Legislature(2003 - 2004)
05/10/2003 09:05 AM 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
May 10, 2003
9:05 AM
TAPES
SFC-03 # 86, Side A
SFC 03 # 86, Side B
SFC 03 # 87, Side A
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Gary Wilken convened the meeting at approximately 9:05 AM.
PRESENT
Senator Gary Wilken, Co-Chair
Senator Lyda Green, Co-Chair
Senator Con Bunde, Vice Chair
Senator Robin Taylor
Senator Ben Stevens
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Senator Donny Olson
Also Attending: SENATOR GARY STEVENS; SENATOR FRED DYSON;
REPRESENTATIVE TOM ANDERSON; MIKE BARTON, Commissioner, Department
of Transportation and Public Facilities; TOM WRIGHT, Staff to
Representative John Harris; JACQUELINE TUPOU, Staff to Senator Lyda
Green; DOUGLAS BRUCE, Director, Division of Public Health,
Department of Health and Social Services; WES KELLER, Staff to
Senator Fred Dyson; ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General,
Legal Services Section-Juneau, Criminal Division, Department of
Law; JUANITA HENSLEY, Special Assistant, Office of the
Commissioner, Department of Public Safety; LINDA SYLVESTER, Staff
to Representative Bruce Weyhrauch; KATHLEEN STRASBAUGH, Assistant
Attorney General, Governmental Affairs Section, Civil Division,
Department of Law
Attending via Teleconference: From Offnet Sites: DR. JOHN
ROBERTSON, Medical Director, Department of Corrections; DR. BETH
FUNK, Epidemiology Section, Division of Public Health, Department
of Health and Social Services; CHRIS BEHEIM, Director, Scientific
Crime Detection Laboratory and Manager, DNA Database, Department of
Public Safety; LINDA WILSON, Deputy Director, Public Defender
Agency, Department of Administration
SUMMARY INFORMATION
SB 185-ROYALTY REDUCTION ON CERTAIN OIL
This bill was scheduled but not heard.
HB 229-PAROLE FOR MEDICAL/COGNITIVE DISABILITY
The Committee heard from the bill's sponsors, the Department of
Corrections, and the Department of Health and Social Services. One
amendment was presented but withdrawn from consideration, and the
bill was held in Committee.
HB 105-COMMERCIAL FISHING LOANS
The Committee heard testimony from the sponsor and reported the
bill from Committee.
SCR 10-CHARTER SCHOOL TASK FORCE
The Committee heard from the sponsor, considered two amendments and
adopted one, and reported the bill from Committee.
HB 49-EXPAND DNA DATABASE
The Committee heard from the bill's sponsor, the Department of Law,
and the Department of Public Safety. The bill reported from
Committee.
HB 109-TREASURY WARRANTS/LAPSED APPROPRIATIONS
The Committee heard from the sponsor and reported the bill from
Committee.
SB 213-KNIK ARM BRIDGE AND TOLL AUTHORITY
The Committee heard from the Department of Transportation and
Public Facilities and the Department of Law. The bill was held in
Committee.
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 229(FIN)
"An Act relating to special medical parole and to prisoners
who are severely medically or cognitively disabled."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-chair Wilken stated that this legislation would provide the
Alaska Board of Parole the flexibility to deny or approve medical
parole.
TOM WRIGHT, Staff to Representative John Harris, Co-Chair of the
House Finance Committee, stated that Senator Lyda Green's staff
would present testimony on the behalf of the House Finance
Committee, the bill's sponsor.
JACQUELINE TUPOU, Staff to Senator Lyda Green, commented that this
bill would allow the Parole Board to grant parole to severely
disabled or ill prisoners. As a testament to the Parole Board's
"proven track record" regarding discretionary parole decisions, she
informed that prisoners who are released on mandatory parole have a
77-percent recidivism rate as compared to a one-percent recidivism
rate for those prisoners awarded discretionary parole by the Parole
Board.
Ms. Tupou stated that the State's inmate population is comprised of
430 individuals 50 years of age or older and that 23 percent of the
430 are more than 60 years of age. She expressed that the aging
prison population is incurring great medical expense to the State,
as she informed that people in State custody are exempt from
Medicaid or Medicare programs and Veterans or Native American
benefits. Therefore, she communicated that this legislation would
enable the Department to formulate a release plan for qualifying,
critically ill prisoners provided that such things as where they
would live and who their caregivers would be are addressed. She
assured the Committee that the release plan must be developed
before a prisoner's name would be advanced to the Parole Board.
Ms. Tupou stated that even though some of these prisoners are
currently in a hospital or other care facility, because they are in
State custody, the State is required to post a guard with them 24-
hours a day, regardless of the patient's physical situation. Were
these prisoners granted a medical parole, she stated that the cost
of the individual's care would be provided by federal matching
monies or by family resources. She reiterated that, under current
conditions, these funding options are not available.
Ms. Tupou declared that, were the medical parole option being
considered, the prisoner's victim would be notified and allowed to
comment. She further attested that were the action "to diminish the
seriousness of the crime," the medical parole would not be granted.
Ms. Tupou reiterated that this legislation would grant the Parole
Board the flexibility to make these discretionary parole decisions.
Senator Bunde asked whether a prisoner must be diagnosed with a
terminal medical condition before being considered for medical
parole.
Ms. Tupou replied yes, the prisoner should be experiencing a life-
threatening illness from which recovery is not expected.
Senator Bunde asked whether the illness must have "a time certain"
death element.
DR. JOHN ROBERTSON, Medical Director, Department of Corrections,
testified via teleconference from an offnet site to explain that
the general guidelines of this legislation specify that "the vast
majority" of people who would be considered for medical parole
status would have three to six months to live "with a year at the
outside." He expressed that this bill addresses the lack of
flexibility the Parole Board currently experiences regarding
medical paroles.
Senator Bunde voiced support for the bill.
Dr. Robertson commented that safeguards, based on other states'
experiences, are incorporated into the process, and that he is
confident that the Parole Board would take all factors such as the
crime, the medical condition, the prognosis, and the release plan
into consideration during its medical parole determination. He
stated that one of the prime considerations in the release plan is
that an appropriate care environment would be in available for the
person.
Amendment #1: This amendment changes the bill's title by inserting
new language on page 1, line 2, following the word "disabled" to
read as follows.
"An Act relating to special medical parole and to prisoners
who are severely medically or cognitively disabled; relating
to a severe acute respiratory syndrome control program; and
providing for an effective date."
Additionally, two new sections are inserted on page 1, following
line 3. The new sections read as follow.
Section 1. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is
amended by adding a new section to read:
PURPOSE. (a) The purposed of sec. 2 of this Act is to
clarify the law and expressly establish a comprehensive
program for health care decisions to control severe acute
respiratory syndrome (SARS) in this state, including
reporting, examinations, orders, and detention to protect the
public health.
(b) The purpose of secs. 3 7 of this Act is to clarify
standards for special medical parole and to address prisoners
who are severely medically or cognitively disabled.
Sec. 2 AS 18.15 is amended by adding a new section to
read:
Article 1A. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).
Sec. 18.15.112. SARS control program authorization. (a) A
severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) control program is
authorized in the department. The SARS control program shall
be administered in the same manner and has the same powers,
authority, obligations, and limited immunities as does the
program for the control of tuberculosis under AS 18.15.120
18.15.149, except for the following:
(1) the provisions of the control program described in AS
18.15.120(1) and (7);
(2) reports to state medical officers under AS 18.15.131;
(3) examinations of persons under AS 18.15.133;
(4) title to and inventory of equipment allotted to
private institutions under AS 18.15.140;
(5) the screening of school employees under AS 18.15.145.
(b) In this section, "SARS" or "severe acute respiratory
syndrome" means the infectious disease caused by the SARS-CoV
or the SARS coronavirus and the mutations of that disease."
Furthermore, a new bill section is inserted on page 4, line 12 that
reads as follows.
Sec. 8. Sections 1 and 2 of this Act take effect immediately
under AS 01.10.070(c).
Senator Bunde moved for adoption of Amendment #1.
Co-Chair Wilken objected to discuss the status of the amendment
with Co-chair Green, the Chair of the Committee's subcommittees for
the Department of Health and Social Services and the Department of
Corrections.
Co-chair Green asked that the motion be temporarily tabled.
Co-Chair Wilken requested that the motion be withdrawn.
Senator Bunde WITHDREW the motion to adopt Amendment #2; however,
he asked that the amendment be discussed.
DOUGLAS BRUCE, Director, Division of Public Health, Department of
Health and Social Services stated that this amendment would allow
the Department to develop a program, similar to its tuberculosis
program, to address a possible outbreak of Sudden Acute Respiratory
Syndrome (SARS) or other issues that might require quarantines. He
stated that the amendment would additionally provide the Department
with the authority to address the particulars of the disease as
they differ from those of tuberculosis.
Co-Chair Wilken clarified that this amendment would affect a
different section of the bill than the medical parole issue does,
and in addition, he stated, it would require a title change.
Senator Hoffman asked the potential for a SARS outbreak in the
State.
DR. BETH FUNK, Epidemiology Section, Division of Public Health,
Department of Health and Social Services, testified via
teleconference from an offnet site in Anchorage and specified that
this amendment would provide the State with the ability to develop
a program to specifically address the particulars of SARS. She
noted that the State has observed the various international
reactions to SARS outbreaks and has determined that the regions
that moved quickly to test and quarantine suspected outbreaks have
been the most successful in disease control. She stated that while
most people voluntarily comply with quarantine requests, the
State's lack of enforcement capability might hinder disease
control.
Dr. Funk informed that the incubation period for SARS is
approximately two to ten days. She stated that this timeframe could
provide the opportunity for SARS to be introduced to the State due
to the fact that Alaskans travel so much and that national and
international travel is so "rapid."
Senator Taylor questioned why one specific infectious illness is
addressed in this amendment, as he suggested that a more generic
approach should be presented to allow the Department to address
infectious illnesses as deemed necessary.
Dr. Bruce agreed "that more general powers" would be welcome;
however, he stated that this is the initial step of a long process.
Senator Taylor voiced support for the overall Department objective.
However; he stated that previous legislative attempts to change
regulations to address a medical outbreak, specifically acquired
immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), were unsuccessful; partly he
noted, due to a lack of cooperation from the medical field. He
avowed that he has "no problem with this amendment," but he voiced
"strong concern ? with the inability of the Department to react" to
medical emergencies because of "political sensibilities," rather
than "the appropriate medical response."
Co-Chair Green questioned whether this concern could be addressed
in current Public Health regulations, as specified on page 267 of
the Alaska Statutes, Year 2002, Volume 5, that read as follow.
Section 18.05.040 Regulations (a) The commissioner shall adopt
regulations consistent with existing law for (1) the
definition, reporting, and control of diseases of public
health significance" should provide the Commissioner with the
authority to address major health issues.
Mr. Bruce responded that this amendment would address the concern
that this regulation does not provide the Department with
sufficient ability to quarantine individuals.
Co-chair Green suggested that the language could be amended to
include SARS under the tuberculosis program authority.
Mr. Bruce voiced support for the establishment of a separate SARS
program, similar to that specified for tuberculosis, as he stressed
that the program must contain language and procedures specific to
SARS.
Mr. Bruce asserted that this amendment would provide an interim
approach to providing the more generic authority that would be
required.
Co-Chair Green asked whether existing State statutes, specifically
Title 26. Military Affairs and Veterans. would provide the State
with the authority to make decisions regarding State disasters such
as an epidemic situation.
Mr. Bruce commented that "the Department of Law has indicated that
they would be much more comfortable" were this clarification
provided.
Co-Chair Green agreed with Senator Taylor's comment that the
amendment's language should be generic as opposed to being crafted
to address one specific virus. She stated that she would revisit
the language of the amendment to provide a more generic approach.
Co-chair Wilken commented that the amendment would be further
revised.
The bill was HELD in Committee.
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 105(FIN)
"An Act relating to loans to satisfy past due federal tax
obligations of commercial fishermen and to the commercial
fishing loan program."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-chair Wilken announced that this legislation would allow
commercial fisherman to secure loans to satisfy federal Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) debt retirement.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS, the bill's sponsor, expressed that this
legislation results from the State's Salmon Task Force efforts to
assist the "in crisis" fishing industry. He stated that the bill
proposes changes to the Commercial Fishing Revolving Loan Fund that
is funded by its participants and administered by the Division of
Investments, Department of Community and Economic Development, by
reinstating a previous loan program that allowed commercial
fishermen "to access these funds to satisfy past due federal tax
obligations."
Senator G. Stevens voiced that the Salmon Task Force supports this
legislation in order to protect and retain in-state resident
limited-entry salmon permits and continue providing jobs in regions
of the State with limited job opportunities. He emphasized that
these loans would be "secured" and have a maximum $40,000 limit. He
stated that in addition to loan requirements, applicants must prove
that they are a current resident of the State, must have been a
resident for the two previous years; must be current on their
federal tax filings; and must have a payment agreement with the
IRS. He stated that this legislation would incur a $30,000
detriment in FY 04 and a detriment of $13,000 thereafter through FY
09.
Senator G. Stevens noted that the removal of the word "promptly" in
Section 3, subsection (b), line 31 on page 4, would allow the
Department flexibility regarding the timeline required for
advertising the sale of repossessed permits in order to entertain
"quality offers." This language reads as follows.
Sec. 3. AS 16.10.337(b) is amended to read:
(b) If the commission does not exercise its right of first
refusal within 30 days after it receives the offer, or if the
permit is not subject to a buy-back program under AS
16.43.290-16.43.330, the department shall [PROMPTLY] advertise
and sell the permit.
Next Text Underlined [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED]
Senator Bunde asked whether the bill's two-year residency
requirement might incur a legal challenge.
Senator G. Stevens stated that the two-year residency requirement
is not a new provision in the bill, and he stated that, to date, no
legal challenge has been introduced. He clarified that in addition
to the two-year residency requirement, the applicant must be a
current resident of the State.
Senator Taylor clarified that federal law does not allow for more
than a two-year residency requirement.
Senator Taylor offered a motion to move the bill from Committee
with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note.
There being no objections, HB 105 was REPORTED from Committee with
previous negative $30,000 fiscal note #1 from the Department of
Community and Economic Development.
CS FOR SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 10(HES)
Establishing the Joint Legislative Charter School Task Force.
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-Chair Wilken explained that this bill would create an eight-
member charter school task force to review Alaska statutes
pertaining to charter schools.
WES KELLER, Staff to the bill's sponsor Senator Fred Dyson, voiced
that this resolution would establish a charter school task force to
review existing laws for compliance with such issues as the federal
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) and present a report to the
Legislature. He noted that, in addition, the task force would be
required "to propose alternative governing of a school" were it to
fail to meet requirements.
Senator Taylor voiced support for the bill as he agreed that it is
wise to review charter school regulations and provide the
Legislature with policy directives.
Senator Bunde asked whether the omission of language specifying
whether the Legislative representation on the review panel task
force, as referenced on page two, line 21, would be members of the
majority or minority party was intentional.
Mr. Keller responded that the intent would be to appoint a member
of the majority and a member of the minority from each house. He
noted that the Senate President and the Speaker of the House
support this language.
Amendment #1: This amendment inserts clarifying language into the
resolution on page two, lines 21 - 23,to specify that a minority
and majority member from each house would comprise the four-member
Legislative presentation.
Senator Bunde moved for adoption of Amendment #1.
Co-chair Wilken clarified that the amendment would provide for the
inclusion of a total of four members: one member of the majority
and one member of the minority parties in the Senate and one member
of the majority and one member of the minority parties in the House
of Representatives.
Senator Taylor understood the amendment to provide equal
representation.
Co-Chair Wilken objected to the amendment. He voiced being "very
comfortable with having the President of the Senate and the Speaker
of the House appoint whomever, regardless of party."
Senator Bunde asserted that while the language might be appropriate
under the current leadership, this situation might differ over
time; therefore, he supported the clarifying language.
A roll call was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Senator Bunde and Senator Hoffman
OPPOSED: Senator B. Stevens. Senator Taylor, Co-chair Green and Co-
chair Wilken
ABSENT: Senator Olson
The motion FAILED (2-4-1)
Amendment #1 FAILED to be adopted.
Co-Chair Green characterized the bill's accompanying $20,000 fiscal
notes as "excessive," as she declared that existing staff could
provide support to the short-term task force. She noted that the
amount of the bill's fiscal notes raised concern during the Senate
HES Committee discussions.
Co-Chair Wilken observed that a school administrator, principal or
superintendent should be involved in the review process.
Amendment #2: This amendment inserts language into the resolution
on page 2, line 27 as follows.
(5) that the ninth member of the body be a school
administrator, superintendent, or principal."
Co-Chair Wilken moved for the adoption of Amendment #2.
Senator Taylor objected.
SENATOR FRED DYSON expressed that more than five groups have
requested representation on the review panel. He stated that in
response to this, the decision was made to address the make-up of
the panel in a broad manner so that the policy group could solicit
input from special interest groups such as bargaining units, school
administrators, and school financial administrators. He noted that
the two groups specified in the bill have the authority to enter
into agreements as opposed to other groups.
Discussion ensued amongst Committee members, during which Co-Chair
Green suggested that the language of the amendment specify that the
Governor would be the appointing authority for these persons;
Senator Hoffman suggested that the amendment language could be
addressed as a component of Number (2) in that section; and Senator
Taylor suggested that the amendment should specify a "retired"
principal, superintendent or administrator.
Amendment-to-Amendment #2: This friendly amendment to the amendment
would read as follows:
(2) two members, appointed by the Governor, one of
which should be a principal, administrator or superintendent.
Co-chair Wilken moved for the adoption of the friendly amendment-
to-Amendment #2.
Senator Dyson noted that the Department of Education and Early
Development's representative, appointed by the Governor, could
possess a school administrator's background.
There being no objection, Amendment #2, as amended, was ADOPTED.
Senator Taylor moved to report the resolution, as amended, from
Committee with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal
notes.
There being no objection, CS SCR 10 (FIN) was REPORTED from
Committee with previous $10,000 fiscal note #1 from the Senate HES
Committee and previous $10,000 fiscal note #2 from Department of
Education and Early Development.
SENATE CS FOR CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 49(JUD)
"An Act relating to the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)
identification registration system and testing; and providing
for an effective date."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-chair Wilken informed that this bill would expand the State's
deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) database "registry to include samples
from all persons who are convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor sex
offense."
REPRESENTATIVE TOM ANDERSON, the bill's sponsor, explained that the
collection of DNA "is the next step in the advancement in the
science of crime investigation," and has been instrumental in
providing evidence in convictions that, otherwise, "would have
previously been impossible." He stated that DNA evidence, in
addition to assisting in convictions, has also aided in clearing
persons wrongfully accused of a crime. He stated that this
legislation would provide law enforcement efficiencies, assist with
furthering unsolved crimes, and expand the State's DNA database.
Furthermore, he noted that DNA samples would be acquired from those
juveniles adjudicated as a delinquent for felony or misdemeanor sex
offenses, would allow for voluntary and anonymous DNA donors, and
would require that sex offenders or child kidnappers register as
such. He stated that DNA sampling is a nationwide trend.
Senator Bunde voiced support for the bill.
SFC 03 # 86, Side B 09:52 AM
Senator Bunde understood that parents might voluntarily desire to
have their children's DNA sampled in order to provide
identification verification; however, he asked the value of
anonymous DNA donations.
ANNE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services Section-
Juneau, Criminal Division, Department of Law responded that
anonymous DNA donations could be valuable in identifying missing
person remains.
Senator Taylor asked for further clarification regarding "the
scope" of individuals who would be affected by this DNA sampling
legislation.
Ms. Carpeneti stated that individuals "convicted of felonies under
Title 11 and Title 28, Chapter 35 felonies which is felony drunk
driving, felony refusal and felony leaving the scene of an
accident" would be subject to the legislation. Additionally, she
noted it would affect persons convicted of crimes against persons
under AS 1141 that would include "a few misdemeanor sex offenses
and assaults."
Senator Taylor asked how the legislation would affect juveniles.
Ms. Carpeneti responded that it would affect "juveniles adjudicated
as delinquents" who are convicted for these offenses.
Senator Taylor asked the legislation's fiscal impact.
Co-chair Wilken stated that an indeterminate Department of Law
fiscal note accompanies the bill.
Senator Taylor asked whether federal funding might be forthcoming.
Ms. Carpeneti voiced the understanding that federal funding would
be available to provide for the additional testing expenses.
JUANITA HENSLEY, Special Assistant, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Public Safety, noted that this federal funding is
unique in that the federal government would establish direct
contracts with certified laboratories to which the State would send
the samples for testing. She noted that this indirect funding is
anticipated to be available for a minimum of five years.
Senator Hoffman asked what provisions are included in the bill to
guarantee that the DNA samples would not be used for other purposes
such as health information or cloning. Additionally, he asked
regarding the State's liability regarding the protection of this
information.
Representative Anderson responded that Section 11.56.762 located on
page 2, lines 20 - 26 of the bill addresses this concern.
Sec. 11.56.762. Unlawful use of DNA samples. (a) A person
commits the crime of unlawful use of DNA samples if the person
knowingly, without authorization under AS 44.41.035, possesses
or allows another person access to (1) a blood, oral, or
tissue sample collected for inclusion in the deozyribonucleic
identification registration system under AS 44.41.035, or (2)
identification data or records derived from those samples.
(b) Unlawful use of DNA samples is a class C felony.
Ms. Carpeneti qualified that the DNA testing would be limited to 13
specific criteria and would not include medical DNA testing which
determines health history. She stressed that, while the State crime
laboratory would retain the DNA sample in a secured facility, the
legislation prohibits a wider range of testing from being
conducted.
Senator Hoffman clarified that the testing would be limited to 13
elements.
Ms. Carpeneti stated that the 13 DNA molecule-sampling tests would
provide sufficient information to the Department of Public Safety.
She continued that the sample would be securely retained in case
the DNA results require double-checking.
Senator Olson asked how this legislation provides protection
against DNA being used for commercial purposes.
Representative Anderson stated that protection is provided in
language on page 3, line 23 through page 4, line 1 that reads as
follows.
Sec. 7. AS 44.41.035(f) is amended to read:
(f) The DNA identification registration system is
confidential, is not a public record under AS 40.25.110
40.25.140, and may be used only for
(1) providing DNA or other blood grouping tests for
identification analysis;
(2) [LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES INCLUDING] criminal
investigations; [AND] prosecutions, and identification of
human remains;
(3) statistical blind analysis; [OR]
(4) improving the operation of the system; or
(5) exoneration of the innocent.
New text underlined [DELETED TEXT BRACKETED]
Representative Anderson asserted "that parameters" pertaining to
sampling use are provided in the legislation.
CHRIS BEHEIM, Director, Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory and
Manager, DNA Database, Department of Public Safety testified via
teleconference from an offnet site to share that in the previous 16
months, the State's DNA database entertained 30 searches resulting
in 15 instances where the DNA database "actually connected crime
scene evidence to convicted offenders." He stated that the
remaining 15 "hits linked together unsolved crimes" whereby law
enforcement officials have been notified that "the same perpetrator
committed these seemingly unrelated offenses." He shared successes
that other states have experienced by the expansion of their DNA
programs.
Mr. Beheim communicated that while the current program is "very,
very successful," an expanded program would be beneficial as it
would provide identification information for children; incur cost
savings by reducing the time involved in crime scene
investigations; update evidence information on older, unsolved
crimes; and exonerate some individuals considered suspects in a
crime. He continued that this legislation would align the State
with other states' programs by allowing DNA samples to be
retroactively acquired from individuals who are in jail or under
probation or parole. He noted that current policy limits the
collection of DNA sampling to those convicted since the bill was
initially enacted in 1996.
Mr. Beheim informed that the state of Virginia, which has the
largest criminal "DNA database in the country," has determined that
were their DNA database limited to only violent offenders, a high
percentage of crimes would not have been solved as "there is a very
strong correlation between individuals who might not have been
convicted of violent crimes but are still involved in criminal
activity." Therefore, he anticipated that the State of Alaska would
experience a similar increase in its ability to match perpetrators
to crime scenes. He continued that this program would allow the
State's DNA database to be uploaded into the National DNA Index
System (NDIS) to allow unsolved crime profiles to be
reciprocatively matched against other states' convicted offender
databases.
Mr. Beheim assured that the testing of the "DNA markers" would be
limited to law enforcement identification purposes, and he
furthered that, rather than being identified by name, DNA samples
are identified by a laboratory coding system that is known only to
that particular crime laboratory.
Senator Bunde asked Mr. Beheim to comment on whether the coding
system would provide adequate security measures against computer
hackers who might seek access to the information to sell, for
instance, to an insurance company.
Mr. Beheim assured that the coding system would prevent a sample
from being traced to an individual. Additionally, he emphasized
that medical testing information would be unavailable, as those
types of tests would not be conducted.
LINDA WILSON, Deputy Director, Public Defender Agency, Department
of Administration testified via teleconference from an offnet site
to express that the adoption of this legislation would
"significantly expand" the offenses" upon which DNA sampling is
conducted. She expressed that the 80 offenses that would be added
to the qualifying list would range from misdemeanor convictions for
indecent exposure and assaultive behavior to felony convictions for
such non-violent crimes as shoplifting and refusal to submit to a
Breathalyzer test and failure to stop at the direction of a police
officer. In addition, she stated that the retroactive language in
the bill is going "to widen" the number of individuals who would be
required to give a sample.
Ms Wilson anticipated that the department would experience an
increase in its caseload due to being appointed to represent those
individuals refusing to adhere to the DNA requirements. She
continued that this expected increase in caseloads is the reason
that the department has submitted an indeterminate fiscal note. She
criticized that the bill does not include a mechanism to re-
evaluate a crime wherein a convicted person maintains their
innocence. She asserted that a mechanism to retest old evidence,
which was processed using less sophisticated methods than are
available today, should be included in the bill.
Senator Olson asked whether the Department of Administration
supported the legislation.
Ms. Wilson announced that the department was not in favor of the
legislation.
Senator Bunde asked for further information regarding testimony
citing that individuals who commit "petty crimes or relatively
minor felony offenses" commit more serious offenses.
Ms. Hensley shared that when the state of Virginia expanded its DNA
sampling database to include individuals who were convicted of a
"white collar crime" such as forgery, the inclusion of these "non-
violent crime" offenders in the DNA data base enabled the State to
solve 63-percent of its property crimes, 21-percent of sex offense
crimes, 14-percent of homicide crimes, and one-percent of murder
crimes. She asserted that this is evidence that individuals, who
commit non-violent crimes such as shoplifting, do commit other
crimes including violent crimes.
Senator Stevens asked how this legislation would expand the State's
DNA qualifying offenses as specified in the "State DNA Database
Laws Qualifying Offenses (As of October 2002)" chart in the October
15, 2002 National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL)
LegisBrief [copy on file]. He voiced the understanding that it
would provide for the inclusion of all felony offenses.
Ms. Carpeneti agreed that all felony offenses listed in the State's
Title 11 and Title 28.35 would qualify, including Felony Driving
While Intoxicated (DWI) and refusal to submit to an alcohol
Breathalyzer test, as well as "juveniles found to be delinquent
based on similar acts." Additionally, she stated, "it would include
some misdemeanors that are crimes against a person;" as well as
arrestees or suspects "if there's a search warrant to gather DNA
from the suspect;" however, she clarified that their DNA would not
be included in the databank were they cleared of the offense.
Continuing, she stated that the DNA sampling expansion would
include individuals currently on probation or parole were the
crimes they committed offenses that are being added.
Senator Stevens assumed, therefore, that other states listed on the
chart might "have limited versions" of offenses as well.
Ms. Carpeneti concurred.
Ms. Carpeneti clarified that the bill would not include individuals
on unsupervised probation or parole.
Senator B. Stevens assumed that the four states that are using DNA
sampling to its "fullest advantage" require DNA samples from
arrestees and suspects.
Ms. Carpeneti noted that Louisiana does require suspects and
arrestees to give DNA samples. However, she noted that it does not
require all violent crime offenders to provide DNA samples.
Senator B. Stevens surmised that because Louisiana requires DNA
samples from arrestees and suspects, there is no need to require it
from the violent crime offenders as they might have previously been
sampled.
Ms. Carpeneti replied that in some states, including Alaska, a DNA
sample taken from an arrestee or suspect who is not convicted or
whose conviction is overruled, would be purged from the databank.
Senator Stevens stated that because all crime scene evidence is
retained indefinitely, a convicted offender's DNA could be matched
against the entire field. Therefore, he asserted that all the
various offense qualifications could be eliminated, were the bill
simplified to require "all jailed offenders" to be tested.
Ms. Hensley puzzled as to the reason that all violent crime
offenders are not tested in some states.
Senator B Stevens asserted that DNA testing of all offenders was
originally the intent of presenting this legislation.
Representative Anderson could not verify that assertion.
Senator B. Stevens stated that he would not be offering an
amendment to this affect because it would experience much
opposition. However, he pointed out that were all offenders to
provide DNA samples, they would either be exonerated of a crime and
their DNA sample would be destroyed or they would be convicted and
would be a jailed offender.
Representative Anderson agreed; however, he voiced that there would
not be support for such a blanket approach.
Senator Stevens asserted that an all-inclusive approach would solve
more crimes.
Senator Taylor voiced concern regarding the security of the DNA
databanks and urged that safeguards be instituted to warrant a high
level of confidence.
Ms. Carpeneti responded that the Department of Law has confidence
that adequate safeguards would be in place. She noted that the
inclusion of language specifying that anyone found guilty of misuse
of the sample and the data would be charged with a Class C felony
would be a deterrent.
Senator Olson voiced concern that a DNA match might reflect "a
false positive" and therefore convict an innocent person.
Mr. Beheim responded that DNA profiles are essentially unique and
that it would be virtually impossible, with the exception of
identical twins, for two individuals to have the same DNA profile.
He alerted that a sample mix-up could occur, however, he qualified
that samples are retained and are re-analysised for "positive
assurance" whenever a positive "hit" is found.
Senator Olson asked how often a mix-up in the collection of the
data and a DNA sample might occur.
Mr. Beheim responded that no mix-ups were found in the re-analysis
conducted on the 15 positive hits that have been experienced. He
continued that in addition to the re-testing of the crime scene
evidence, a new DNA sample from the suspect is also acquired and
tested previous to any criminal proceedings being undertaken.
Senator Olson asked what is done with DNA samples of an unsolved
crime.
Mr. Beheim responded that all crime scene evidence is permanently
retained in the laboratory. He stated that all unsolved crime DNA
profiles, which are referred to as a forensic index, are entered
into a national database and "are searched against other unsolved
cases" on a State and national level.
AT EASE 10:26 AM / 10:26 AM
Senator Taylor moved to report the bill from Committee with
individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes.
Without objection, SCS HB 49(JUD) was REPORTED from Committee with
previous zero fiscal note # 1 from the Department of Public Safety,
previous zero fiscal note #2 from Department of Law; and previous
indeterminate fiscal note #3 from the Department of Administration.
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 109(FIN)
"An Act relating to the limitation on payment of state
treasury warrants and to the payment of a claim for which the
appropriation has lapsed; and providing for an effective
date."
LINDA SYLVESTER, Staff to Representative Bruce Weyhrauch, informed
the Committee that this bill would streamline the accounting
functions for two items: stale-dated warrants and Miscellaneous
Claims. She stated that rather than the current process in which
the funds designated for warrants are transferred to the general
fund if they are not cashed within two years of issuance, this
legislation would designate that the funds for warrants not cashed
within six months of issuance would be transferred to the
Department of Revenue's "Unclaimed Property Section." She explained
that this action would allow delinquent claims to be paid when the
warrants are submitted, without requiring the originating
department to request funds to be re-appropriated from the general
fund via the Fast Track Supplemental bill.
Senator Olson asked whether there is any opposition to this bill.
Ms. Sylvester stated there is none.
Senator Taylor moved to report the bill from Committee with
individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal note.
There being no objections, CS HB 109 (FIN) was REPORTED from
Committee with zero fiscal note #1 from the Department of
Administration.
SENATE BILL NO. 213
"An Act establishing the Knik Arm Bridge and Toll Authority
and relating to that authority; and providing for an effective
date."
This was the first hearing for this bill in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Co-chair Wilken stated that this legislation would provide for the
establishment of an independent authority to build and operate a
Knik Arm Bridge.
MIKE BARTON, Commissioner, Department of Transportation and Public
Facilities, expressed that this bill would establish a separate and
independent authority, which would function in a similar manner as
the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation, to build and operate a
bridge across Knik Arm. In addition, he stated that it would
provide for the creation of a three-person board, which would be
comprised of the commissioners of the Department of Revenue and the
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, and a public
member appointed by the Governor. He specified that each of these
persons would serve a five-year term with the option of an
additional five-year term.
Mr. Barton declared that the majority of the language in the bill
pertains to the Authority's ability to: issue revenue bonds; accept
and receive federal government funding; provide for Legislative
oversight of bonds; and manage the construction and operation of
the bridge.
Co-chair Wilken announced that the purpose of this hearing is to
entertain issues regarding the bill.
Senator Olson asked whether a change in administration would
"automatically change" the Board's membership.
Commissioner Barton replied that even though the commissioners of
the two departments might change as the result of a new
administration, this situation would not immediately affect the
members of the Board as they are appointed for five-year terms.
Senator Olson asked the reactions to this legislation by the
affected communities, particularly the reaction of the Municipality
of Anchorage which would be most impacted by this legislation.
Commissioner Barton responded that "there is an amazing amount of
support" for the construction of a bridge. He stated that at a
recent meeting in Palmer in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, no
opposition to the bridge was experienced.
Senator Taylor noted that the distance across Knik Arm is short.
Therefore, he suggested that a fast ferry and/or a hovercraft might
be viable alternatives to a bridge.
Commissioner Barton acknowledged the suggestion.
Senator Hoffman, referring to the three-person administrative staff
as outlined in the accompanying May 5, 2003 Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities fiscal note, asked whether it
is imperative that staff be hired immediately upon the
establishment of the Authority. Additionally, he asked at what
point the tolls generated from the bridge would support the
bridge's administrative costs.
Commissioner Barton voiced the need for early hire of the
administrative staff, as they would be able to assist the Authority
in securing adequate funding and design determinations for the
bridge. He noted that the construction of the bridge is anticipated
to occur in the 2007 to 2009 timeframe, depending upon the bridge
design.
Senator Hoffman asked when the bridge design requests for proposals
should be conducted in order to start construction in the 2007 to
2009 timeframe.
Commissioner Barton responded that it would depend on the bridge
option selected. He stated that bridge design work should be
conducted in 2005 and 2006.
Senator Olson voiced surprise that there is no opposition to this
legislation as, he stated, this is not typically the norm when a
project could negatively affect property values in an area.
Commissioner Barton reiterated that, while there might be some
concern, no opposition has been expressed.
Co-Chair Wilken voiced concern regarding the Department's fiscal
note and the subsequent impact on the FY 04 budget.
Co-Chair Wilken opined that communities, specifically the
Municipality of Anchorage and the Mat-Su Borough, should be able to
participate in discussions with the Bridge Authority. Therefore, he
questioned whether the word "confer," as denoted in the bill in
Article 2. Powers and Duties, Subsection (a)(17) on page 4, line
27, is "strong enough."
(17) confer with municipal and other governments,
metropolitan planning organizations, and the department,
concerning the Knik Arm bridge;
Commissioner Barton referred the Committee to language in
Subsection (b)(5), on page 5, line 18 that specifies that the
Authority must coordinate activities with these communities.
(5) coordinate the exercise of its powers to plan,
design, construct, operate, and maintain the Knik Arm Bridge
with the department, and with the mayors of the Municipality
of Anchorage and the Matanuska-Susitna Borough.
Co-Chair Wilken acknowledged this language; however, he opined that
the word "coordinate is a soft word."
Co-Chair Green testified to the Mat-Su Borough's long-term support
of this project. She responded to Senator Olson's remarks
pertaining to the project's adverse effect on Anchorage property
values by asserting that the Mat-Su Borough would similarly be
affected by a loss of traffic in its core area. However, she noted
that allowing traffic to be expedited from the area toward
Anchorage would relieve congestion and provide other communities
more direct access to Anchorage.
Co-chair Green voiced, however, that the Mat-Su Borough is
concerned about the primacy of the Department. Furthermore, she
noted that while the Mat-Su Borough and the Municipality of
Anchorage might not always agree on an issue, both communities
support improvements in the regional transportation system. She
voiced support of Co-Chair Wilken's concern about "soft language,"
and she expressed further concern regarding the Department's
"higher level of control;" particularly the Department's control on
project funding.
SFC 03 # 87, Side A 10:41 AM
Commissioner Barton responded that this legislation would establish
"a separate legal authority that would be able to raise revenue
through the sale of bonds." He assured that the bonds would not be
an obligation of the State, as the Authority would issue them.
Furthermore, he noted that it would be Authority, rather than the
Department that would be working with the various municipalities
Co-Chair Green asked how the situation would be resolved, were the
two communities "to totally disagree" on the project.
Senator Taylor declared that the Bridge Authority must be created
as an autonomous entity in order to issue bonds. Furthermore, he
voiced that while it might be desired for the public to have
greater input and that the affected communities should consult with
the Authority regarding the project, he attested that the action of
providing communities with a "primacy" control could jeopardize the
asset that the bonds are pledged to "payoff." He voiced that
stronger language might negatively affect the Authority's ability
to sell bonds.
Co-Chair Wilken asked the Department to address these concerns and
report back to the Committee. Additionally, he asked the Department
how a delay in action on this legislation might impact the project.
Commissioner Barton responded that even if no action were taken on
the bill this Legislative session, the Department would continue to
"proceed on the course we're on." However, he asserted that it
would be beneficial to pass the legislation this year, as the
establishment of the Bridge Authority would assist in focusing
efforts and developing methods to secure funding that would
contribute to getting the bridge built.
Senator B. Stevens voiced concern regarding "the extent of the
power of the authority" and how it would affect the communities of
Anchorage and the Mat-Su Borough. To that end, he asked for an
explanation of the term "appurtenant facilities" as referenced in
Article 2. Powers and Duties. Section 44.90.111 subsections (1),
(7), and (16) on page three and four that read as follows.
Article 2. Powers and Duties.
Sec. 44.90.111. Powers and duties of the authority. (a)
In furtherance of its purposes, the authority may
(1) own, acquire, construct, develop create,
reconstruct, equip, operate, maintain, extend, and improve the
Knik Arm bridge and its appurtenant facilities;
(7) issue bonds and otherwise incur indebtedness, in
accordance with AS 44.90.211, in order to pay the cost of the
Knik Arm bridge and its appurtenant facilities; the authority
may also secure payment of the bonds or other indebtedness as
provided in AS 44.90.221;
(16) exercise powers of eminent domain or file a
declaration of taking as necessary for the Knik Arm bridge and
appurtenant facilities under AS 09.55.240 09.55.460 to
acquire land or an interest in land;
Senator B. Stevens opined that this language seemingly specifies
that the Authority is the entity that is responsible "for paying
the cost of the bridge and its associated facilities," as well as
"defining in terms of land and facilities," what is required by the
Authority in order to build the bridge. He surmised therefore, that
the Authority would be responsible for the bridge section of the
transportation corridor between the two municipalities, and would
issue bonds to enable the bridge to be built as well as levying
fees to pay for those bonds.
Commissioner Barton stated that is correct.
Senator B Stevens voiced that the mechanism for including
communities in the events leading up to the construction of the
bridge is provided; however, he questioned how communities would be
involved after the bridge is built.
Commissioner Barton concurred that this language "addresses the
crossing itself and its immediate environs." He stated that the
federal highway program would be involved because the north and
south side approaches to the bridge would affect the federally
funded road network to such place as Houston and Talkeetna in
addition to the Mat-Su Borough and the Municipality of Anchorage.
He reminded Committee Members that the federally mandated Regional
Transportation Planning Organization is charged with addressing
conflicts that a transportation project such as this one, "might
incur to a great part of the State."
Senator B. Stevens asked whether the Knik Arm Bridge Authority
"would be a participant in the Regional Transportation Planning
Organization."
Commissioner Barton responded that while the Authority "would have
a lot of involvement" with the Organization, he is unsure as to
whether the Authority would be a member of it.
Senator B. Stevens interjected that boroughs, cities, and the State
are members of that organization.
Commissioner Barton agreed.
Senator Bunde pointed out that this project would require the State
to expend "$2.5 million of scare dollars" to access the "free"
federal highway fund money. Therefore, he stated that while it
might be nice to have this bridge, he deemed it "unnecessary at
this time."
Senator Hoffman stated that this legislation appears to provide the
Knik Arm Bridge Authority with the power to operate outside of the
Executive Budget Act. He asked the justification for providing the
Authority with this ability as opposed to the State providing funds
and maintaining control of such things as the Municipality of
Anchorage International Airport improvements.
Commissioner Barton responded that the Executive Budget Act does
not apply to the Authority's ability to issue revenue bonds.
KATHLEEN STRASBAUGH, Assistant Attorney General, Governmental
Affairs Section, Civil Division, Department of Law, clarified that
the Authority would be required to comply with the Executive Budget
Act with the exception that the revenues generated by the sale of
the bonds would be obligated to pay off those bonds. She noted that
this provision is mirrored after the Alaska Housing Finance
Corporation (AHFC) that operates in this manner and has the duty to
repay its bonds.
Ms. Strasbuagh noted, however, that the money appropriated by the
State for operating expenses does not qualify for exemption, as is
specified in Article 2. Powers and Duties. Sec. 44.90.111.
Subsection (b)(2) that reads as follows.
(2) comply with the provisions of AS 37.07 (Executive Budget
Act), except that AS 37.07 does not apply to the activities of
the authority that relate to the authority's borrowing of
money as provided in this chapter, including the issuing of
its obligations or evidence of that borrowing and the
repayment of the debt obligation;
Commissioner Barton noted that this exemption might be unnecessary;
however, he suggested that a person with bond experience should
advise on the matter.
Senator Hoffman noted that AHFC has collateral comprised of housing
and other properties that are readily marketable as opposed to the
Knik Arm Bridge Authority. Therefore, he stated that were the
Authority not granted this exemption, the State could be liable for
the repayment of the bond debt.
Commissioner Barton voiced that the intent of the legislation is to
separate the State from the sale of revenue bonds in order to not
obligate the State. He noted that an insurance company as opposed
to the State would be responsible were the aforementioned airport
bonds defaulted upon.
Co-Chair Wilken opined that while language in the bill specifies
that the State would not be obligated for these bonds, he
questioned what is referred by the phrase "other monies" as
referenced in Sec. 44.90.241 Nonliability on Bonds. Subsection (b)
on page nine, lines 20-23 that reads as follows.
(b) The bonds issued by the authority do not constitute
an indebtedness or other liability of the state or of a
political subdivision of the state other than the authority,
but shall be payable solely from the income, receipts, or
other money or property of the authority.
Co-chair Wilken further inquired regarding language in Sec.
44.90.221. Trust indentures and trust agreements. that provides for
the establishment of a capital reserve fund. He worried that
because the State would be "recognizing the bridge and the debt"
that the "other monies" specified might be the State's "saving
account," and that in future years, the State might be allocating
"money to pay that debt and/or the operation of a bridge that
people aren't using."
Commissioner Barton replied that, "it is not the intent to obligate
the State."
Co-Chair Wilken asked whether there are other State programs
modeled in this fashion.
Commissioner Barton responded that such programs would include
AHFC, the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority
(AIDEA), some portions of the Alaska Railroad Corporation, and the
Alaska Aerospace Development Corporation.
Co-Chair Wilken asked whether any of the State's international
airports have a similar authority.
Commissioner Barton responded no.
Co-Chair Wilken asked whether the Authority could be terminated and
its responsibilities assumed by the Department of Transportation
and Public Facilities once its financial obligations are retired,
as specified in Sec. 44.90.021. Establishment of authority.
Subsection (b) on page two, lines four and five that reads as
follows.
(b) The authority may not be terminated as long as it has
bonds, notes, or other obligations outstanding. Upon
termination of the authority, its rights and property pass to
the state.
Commissioner Barton stated that the toll revenues generated from
the bridge would fund the operational costs of the bridge.
Co-Chair Wilken asked the role of the Authority upon completion of
the bridge, specifically, he asked why the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities could not operate the bridge.
Commissioner Barton stated that the autonomy of the Authority must
be maintained until the bond obligation is fulfilled or another
mechanism of paying off the bonds is established.
Co-Chair Wilken opined that the three-person Authority could be
maintained; however, the Department could oversee the bridge
operations.
Commissioner Barton conveyed that this might be possible.
Senator Bunde pointed out that the Department's fiscal note could
be considered "seed money" as the bridge's administrative expenses
would by paid by toll revenue rather than by State money once the
bridge was operational.
Senator Hoffman asked whether other State boards include Governor
appointees with no specific background or "ties" to the program.
Commissioner Barton responded that the Governor also appoints
individuals to the Boards of the Alaska Railroad Corporation, AHFC,
and AIDEA.
Senator Hoffman expressed that he would be sponsoring amendments
that would address the composition of the Authority's Board to
provide for a higher level of involvement by the Municipality of
Anchorage and the Mat-Su Borough as well as the inclusion of non-
voting State legislators, one from the Senate and one from the
House of Representatives, on the Board.
Co-chair Wilken summarized that these issues would be addressed at
a follow-up meeting. He ordered the bill HELD in Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
Co-Chair Gary Wilken adjourned the meeting at 11:02 AM
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|