Legislature(2001 - 2002)
04/29/2002 04:22 PM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
MINUTES
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 29, 2002
4:22 PM
TAPES
SFC-02 # 80, Side A
SFC 02 # 80, Side B
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Pete Kelly convened the meeting at approximately 4:22 PM.
PRESENT
Senator Pete Kelly, Co-Chair
Senator Dave Donley, Co-Chair
Senator Jerry Ward, Vice Chair
Senator Loren Leman
Senator Gary Wilken
Senator Alan Austerman
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Senator Donald Olson
Also Attending: MARY JACKSON, Staff to Senator Torgerson, Chair of
the Senate Community and Regional Affairs Committee; MARCO
PIGNALBERI, City Manager, City of Haines; DAVID BLACK, Mayor, City
of Haines; LUCY HARRELL, Member, Haines Borough Assembly and Haines
School Board; WENDY HALL, Staff, Co-Chair Kelly; PATTY WARE,
Juvenile Justice Program Manager, Division of Juvenile Justice,
Department of Health and Social Services; ROBERT BUTTCANE,
Legislative and Administrative Liaison, Division of Juvenile
Justice, Department of Health and Social Services; JANET PARKER,
Retirement and Benefits Manager, Health Benefits Sections, Division
of Retirement and Benefits, Department of Administration; GREG
ROTH, Alaska Juvenile Correction Officer Association; KRISTI
HELGEN, Juvenile Probation Officer IV, Probation Services, Division
of Juvenile Justice, Department of Health and Social Services;
ROBERT BUTTCANE, Legislative and Administrative Liaison, Division
of Juvenile Justice, Department of Health and Social Services;
Attending via Teleconference: From Fairbanks: BERNARD GATEWOOD,
Superintendent, Fairbanks Youth Facility, and Alaska Juvenile
Correction Officer Association; JEFF RIGA; From Mat-Su: RAY
MICHAELSON, Superintendent, Mat-Su Youth Facility, and Member,
Alaska Juvenile Correction Officer Association;
SUMMARY INFORMATION
SB 359-MUNICIPAL ORGANIZATION GRANTS
The Committee heard from the sponsor and the local governments of
Haines. An amendment was adopted and the bill moved from Committee.
SB 367-PERS BENEFITS FOR JUV INSTIT EMPLOYEES
The Committee heard from the sponsor, the Department of Health and
Social Services, the Department of Administration and employees of
the Division of Juvenile Justice. An amendment was considered and
adopted and the bill was held in Committee.
SENATE BILL NO. 359
"An Act relating to organization grants for mergers,
consolidations, or unifications involving third class
boroughs."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
MARY JACKSON, Staff to Senator John Torgerson, Chair of the Senate
Community and Regional Affairs Committee, which sponsored this
bill, testified. She spoke of two communities contemplating a
consolidation and informed that a review of statute revealed that
the proposed consolidation is not eligible to receive
organizational grants.
Ms. Jackson stated this legislation would permit the receipt of the
organizational grants, with $200,000 provided in the first fiscal
year and an additional $200,000 in the second year. She compared
this to the amounts granted to other entities under existing
statute of $300,000 the first fiscal year, $200,000 the second
fiscal year and $100,000 the third fiscal year.
Senator Leman commented that he supported the efforts of the City
of Haines and the Haines Borough to consolidate, however, he was
unclear why the State of Alaska should pay $400,000 for this
process. He asked what activities must be funded, and whether these
expenditures were incurred by the State when other local
governments were consolidated, such as the City and Borough of
Juneau, the Anchorage Municipality, and the City and Borough of
Sitka, etc. He understood the need for the State to cover certain
expenses for areas that were not previously organized to encourage
them to organize.
Ms. Jackson answered this legislation is specific for third-class
boroughs and that Haines is the only area of the State with this
form of government.
Ms. Jackson read from existing statute as follows.
Sec. 29.05.190. Organization grants to boroughs and unified
municipalities.
(a) For the purpose of defraying the cost of transition
to borough government and to provide for interim governmental
operations, each borough or unified municipality incorporated
after December 31, 1985, is entitled to organization grants as
follows:
…
Senator Leman asserted there is no information included in the
backup information for this legislation indicating the necessity
for these expenditures in the Haines situation.
Ms. Jackson stated that the Senate Community and Regional Affairs
Committee determined it is important that the organizational grants
be offered to third-class boroughs, although in a lesser amount
than awarded to unorganized areas.
Senator Leman asked if this question arose in the Senate Community
and Regional Affairs Committee.
Ms. Jackson affirmed the question was posed and it was determined
that some amount should be provided. She expressed that budget
constraints are the "business" of the Senate Finance Committee.
Senator Leman supported efforts to encourage the organizing of
unorganized communities.
Senator Leman reiterated the need to understand the reason for
expending the State funds. He qualified the expenditure could be
justifiable and necessary, but he had no information to prove this.
MARCO PIGNALBERI, City Manager, City of Haines, referenced a
handout titled "Outline Estimate of Costs for Consolidation" that
details the anticipated costs involved in coordination [copy on
file]. He spoke to expenditures made to date for such services as a
consultant and legal fees to address litigation on the issue. He
noted that the local governments have covered these expenses to
date.
Mr. Pignalberi asked and answered why the State must pay $400,000
for these expenses, asserting the question instead should be why
the State does not appropriate $600,000 for these efforts because
that is the amount currently authorized for newly formed boroughs.
He stated that the Local Boundary Commission is unsure why the
consolidation is excluded from existing statute. He surmised that
in 1985, when third class boroughs were deleted from this portion
of statute and the $600,000 grant provision was added, it was not
anticipated that the Haines governments would consolidate.
Mr. Pignalberi stated the $600,000 grant program is for the purpose
of establishing first class city and borough governments. He
stressed this process is "part of the constitutional fulfillment"
that requires the State to work toward obtaining the least number
of governmental entities and the fewest number of tax assessing
entities. He asserted this has been the goal of the Haines
community since 1998. He spoke of an upcoming election to determine
whether the city and borough governments should be consolidated.
Mr. Pignalberi noted a cost benefit to the State from this
consolidation in that of one less applicant would be requesting
state grant funds in the future.
Mr. Pignalberi also stressed the new city and borough would provide
a stronger local government.
Mr. Pignalberi also pointed out a stipulation in the Alaska
Administrative Code requiring that consolidations must be completed
within two years. He asserted this could not be accomplished within
the deadline without the services of a contracted consultant.
Senator Ward asked the consequence if the State does not provide
the requested $400,000 in grant funding.
DAVID BLACK, Mayor, City of Haines, surmised the city would
continue its efforts for consolidation. However, he cautioned that
the anticipation that borough residents would incur increased costs
could provide the incentive for those voters to not support
consolidation. He informed of a recent election in which the
question to consolidate failed by two votes. He surmised the
proponents of the consolidation "are working in a very narrow
margin."
Senator Ward asked if the election included both city and borough
residents.
Mr. Black affirmed.
LUCY HARRELL, Member, Haines Borough Assembly and Haines School
Board testified to comments she has heard indicating that receiving
funding for this transition could be the "crucial" influence to
convince voters to approve the consolidation.
Ms. Harrell reminded that the current Haines Borough is a third
class borough and therefore its authority is limited to taxation
and school operation. She stated that current activities are being
conducted by the Borough assembly "in gray areas" of its
authorization. As a result, she stressed, it is difficult to
convince residents to run for public office, given the questionable
legalities of their actions as a government. She told of the few
people holding multiple offices. She asserted the intent to create
a government that "represents all people in the area."
Ms. Harrell spoke to the unfairness of providing grant funding for
other organizational efforts while excluding the Haines government.
She asserted the Haines consolidation would require both the
formation of a new government and the dissolution of the existing
system.
Amendment #1: This amendment inserts language into the title of the
bill, following "boroughs", to read as follows.
An Act relating to organization grants for mergers,
consolidations, or unifications involving third class
boroughs; and relating to identification by the Local Boundary
Commission of areas that meet the standards for borough
incorporation.
This amendment also adds a new bill section on page 2, following
line 2, to read as follows.
Sec. 3. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is
amended by adding a new section to read:
REVIEW OF UNORGANIZED BOROUGH. The Local Boundary
Commission shall review conditions in the unorganized borough.
th
By the 10 day of the First Regular Session of the Twenty-
Third Alaska State Legislature, the commission shall report to
the legislature the areas it has identified that meet the
standards for borough incorporation and the basis for its
determination, and make recommendations for legislative
consideration.
Senator Wilken moved for adoption.
Senator Austerman objected for an explanation.
Senator Wilken stated this amendment instructs the Local Boundary
Commission to identify those areas where organization into a local
government is feasible. He recalled past unsuccessful efforts in
this matter and assured this amendment was drafted with the
assistance of the chair of the Local Boundary Commission. He
emphasized it is not his intent to slow the process of passage of
this legislation. However, he stressed the matter requires "serious
consideration" and that he did not anticipate any member of the
legislature opposing the identification of "those areas that are
able to help themselves."
Senator Austerman commented he also did not want to hamper efforts
in passage of this bill, although he wanted input from the sponsor.
Senator Wilken assured that if the sponsor indicated opposition to
this amendment, he would remove it at a later date.
Ms. Jackson agreed Senator Torgerson has supported these efforts in
the past. She qualified he could have concerns if a fiscal note
were generated.
Senator Hoffman commented that it is "highly probable" this
amendment "drastically slow down and possibly kill this
legislation."
Senator Austerman asked if legislation has been introduced in the
House of Representatives that addresses grant funding for the
Haines government as well.
Co-Chair Kelly replied such a bill does exist.
Senator Austerman removed his objection to adoption of the
amendment.
The amendment was ADOPTED without objection.
Senator Ward asked for clarification of the outline of estimated
costs handout. He questioned the amount that must be spent during
the first year of consolidation rather than deferred to the second
year.
Mr. Pignalberi stressed the need to undertake the process as
quickly as possible. He stated all expenditures would not be known
until the process is underway. He expressed intent to accomplish
the consolidation in one year, and noted statute requires
completion in two years.
Senator Ward asked for an explanation of the "litigation
contingency."
Mr. Pignalberi told of the previous attempt for consolidation
undertaken in 1998 and a subsequent lawsuit involving a utility
operating within the city. He informed he has been told that those
parties opposing consolidation would attempt to identify issues
whereby a lawsuit could be brought to stop the efforts. He noted an
on-going legal dispute relating to consolidation regarding a
service area has incurred $25,000 in expenses.
Senator Ward asked what would occur if this bill passed into law
yet the Haines voters rejected the consolidation proposal.
Mr. Pignalberi noted the Haines government would not receive the
funds. However, he indicated that the efforts to consolidate would
be repeated.
Senator Ward questioned the manner in which the grants would be
appropriated.
Mr. Pignalberi explained that the funds would be appropriated for
the fiscal year in which they would be expended.
Mr. Pignalberi spoke to past grant appropriations for other newly
incorporated boroughs and surmised that the Haines consolidation
process could be completed in one year if the funds were provided
immediately. He detailed the timeline of conducting the elections
to consolidate and choose new assembly members.
Senator Leman referenced the aforementioned handout, which he
totaled at a maximum of $420,000 in grant funding. However, he
pointed out the language of the legislation states "for the
purposes of defraying the cost of transition." He remarked this
appropriation would cover the entire identified cost, rather than
just defray the cost.
Mr. Pignalberi disagreed and listed expenditures the city has paid
to date including consulting fees and litigation settlement costs.
He stated the handout identifies "broad categories of costs here
that are not meant to be detailed because we have no one available
to us who has gone through this before." He noted the city's
auditors have provided the estimates listed in the handout.
Senator Leman stated the legislature as recently as 1994 has
stated, "these grants don't apply to a borough incorporated by
consolidation or to a unified municipality." He stressed the intent
is for local governments to consolidate to form boroughs, and
expressed the situation in the community of Haines is different.
Mr. Pignalberi reiterated the purpose of the Haines effort is to
fulfill the Alaska constitutional requirement to create the least
number of government units and taxation jurisdictions and the most
effective local government. He again referred to the Local
Boundary Commission's assertion that this effort should be funded.
He remarked, "It's hard to make a template" to fit "every situation
around the State and fit it fairly." He pointed to efforts in the
City of Skagway to form a borough government and stressed that
community would be eligible to receive $600,000 in grant funding
for the effort.
Senator Leman agreed the grant funds would be available if the
areas considered for consolidation into a borough if the Local
Boundary Commission determined the efforts to be feasible. He
suggested Haines, Skagway, Gustavus and Tenakee Springs could be
consolidated into one borough. He did not support funding a change
of the City of Skagway to become the Borough of Skagway.
Mr. Pignalberi expressed he could only comment on the issue of the
Haines governments.
Mr. Pignalberi again spoke of the $1 to $2 million State funds that
would be saved within ten years as a result of a Haines
consolidation because the City of Haines would no longer exist and
therefore be eligible to receive capital improvement project (CIP)
grants.
Ms. Harrell, commented that a third class borough is not "a borough
as you understand it" but is rather a "sick dinosaur" with the
intention of avoiding forming a borough government and therefore
must be "put to rest".
Senator Leman did not oppose this argument, but stressed that based
on the information provided to the Committee, the State would
provide all the transitional costs as opposed to sharing the cost
with the local government.
Ms. Harrell responded $400,000 would not pay all the transitional
costs. She noted the borough is responsible for school operations
and stressed that a third class borough is prohibited from
deferring funds from school expenses to use for consolidation
efforts. She listed political activities and economic development
as activities the third class borough is prohibited from
participation. She stated this appropriation would not pay the
entire cost of consolidation, but only "a chunk".
Senator Wilken moved "to report SB 359 as amended from Committee
with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note."
There was no objection and CS SB 359 (FIN) MOVED from Committee
with a $250,000 forthcoming fiscal note from the Department of
Community and Economic Development.
SENATE BILL NO. 367
"An Act relating to retirement contributions and benefits
under the public employees' retirement system of certain
juvenile detention employees and juvenile correctional
institution employees."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
WENDY HALL, Staff to Co-Chair Kelly, testified that this bill was
introduced as an effort to help recognize those individuals who
serve as juvenile officers throughout the State. Currently, She
said, Alaska statute provides that peace officers and fire fighters
are entitled to a 20-year retirement service system while juvenile
officers participate in a 30-year retirement system. She stated
that this bill would add juvenile officers to the statute governing
the retirement system of peace officers and fire fighters.
PATTY WARE, Juvenile Justice Program Manager and Acting Director,
Division of Juvenile Justice, Department of Health and Social
Services, testified and read letter of support from George Buhite,
Director of the Division of Juvenile Justice, dated April 29, 2002,
into the record as follows [copy on file].
I want to thank you, the members of the Senate Finance
Committee and the Alaska Legislature for your support of the
Division of Juvenile Justice. Because of this support, we are
able to provide the people of the state with a wide range of
restorative justice services in which we hold juvenile
offenders accountable, work to repair the harm to those
impacted by juvenile crime and provide offenders and their
families with opportunities to develop new skills to be
productive and contributing members of our schools and
communities.
Over the past several years, the Legislature has funded the
construction and operation of our juvenile correctional
facilities in support of the public safety component of the
Division's restorative justice mission. But buildings in and
of themselves do not make our communities safer and our
offenders better equipped to change their behaviors.
Ultimately, it is the people who staff these facilities who
are responsible for the positive outcomes that flow to victims
and communities. It is our staff who guard, control and
confront the most hardened juvenile offenders, who guide
parents to better understanding and more effective methods of
regulating their child's life, who provide those impacted by
juvenile crime with information and opportunities to engage
with a system that strives to right the wrongs done to victims
and communities. These people, these staff members, are what
make the difference in the end.
I genuinely appreciate the support that you have shown [the
Division] in providing the means to expand our bed capacity
throughout Alaska. Today, [I] am asking you to support those
who work on behalf of our youth, our families, our victims and
our communities by considering and passing SB 367.
This legislation addresses a long standing inequity and would
give our youth counselors the same benefit now available to
each of the other correctional job classes in Alaska's adult
and juvenile systems. I urge you to pass SB 367 and again
appreciate all that you have done in support of our juvenile
justice system.
Senator Wilken cited page 3 line 25 of the bill, "…a juvenile
detention or juvenile correctional facility…" and asked if these
facilities are defined elsewhere.
Ms. Ware responded that juvenile detention and juvenile
correctional facility are defined in AS 47.14. She noted this bill
does not apply to any municipally funded or operated facility, but
rather only to State facilities.
Senator Wilken understood, but voiced concern that this statute
could be expanded to juvenile halfway houses or other juvenile
facilities in the future.
ROBERT BUTTCANE, Legislative and Administrative Liaison, Division
of Juvenile Justice, Department of Health and Social Services,
assured that statutory language is specific as to what constitutes
a juvenile detention facility.
SFC 02 # 80, Side B 05:09 PM
Mr. Buttcane agreed with Senator Wilken that it is important to be
mindful to avoid a reinterpreted definition of juvenile detention
facilities in a manner not intended.
Senator Ward asked what other states provide for a 20-year
requirement system for juvenile justice correctional officers.
Mr. Buttcane replied that he had researched the matter and learned
there is no consistency. He noted that counties rather than states
administer most juvenile systems. Therefore, he was unable to make
an accurate comparison.
Senator Ward understood a national organization of juvenile justice
correctional officers exists. He surmised this group would have
records of this.
Mr. Buttcane responded that the Division made inquiries of the
American Probation and Parole Association and the American
Corrections Association and both responded they do not track
retirement systems and referred him to individuals.
Senator Ward asked if any other state offers a 20-year retirement
system.
Mr. Buttcane did not know.
Senator Leman asked if a fiscal note is available.
Co-Chair Kelly informed that a fiscal note had not been submitted
for this legislation to date.
Senator Leman noted other discussions entailed that employees pay
the full actuarial costs of an earlier retirement and asked if such
a method is proposed for this legislation as well.
Mr. Buttcane reminded that this request has been before the
Legislature for the past 12 years. He recalled the most recent
scenario provided that the participating employee would incur
responsibility for the entire debt. However, he pointed out that
the potential benefit is "impractical" for certain employees
including police dispatchers, none of whom have opted to
participate because the indebtedness to the employee would be
"several tens of thousands of dollars". He shared that the Division
had an opportunity to include its employees in that plan but
determined it would not be practical as well as being a "parody
issue" in that other correctional officers are not required to
incur the expenses. He stressed the employees who work with
juvenile delinquents face the same dangers as adult correctional
officers.
JANET PARKER, Retirement and Benefits Manager, Health Benefits
Sections, Division of Retirement and Benefits, Department of
Administration, testified the bill would have an indeterminate cost
to the State and an actuarial cost to the participating employees.
She explained the employees would be eligible to claim service
retroactive to their date of hire with their indebtedness being the
difference in the amount of contribution to the retirement system
for the previous years of service. She added that the State would
pay the remainder of the actuarial cost. She informed that
approximately 240 employees would qualify under this system and the
total cost would be $7.2 million with a State rate contribution
increase of .0014 percent. She calculated the annual State expense
at less than $900,000 and that $428,000 of this amount would be
charged to the general fund.
Senator Ward asked of the 240 employees, how many had served 15 to
20 years.
Mr. Buttcane replied that approximately 46 employees were hired
before 1986 and are covered under the Tier I retirement system. He
noted these employees have served between 12 and 23 years. The
remaining employees, he said, have served less than 12 years.
Senator Austerman referred to page 2 of the fiscal note and asked
if the $428,000 amount charged to general funds would be an annual
cost.
Ms. Parker affirmed.
Mr. Buttcane qualified that the .14 percent rate could be paid from
the Department's budget without an additional appropriation
necessary. He noted that additional expenses resulting from
unemployment insurance rates increases and employee leave cash-ins
are absorbed as well.
Mr. Buttcane cited that approximately 65 percent of employees do
not remain in this field until retirement. He detailed the high
stress and necessary dedication to young people and expressed that
the 35 percent who remain in the field for 12 or more years are
"genuinely committed". Therefore, he predicted the cost assumptions
might not "bear true", thus the indeterminate fiscal note.
Senator Hoffman asked about hazardous duties incidents of the
previous five years.
Mr. Buttcane detailed a number of serious and significant
incidences where officers were strangled, bitten, kicked, and
otherwise attacked. He assured these are not daily occurrences, but
emphasized that smaller incidents are common. He noted workers
compensation claims have decreased from approximately $400,000 in
1997, due to increased training efforts, additional staff and
reduced overcrowding. He pointed out the youth facility staff do
not have access to many implements utilized in adult correctional
facilities, including clubs, etc.
Senator Ward asserted this legislation would allow trained senior
officials to retire early and subsequently reduce the number of
qualified staff.
Mr. Buttcane replied the Division anticipates this legislation
would encourage employees to stay longer than the average ten years
currently served and therefore increase retention. He admitted some
who might have worked 30 years would chose to retire sooner, but
reiterated testimony given before the House State Affairs
Committee, that the mean length of service of employees currently
eligible for 20-year retirement, is 22 years. He informed that many
employees could not afford to retire at 20 years of service, giving
as an example employees who have children in collage at that time.
He noted the average annual retirement under this program is
$18,000.
Ms. Parker detailed the approximately 45 percent of salary paid in
retirement benefits.
Mr. Buttcane reminded that the salaries for youth counselors are
between Range 11 and 13, which is relatively low for State
employees.
Senator Hoffman asked if were possible to work as a juvenile
correction officer for 20 years, work for a fire department for an
additional 20 years then retire with two complete retirement
packages.
Ms. Parker answered no, that the Public Employees Retirement System
(PERS) covers both fields.
GREG ROTH, Alaska Juvenile Correction Officer Association,
testified the Association has 240 members who staff seven
facilities in the state. He read a statement into the record as
follows.
We specifically chose our name, Alaska Juvenile Correction
Officers Association, because it accurately represents what we
do in our jobs. The public and job applicants are sometimes
confused by our working title of youth counselors. They
mistakenly believe that we see kids in offices or by
appointment. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact
we provide 24-hour locked correctional care and custody
related to the incarceration of people against their will. It
also includes all the duties that entails.
Each day in performance of our duties, youth counselors are
involved in a chain of custody with other law enforcement
professionals across the State. Minors are brought to our
youth facilities in handcuffs in the back of police cars.
They've been arrested for a crime. They've been brought to our
facilities in an angry, agitated or assaultive state. Often
times, they are violent or intoxicated. The officers turning
these youths over to youth counselors are given weapons,
shields, body armor and chemical deterrents in order to deal
with these offenders. Youth counselors use their skill, their
training and their relationships they've formed with the kids
in order to conduct their duties safely.
We also exchange custody of minors between youth counselors
and judicial services officers in the court buildings across
the street and other facilities around the State. We accept
custody from juvenile probation officers out in the field.
Often times we assist in those arrests-juvenile probation
officers request our assistance in those cases.
Some of our offenders are charged with very serious and
violent crimes and may spend 30, 60, 90 days inside our
facilities before being transferred to an adult facility. In
those cases, we transfer our kids over to adult correction
officers. In the meantime, we've held those juveniles the same
as adult correctional officers would have held them in their
facilities.
In addition to custody transfers, some of our youths stay in
our facilities until they are age 20. So we are stuck with
housing adults in some of our facilities. That happens every
day in the performance of our duties.
Also as mandated by statute, youth counselors make independent
arrests in the community in the pursuit of juveniles that have
absconded from our facilities or from an escort for a medical
or service transport. We in fact make arrests out in the
community.
The duties of the youth counselor position require solid
training and excellent skill development in handling resistive
clients. Peak mental and physical condition is necessary and
critical to safely carry out these duties. This bill, SB 367,
corrects the inequity regarding the retirement disparity
between youth counselors and all other job classes in the
chain of custody for offenders that currently exist.
The bottom line is that each and every day, youth counselors
put their lives on the line to keep Alaska safe and improve
public protection through the safe incarceration and
rehabilitation of juvenile offenders. Alaska Juvenile
Correctional Officers Association appreciates your time and
your consideration in support of this legislation.
Senator Ward reposed his question of whether other states provide a
20-year retirement for youth counselors.
Mr. Roth repeated earlier responses that counties and
municipalities in most states operate youth counselor operations.
He added that with the exception of Anchorage, most municipalities
in Alaska could not afford to operate juvenile correctional
facilities.
Senator Ward asked of a municipality that offers a 20-year
retirement to youth correctional officers.
Mr. Roth replied that many juvenile detention facilities are
operated by the county sheriff system, many of which are covered
under a 20-year retirement system.
Senator Ward noted sheriff deputies are trained and licensed to
carry firearms and to perform other duties. He asked if other
employees who provide the same duties as the youth counselors in
Alaska receive a 20-year retirement. He expressed he would not
support this legislation because he has seen no evidence of other
programs offering a 20-year retirement system. He indicated his
research in the matter has shown that most juvenile correction
officers qualify for a 30-year retirement system.
KRISTI HELGEN, Juvenile Probation Officer IV, Probation Services,
Division of Juvenile Justice, Department of Health and Social
Services, testified about the inclusion of juvenile probation
officers in the 20-year retirement system. She told of personally
petitioning the court on six cases of murder, one case of attempted
murder, and numerous felony and/or sexual assaults. She stressed
that the youths who committed these serious crimes were all
detained at youth facilities under the care of youth counselors.
Ms. Helgen spoke of the dangers faced by youth counselors who must
work in continuous direct contact with these juveniles in an effort
to carry out the Division's mission of restorative justice. She
stated that in addition to being responsible for protecting the
public by guarding these youth, youth counselors work with these
youth to hold them accountable for their actions, repair the harm
to victims and community, and assist youth in the development of
competencies so that they may be better citizens once released to
the community.
Ms. Helgen noted that as a juvenile probation officer, she could
request assistance from law enforcement when concerned for her
personal safety; however youth counselors do not have this option.
She relayed incidences in Bethel where youth counselors have
suffered injury. She expressed that as a "have", who benefits from
the 20-year retirement system, she is embarrassed to work with the
"have-nots", the youth counselors who do not receive this benefit.
BERNARD GATEWOOD, Superintendent, Fairbanks Youth Facility, and
Alaska Juvenile Correction Officer Association, testified via
teleconference from Fairbanks to encourage support for this
legislation. He stated this would correct an inequity and spoke to
the "misnomer" of the title "youth counselor" as these officers are
often the "last line of defense between the Alaska public and some
of the most serious juvenile offenders in the correctional system."
He detailed the range of counseling services intended to
rehabilitate and prevent the offenders from hurting themselves and
others.
JEFF RIGA testified via teleconference from Fairbanks to reiterate
the previous witness' statement. He added that he has experienced
during his 23 years in this occupation, many of the same threats as
other youth correction officers.
RAY MICHAELSON, Superintendent, Mat-Su Youth Facility, and Member,
Alaska Juvenile Correction Officer Association, testified via
teleconference from Palmer about his career experience beginning as
a juvenile probation officer in 1990. He talked about the inequity
of the 30-year retirement system for youth correction officers
compared to the 20-year system applicable for other law enforcement
personnel.
[Note: Teleconference quality from this site is poor.]
Senator Wilken referred to earlier discussion relating to the
definition of youth facilities and requested Mr. Buttcane share
information recently discovered.
Mr. Buttcane clarified that the definition includes youth
facilities operated by municipalities. He suggested amending this
bill to specify the 20-year retirement applies only to employees of
state-operated facilities to avoid extending provision to
municipally operated facilities.
Amendment #1: This amendment clarifies the definition of juvenile
officer as it relates to this legislation by specifying employment
by the State of Alaska. The amended language in page 3, following
line 22 reads as follows.
Sec. 6. AS 39.35.680 is amended by adding a new paragraph
to read:
(41) "juvenile officer" means a State of Alaska
youth counselor, unit leader, or superintendent in a
juvenile detention or juvenile correctional facility
operated by the State of Alaska.
Senator Wilken moved for adoption.
The amendment was ADOPTED without objection.
Co-Chair Kelly ordered the bill HELD in Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
Co-Chair Pete Kelly adjourned the meeting at 05:52 PM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|