex offense.                                                                                                               
     ? Driver's License  after Felony DUI o  Allows a person                                                                    
     to  obtain  a  driver's   license  if  they  have  been                                                                    
     convicted of a felony DUI  that was not associated with                                                                    
     a  crime against  a  person  (vehicular assault  etc.),                                                                    
     their license has been revoked  for 10 years and in the                                                                    
     preceding 10 years  the person has not  committed a new                                                                    
     criminal offense.                                                                                                          
     ?  Driving  with License  Suspended/Revoked/Canceled  o                                                                    
     Returns DWLS to a crime.                                                                                                   
     ? Under  current law it is  a crime only if  the person                                                                    
     has had their license revoked due to a DUI.                                                                                
     ?  Out Of  State Sex  Offender Registration  o Requires                                                                    
     anyone  convicted  of  a registerable  sex  offense  in                                                                    
     another  state  to  register  in  Alaska  if  they  are                                                                    
     present in the Alaska.                                                                                                     
     ? Earned  Compliance Credits o Grants  credit against a                                                                    
     person's  term  of  probation or  parole  upfront.  The                                                                    
     reduction to  a person's period of  probation or parole                                                                    
     will be  at 1/3 instead  of 30  days for every  30 days                                                                    
     the  person  goes  without a  violation.  If  a  person                                                                    
     violates, they  will have time  added back on  to their                                                                    
     period of  probation or  parole. This  restructuring of                                                                    
     earned compliance  credits is similar to  how statutory                                                                    
     good  time is  awarded to  prisoners in  custody. Also,                                                                    
     prohibits   certain  offenders   from  getting   earned                                                                    
     compliance credits.                                                                                                        
     ?  Parole Eligibility  -  Returns  to restricting  what                                                                    
     crimes  are eligible  for  discretionary parole.  Makes                                                                    
     the following crimes ineligible:                                                                                           
     o  Non-sex  class A  felonies  (Robbery  1, Assault  1,                                                                    
     Arson 1, Escape 1, MIW 1);                                                                                                 
     o  B felonies  if  the  person had  one  or more  prior                                                                    
     felony convictions;                                                                                                        
     o  C felonies  if  the  person had  two  or more  prior                                                                    
     felony convictions; and                                                                                                    
     o B and C sex  felonies (Sexual Assault 2, Sexual Abuse                                                                    
     of a Minor 2, Distribution of Child Pornography).                                                                          
     ? Parole  Release Presumptions o Returns  discretion to                                                                    
     the  parole  board  by  eliminating  a  presumption  of                                                                    
     ? Parole Application o Requires  the person to actually                                                                    
     apply for discretionary parole  rather than forcing the                                                                    
     parole board to have a hearing automatically.                                                                              
     ? ASPIN  Use At Grand  Jury o Allows APSIN  (rap sheet)                                                                    
     to  be  used at  grand  jury  when  an element  of  the                                                                    
     offense requires proof of prior convictions.                                                                               
     ? Increase  Use of Video-Teleconferencing  - Encourages                                                                    
     the  use of  videoconferencing for  all pretrial  court                                                                    
     ? Involuntary  Commitments o Requires the  Alaska Court                                                                    
     System  to transmit  information regarding  involuntary                                                                    
     commitments that  have occurred  since October  1, 1981                                                                    
     to the Department of Public Safety.                                                                                        
1:39:12 PM                                                                                                                    
Co-Chair von Imhof asked about cybercrime.                                                                                      
Mr. Skidmore clarified that the  crime was related to online                                                                    
enticement as it existed in  current statute. The change did                                                                    
not  change it  from being  criminal, rather  it included  a                                                                    
face-to-face enticement.                                                                                                        
Senator Olson asked about the  possibility that two students                                                                    
that were in high school that may be enticing each other.                                                                       
Mr.  Skidmore  replied  that  the law  did  not  change  the                                                                    
requirement. He stated that the  elements stated that it was                                                                    
a crime when  the individual engaging in  the enticement who                                                                    
was older than  18-years-old, and the enticed  was under the                                                                    
age of 16-years-old.                                                                                                            
1:41:12 PM                                                                                                                    
Senator  Olson  surmised  that  the  solicitation  does  not                                                                    
relate to who "pushes send."                                                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore replied  that the solicitation must  occur by a                                                                    
person  18  years  of  age  or  older,  and  they  knowingly                                                                    
communicated with someone under the age of 16.                                                                                  
Senator Olson proposed a situational crime.                                                                                     
Mr. Skidmore clarified the question.                                                                                            
Senator Olson asked his question again.                                                                                         
Mr. Skidmore replied  someone who is 18 years  old or older.                                                                    
Statute related to solicitation of child.                                                                                       
Mr.  Skidmore sections  9-25 and  the vast  majority of  the                                                                    
sections same  as SB  32, which adjust  for inflation  for a                                                                    
Mr.  Skidmore  highlighted  section  9. He  noted  that  the                                                                    
addition of  theft in the  second degree. He  mentioned that                                                                    
the theft two  and the identification document  added to the                                                                    
1:45:01 PM                                                                                                                    
Co-Chair von  Imhof clarified that  the bill was  similar to                                                                    
that passed by the Senate.                                                                                                      
Mr. Skidmore  elaborated about the  new material  in section                                                                    
19 and the motor vehicle  theft. He noted that the conscious                                                                    
objective to commit a vehicle theft.                                                                                            
Senator  Wilson  asked  the   department's  opinion  on  the                                                                    
vehicle theft.                                                                                                                  
Mr. Skidmore  stated that the  department did  not recommend                                                                    
the crime, instead it was  advocated for by law enforcement.                                                                    
Therefore, the department supported the Section.                                                                                
Senator Wilson asked about intent described within.                                                                             
Mr. Skidmore replied that the  intent was not subjective. He                                                                    
stated  that   "intent"  was   defined  in   Alaska  Statute                                                                    
11.81.900,  which   was  a  definition  that   required  the                                                                    
conscious objective to achieve a particular result.                                                                             
Senator  Wielechowski wondered  if the  department supported                                                                    
expanded the  language to include breaking  into the vehicle                                                                    
to steal its contents.                                                                                                          
Mr.  Skidmore stated  that  he was  pausing  to process  the                                                                    
concept.  He shared  that the  concept would  allow for  the                                                                    
prosecution of  someone possessing such tools  to break into                                                                    
vehicles.  He   stressed  that  it   would  be  a   class  A                                                                    
misdemeanor.  He  announced  that   he  would  support  that                                                                    
1:50:20 PM                                                                                                                    
Senator  Micciche  discussed  stealing  a  vehicle  and  the                                                                    
felony charge. He asked whether  including the possession of                                                                    
motor theft  tools in  the theft  of objects  would increase                                                                    
the  level  of the  crime,  than  the  value of  the  stolen                                                                    
Mr.  Skidmore replied  that the  crime could  prevent people                                                                    
from  engaging in  the crime  itself. He  responded that  if                                                                    
someone  possessed  to engage  in  the  activity, the  tools                                                                    
would be used multiple times.                                                                                                   
Mr. Skidmore  discussed section 26,  page 14. He  noted that                                                                    
some theft is  just enough to be charged with  a lower level                                                                    
offence. He  referenced a statute allowing  the aggregation.                                                                    
He provided an example. He clarified that the statute                                                                           
Co-Chair  von  Imhof  provided   an  example  of  theft  and                                                                    
aggregate of charges.                                                                                                           
Mr. Skidmore agreed that it did not matter.                                                                                     
In response to a question  from Senator Bishop, Mr. Skidmore                                                                    
replied  that   the  other   body  established   the  notion                                                                    
discussed in section 26.                                                                                                        
1:55:53 PM                                                                                                                    
Senator Bishop  remarked that construction  sites constantly                                                                    
had  their  tools  stolen,  and   he  felt  that  should  be                                                                    
discussed further.                                                                                                              
Senator Micciche asked about  specific language. He wondered                                                                    
if any theft of items taken of value.                                                                                           
Mr.  Skidmore  stated  that he  had  focused  on  commercial                                                                    
establishments, but  agreed with  the addressing  of Senator                                                                    
Bishop's concerns.                                                                                                              
Senator   Micciche   appreciated   the   addition   to   the                                                                    
legislation.  He noted  that the  consequences were  steeper                                                                    
with the changes to the bill.                                                                                                   
Co-Chair  von  Imhof  looked  at  the  "or  persons",  so  a                                                                    
perpetrator could go  to homes or cabins over  six months to                                                                    
steal  items.  She  remarked that  the  "or  persons"  would                                                                    
result in more than $750.                                                                                                       
Mr. Skidmore agreed.                                                                                                            
Mr. Skidmore discussed sections 27 and 28.                                                                                      
Mr. Skidmore highlighted sections 29 and 30.                                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore addressed sections 31-36.                                                                                          
2:00:04 PM                                                                                                                    
Senator Micciche  asked whether the sections  met the intent                                                                    
of the discussions related to indecent viewing.                                                                                 
Mr. Skidmore  replied that the legislation  was drafted with                                                                    
the intent of the discussions in the legislature.                                                                               
Senator Wielechowski  wondered whether the  legislation made                                                                    
viewing pornography a crime.                                                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore replied no.                                                                                                        
Senator Wielechowski wondered about indecent viewing.                                                                           
Mr. Skidmore replied private exposure  in situation in which                                                                    
they would not think that  a person would take a photograph.                                                                    
He mentioned  a case  where a  person placed  a camera  in a                                                                    
public place to photo someone without their knowledge.                                                                          
Senator  Wielechowski wondered  about an  exception for  art                                                                    
that might be viewed in a museum.                                                                                               
Mr. Skidmore  stated not  a private  exposure for  art class                                                                    
was not considered private exposure.                                                                                            
Senator  Olson asked  medical professionals  who would  take                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore  replied that there  was an exception  with use                                                                    
for medical treatment in Section 36.                                                                                            
Mr. Skidmore discussed Sections 38 through 40.                                                                                  
2:06:22 PM                                                                                                                    
Senator Shower discussed law enforcement  and the use of the                                                                    
charge  of possession  to  -  1. entice  people  to go  into                                                                    
treatment; and  2. have  the tool  to ensure  prosecution or                                                                    
have evidence. He felt that the bill was removing the tool.                                                                     
Mr.  Skidmore agreed  that the  bill  kept the  charge as  a                                                                    
misdemeanor, but  would be subject  to zero to 365  days; as                                                                    
opposed to current  law where the first  two possessions get                                                                    
zero jail time. The idea was having  up to a year in jail to                                                                    
use as either  the incentive for treatment  or the incentive                                                                    
for  cooperation.  He  understood  that there  was  still  a                                                                    
difference between  a misdemeanor  and felony,  but stressed                                                                    
that  it   was  a  policy   issue.  He  stressed   that  the                                                                    
administration  originally  requested  the felony.  He  felt                                                                    
that  the  change  was  still  a  substantial  step  in  the                                                                    
direction to help law enforcement and prosecutors.                                                                              
Co-Chair von  Imhof wondered  whether the "up  to a  year in                                                                    
jail" was the change.                                                                                                           
Mr.  Skidmore replied  in the  affirmative.  He stated  that                                                                    
there were two important changes:  1. The first two offenses                                                                    
would carry up  to a year in jail, 2.  A third offense would                                                                    
become a Class C felony.                                                                                                        
2:09:15 PM                                                                                                                    
Senator Wielechowski looked  at page 25, lines  1 through 5,                                                                    
which addressed possession of a  schedule 3A, 4A, 5A, and 6A                                                                    
controlled  substance  with   reckless  disregard  that  the                                                                    
possession  occur within  500  feet of  a  school ground  or                                                                    
recreation  youth  center. He  noted  that  there were  many                                                                    
houses  in  that  range,  and   noted  that  a  schedule  6A                                                                    
substance was marijuana. He wondered  about a person who had                                                                    
an  ounce of  legal marijuana  in their  home, and  wondered                                                                    
whether that  person would be  committing a crime  under the                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore  replied in the  negative, because  that person                                                                    
was in  compliance with  AS 17.38,  which had  the marijuana                                                                    
regulatory exemptions.                                                                                                          
Senator  Micciche  looked at  page  26,  which had  the  two                                                                    
required  convictions  that would  become  a  felony on  the                                                                    
third  conviction.  He  wondered   whether  it  was  in  the                                                                    
legislature  to require  a different  felony  on the  second                                                                    
conviction, if  looking for some middle  ground. He stressed                                                                    
that  getting  caught  twice  with  possession  might  imply                                                                    
hundreds of injections of drugs.  He wondered whether it was                                                                    
possible  for the  legislature to  require a  felony on  the                                                                    
second arrest.                                                                                                                  
Mr.  Skidmore replied  that it  was a  complicated question,                                                                    
because  the SEJ  contemplated resolving  a case  by setting                                                                    
certain conditions.                                                                                                             
Senator  Micciche clarified  that if  the situation  did not                                                                    
work  the  first time,  the  ability  to require  successful                                                                    
treatment. He stressed that compromise is constitutional.                                                                       
Mr. Skidmore agreed to look into that consideration.                                                                            
Mr. Skidmore discussed section 43  and misconduct in the 5th                                                                    
degree. He  noted that the  differences related back  to the                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore moved  to sections 44 and 45  that continued to                                                                    
deal  with  the  drug  statutes. He  pointed  out  that  the                                                                    
statutes were  now written to  assure that the  6a substance                                                                    
would not qualify.                                                                                                              
2:14:36 PM                                                                                                                    
Senator Micciche asked for a  reminder about misconduct of a                                                                    
controlled substance and 4th and 5th degrees.                                                                                   
Mr. Skidmore  summarized that 4  degree was class  C felony.                                                                    
He stated that misconduct  involving controlled substance in                                                                    
the  5th   degree  was  possession  of   various  controlled                                                                    
substances other  than marijuana, that would  make the first                                                                    
two  offenses a  Class  A misdemeanor.  He  noted the  other                                                                    
subsections that dealt with some other concepts.                                                                                
Senator  Micciche  wondered  whether   there  was  logic  in                                                                    
tracking between the 4th and 5th degree.                                                                                        
Mr.  Skidmore   stated  that  he  did   not  understand  the                                                                    
Senator Micciche assumed that the  5th degree required to or                                                                    
more convictions for a felony charge.                                                                                           
Mr.  Skidmore  replied  that the  distinction  included  the                                                                    
possession,   but  left   the  subsection   that  made   the                                                                    
possession a  misdemeanor. He  stated that  prior to  SB 91,                                                                    
both misconduct involving a controlled  substance in the 4th                                                                    
and 5th degree  broke out a more complex  tiered approach to                                                                    
possession  or  distribution  of  some of  the  other  lower                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore transitioned to  procedure discussed in section                                                                    
46-48.  Time held  prior to  arraignment same  as SB  33. He                                                                    
noted that section 47-52 all addressed bail.                                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore continued with section  48 and 49 including the                                                                    
subsequent bail hearing.                                                                                                        
2:21:11 PM                                                                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore continued with the subsections.                                                                                    
Senator  Shower  recalled  repeal  language for  SB  91.  He                                                                    
expressed concern that judges would use the information was                                                                     
Mr.  Skidmore  responded that  the  court  must consider  12                                                                    
factors   and  the   relationships.  Any   pending  criminal                                                                    
charges. He  wondered about the  risk assessment  tool. This                                                                    
version says that  the factors should be  considered. All of                                                                    
the information in front of them. Risk assessment tool                                                                          
2:25:10 PM                                                                                                                    
Senator Micciche  asked about the pretrial  assessment tool.                                                                    
He discussed that lack of  requirement for the pretrial risk                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore  replied that  subsection b,  lines 19  and 20,                                                                    
which said,  "in addition  to conditions  under 'A'  of this                                                                    
section,  the  judicial  officer  may order  the  person  to                                                                    
submit." He stated that in  reading that in combination with                                                                    
subsection  c, found  on  page 32,  which  said, "the  court                                                                    
shall consider the risk assessment  provided by the pretrial                                                                    
services officer."  He stated that  the court  would examine                                                                    
whatever the  risk assessment tells  them, but were  free to                                                                    
assign whatever weight they deep appropriate.                                                                                   
Senator  Micciche opined  that  a  pretrial risk  assessment                                                                    
might not be ordered.                                                                                                           
Mr. Skidmore replied that the  law stated that statutes must                                                                    
conform with  each other. Risk assessment  is available, and                                                                    
it should be considered.                                                                                                        
Senator Micciche followed up regarding the risk assessment.                                                                     
Mr. Skidmore replied  that there was not a  require to order                                                                    
a risk assessment.                                                                                                              
Senator Bishop  felt that with  the word, "shall"  the judge                                                                    
must do the requirements.                                                                                                       
Mr.  Skidmore  stated  that  the  judge  must  consider  the                                                                    
factors.  He  noted  that  the   information  might  not  be                                                                    
something to  consider. He stressed  that the judge  may not                                                                    
have all of that information.                                                                                                   
Senator Bishop paused because he did not understand                                                                             
Mr. Skidmore  moved to sections  51 and 52  discussing third                                                                    
party custodians, which is the same language as SB 33.                                                                          
2:30:47 PM                                                                                                                    
Senator Micciche  asked about changes  in the Senate,  so he                                                                    
surmised that  the language was different  than the Senate's                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore replied that it  was the exact same language as                                                                    
the Senate.                                                                                                                     
Co-Chair von Imhof clarified that  the language was the same                                                                    
in Section 52.                                                                                                                  
Mr. Skidmore agree.                                                                                                             
Mr. Skidmore sections 53 and 55.                                                                                                
Co-Chair von  Imhof asked how  it changes the intent  in the                                                                    
Senate version.                                                                                                                 
Mr. Skidmore replied that an  individual would have to be on                                                                    
probation   for  two   years  or   eighteen  months   before                                                                    
recommendations are made for early termination.                                                                                 
Co-Chair  von  Imhof  noted  that   the  section  adds  more                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore agreed.                                                                                                            
Mr. Skidmore  moved on to  section 57 and caps  on technical                                                                    
Co-Chair  von Imhof  asked the  Department of  Law's opinion                                                                    
about the caps.                                                                                                                 
Mr. Skidmore  stated that  Department of  Law looked  at the                                                                    
caps.   He  asked   for   consideration  of   administrative                                                                    
sanction,  which  was  an intermediate  step.  He  used  the                                                                    
example including  the filing  of a  petition to  change the                                                                    
conditions enforced.                                                                                                            
Mr.   Skidmore  continued   that  the   technical  violation                                                                    
addressed the  lesser penalty. He  stated that the  bill now                                                                    
allowed  for  adjusting  behavior.  He  pointed  out  21,000                                                                    
administrative  sanctions   and  opportunities   to  correct                                                                    
behavior  without creating  a  petition.  Petitions must  be                                                                    
addressing  more  significant  violations.  He  stated  that                                                                    
technical caps do not work and should be eliminated.                                                                            
Senator Wilson wondered about third party vendors.                                                                              
Mr. Skidmore replied  that the technical caps  only apply to                                                                    
2:41:30 PM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
2:42:16 PM                                                                                                                    
Mr.  Skidmore  replied that  technical  caps  only apply  to                                                                    
felony probation.                                                                                                               
Co-Chair  von Imhof  asked about  Section 57,  and that  the                                                                    
Department  of Law  was not  thrilled. She  wondered if  the                                                                    
administrative sanctions  could overrule  Sections 1  and 2,                                                                    
and  ignore  the  caps.  She   queried  the  flexibility  of                                                                    
probation officers.                                                                                                             
Mr.  Skidmore  replied  that probation  officers  could  not                                                                    
ignore subsection C  1 and 2. He explained that  the cap was                                                                    
a  restriction placed  on the  judge, not  on the  probation                                                                    
2:45:17 PM                                                                                                                    
Senator Wielechowski requested  the available administrative                                                                    
sanctions for probation officers.                                                                                               
Mr.  Skidmore  replied that  caps  could  be eliminated.  He                                                                    
advocated for the administrative sanctions.                                                                                     
Senator  Wielechowski  discussed  the   goal  of  quick  and                                                                    
immediate action, and  wondered whether it could  be tied to                                                                    
the violation.                                                                                                                  
Mr. Skidmore replied that it could be considered.                                                                               
Mr. Skidmore explained Sections 58 through 73.                                                                                  
2:54:18 PM                                                                                                                    
Co-Chair von  Imhof looked at  page 52, line 3,  which said,                                                                    
"a person  has not been  convicted of a criminal  offense in                                                                    
the  ten  years preceding  the  request  for restoration  of                                                                    
license." She  surmised that  if a person  had not  an issue                                                                    
for ten years, there license could be reinstated.                                                                               
Mr.  Skidmore   reviewed  the  provision  and   the  revoked                                                                    
driver's license.  He agreed that  10 years  without another                                                                    
criminal  offense,   would  be  eligible  to   have  license                                                                    
Co-Chair von  Imhof announced that  it was identical  to the                                                                    
provisions in the Senate version.                                                                                               
2:56:09 PM                                                                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore  same concept and identical  to senate version.                                                                    
He looked at Section 73.                                                                                                        
Senator Wilson used the example  of someone with seven DUIs,                                                                    
but did  not harm  anyone. He stated  that after  ten years,                                                                    
then it was ok to get a driver's license.                                                                                       
Mr. Skidmore stated  that the person must have to  go for 10                                                                    
years without any other issue or conviction.                                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore discussed Section 74.                                                                                              
Senator Bishop  asked about a timeline  for the commissioner                                                                    
to establish the regulations.                                                                                                   
Mr.  Skidmore replied  no. He  agreed to  examine the  issue                                                                    
Senator Bishop  wondered if the  issue could be  nailed down                                                                    
to be included in the bill.                                                                                                     
Mr.  Skidmore stated  that the  law said  that the  law must                                                                    
have regulations.                                                                                                               
Senator Shower noted the attempt  to separate the accounting                                                                    
for time, because  there was a possible  accounting for time                                                                    
while at home.  He wondered whether there was  an attempt to                                                                    
fix that issue.                                                                                                                 
Mr. Skidmore  clarified that the concepts  were separate. He                                                                    
stated that  probation could  be reduced  by 33  percent. He                                                                    
noted how the litigation could resolve the litigation.                                                                          
Co-Chair Stedman handed the gavel to Co-Chair von Imhof.                                                                        
3:01:12 PM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
3:05:57 PM                                                                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore discussed Sections 75 through 77.                                                                                  
Co-Chair von Imhof asked Department of Law's opinion.                                                                           
Mr. Skidmore shared that they had no position.                                                                                  
3:10:15 PM                                                                                                                    
Mr.  Skidmore moved  to section  78 and  the eligibility  of                                                                    
discretionary parole.  The amendment  occurred on  the House                                                                    
Senator  Wilson  queried  what  the  language  was  changing                                                                    
Mr. Skidmore replied  that the Senate version was  SB 34, in                                                                    
Section  10 that  set out  the ineligibility  or eligibility                                                                    
for discretionary parole.                                                                                                       
Co-Chair  von   Imhof  surmised   that  the   House  version                                                                    
increased   the  number   of  requirements   needed  to   be                                                                    
Mr.  Skidmore agreed.  He replied  that  the difference  was                                                                    
that the  current version  stated that  there would  be more                                                                    
individuals  eligible  to  apply for  discretionary  parole,                                                                    
therefore  it  would  be more  restrictive.  The  difference                                                                    
between the two was the number of prior felonies.                                                                               
Co-Chair von  Imhof remarked that  it was the  discretion of                                                                    
the  Board,  so  the  Board ultimately  had  the  discretion                                                                    
regardless of the number of prior felonies.                                                                                     
Mr. Skidmore agreed.                                                                                                            
3:14:23 PM                                                                                                                    
Senator Micciche  asked where  the unclassified  was located                                                                    
in  the  list  of  people  who would  not  be  eligible  for                                                                    
discretionary parole.                                                                                                           
Mr. Skidmore replied that a  different statute addressed the                                                                    
unclassified crimes, and were restricted.                                                                                       
Senator Wilson asked whether  geriatric release was included                                                                    
in SB 91.                                                                                                                       
Mr. Skidmore replied in the  affirmative, and looked at page                                                                    
57, lines 6 through 8.                                                                                                          
Mr. Skidmore discussed Sections 79 through 83.                                                                                  
Mr. Skidmore highlighted Sections 84 through 91.                                                                                
3:20:35 PM                                                                                                                    
Senator Wilson wondered about hearings.                                                                                         
Mr.  Skidmore  replied  that  a  number  of  other  hearings                                                                    
occurred and would occur.                                                                                                       
Co-Chair  von Imhof  stated that  the  meeting would  resume                                                                    
tomorrow  at 9:00  am.  She noted  that  there were  missing                                                                    
aspects of the Senate version of the bills.                                                                                     
CSHB 49(FIN) am was HEARD  and HELD in committee for further                                                                    
3:22:02 PM                                                                                                                    
The meeting was adjourned at 3:21 p.m.                                                                                          

Document Name Date/Time Subjects