02/12/2010 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB307 | |
| SB210 | |
| SJR21 | |
| SB214 | |
| HB6 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 6 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 214 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 252 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SJR 21 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| = | HB 307 | ||
| = | SB 210 | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
February 12, 2010
1:33 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Hollis French, Chair
Senator Bill Wielechowski, Vice Chair
Senator Dennis Egan
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Lesil McGuire
Senator John Coghill
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 307
"An Act relating to sexual assault protective orders."
MOVED HB 307 OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 210
"An Act establishing child custody, modification, and visitation
standards for a military parent who is deployed; and amending
Rule 99, Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure."
MOVED CSSB 210(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE JOINT RESOULTION NO. 21
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska
relating to and increasing the number of members of the house of
representatives to forty-eight and the number of members of the
senate to twenty-four.
HEARD AND HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 214
"An Act relating to penalties for cruelty to animals."
HEARD AND HELD
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 6(JUD) AM
"An Act relating to proscribing certain sexual conduct or sexual
activities as cruelty to animals."
HEARD AND HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 252
"An Act relating to the crime of failure to appear; relating to
arrest for violating certain conditions of release; relating to
release before trial, before sentence, and pending appeal;
relating to material witnesses; relating to temporary release;
relating to release on a petition to revoke probation; relating
to the first appearance before a judicial officer after arrest;
relating to service of process for domestic violence protective
orders; making conforming amendments; amending Rules 5 and 41,
Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure, and Rules 206 and 603,
Alaska Rules of Appellate Procedure; and providing for an
effective date."
BILL HEARING POSTPONED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 307
SHORT TITLE: SEXUAL ASSAULT PROTECTIVE ORDERS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) HOLMES
01/19/10 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/19/10 (H) JUD
01/27/10 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
01/27/10 (H) Moved Out of Committee
01/27/10 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
01/29/10 (H) JUD RPT 7DP
01/29/10 (H) DP: LYNN, GRUENBERG, HERRON, DAHLSTROM,
HOLMES, GATTO, RAMRAS
02/01/10 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
02/01/10 (H) VERSION: HB 307
02/03/10 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/03/10 (S) JUD
02/10/10 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/10/10 (S) Heard & Held
02/10/10 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
BILL: SB 210
SHORT TITLE: MILITARY DEPLOYMENT AND CHILD CUSTODY
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) HUGGINS
01/19/10 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/8/10
01/19/10 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/19/10 (S) JUD, FIN
02/08/10 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/08/10 (S) Heard & Held
02/08/10 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
BILL: SJR 21
SHORT TITLE: CONST. AM: INCREASE NUMBER OF LEGISLATORS
SPONSOR(s): COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
04/09/09 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/09/09 (S) STA, JUD, FIN
02/02/10 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/02/10 (S) Moved SJR 21 Out of Committee
02/02/10 (S) MINUTE(STA)
02/03/10 (S) STA RPT 5DP
02/03/10 (S) DP: MENARD, FRENCH, MEYER, PASKVAN,
KOOKESH
02/08/10 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/08/10 (S) Scheduled But Not Heard
02/12/10 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: SB 214
SHORT TITLE: CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) WIELECHOWSKI
01/19/10 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/15/10
01/19/10 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/19/10 (S) JUD
02/12/10 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: HB 6
SHORT TITLE: CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
SPONSOR(s): LYNN
01/20/09 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/9/09
01/20/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/20/09 (H) JUD, FIN
03/20/09 (H) JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120
03/20/09 (H) Moved CSHB 6(JUD) Out of Committee
03/20/09 (H) MINUTE(JUD)
03/25/09 (H) JUD RPT CS(JUD) NT 4DP 1NR 1AM
03/25/09 (H) DP: LYNN, GRUENBERG, COGHILL, GATTO
03/25/09 (H) NR: RAMRAS
03/25/09 (H) AM: HOLMES
04/11/09 (H) FIN REFERRAL WAIVED
04/17/09 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/17/09 (H) VERSION: CSHB 6(JUD) AM
04/18/09 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/18/09 (S) STA, JUD
01/26/10 (S) STA AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
01/26/10 (S) Moved CSHB 6(JUD)am Out of Committee
01/26/10 (S) MINUTE(STA)
01/27/10 (S) STA RPT 5DP
01/27/10 (S) DP: MENARD, FRENCH, MEYER, PASKVAN,
KOOKESH
02/12/10 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
JEAN MISCHEL, Drafting Attorney
Legislative Legal Services
Legislative Affairs Agency
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to drafting questions about SJR
21.
SENATOR DONALD OLSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SJR 21.
GORDON HARRISON, representing himself
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SJR 21.
JIM BALDWIN, representing himself
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SJR 21.
DOUG MOODY, Attorney
Public Defender Agency
Alaska Department of Administration
POSITION STATEMENT: Available for questions on SB 214.
COLONEL AUDIE HOLLOWAY
Alaska State Troopers
Alaska Department of Public Safety
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 214.
JACKIE KAHN, Detective
Anchorage Police Department
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 214.
KAYLA EPSTEIN, member
Anchorage Animal Care and Control Advisory Board
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that the board unanimously
supports SB 214.
RONNIE ROSENBERG, Chair
Fairbanks North Star Borough Animal Control Commission; and
President Fairbanks Animal Shelter Fund
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 214 and HB 6.
MICHELE GIRAULT
Friends of Pets
Anchorage, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 214.
ADAM PARASCANDOLA, Director
Animal Cruelty Campaign
Humane Society of the United States
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 214.
SALLY CLAMPITT, Executive Director
Alaska SPCA
POSITION STATEMENT: Stated enthusiastic support for SB 214.
DR. MYRA WILSON, Veterinarian
Anchorage Animal Care and Control
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 214.
ANNE CARPENETI, Attorney
Criminal Division
Department of Law (DOL)
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified that DOL isn't taking a position
on SB 214.
REPRESENTATIVE BOB LYNN
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 6.
DON MARVIN, Mayor
Klawock, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 6.
LESLIE ISAACS, City Administrator
Klawock, AK
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 6.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:33:52 PM
CHAIR HOLLIS FRENCH called the Senate Judiciary Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:33 p.m. Senators Wielechowski,
Egan, and French were present at the call to order.
HB 307-SEXUAL ASSAULT PROTECTIVE ORDERS
1:34:08 PM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of HB 307. It was heard
previously. Finding no questions or amendments, he asked for a
motion.
1:34:32 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI motioned to report HB 307 from committee
with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note(s).
There being no objection, HB 307 moved from Senate Judiciary
Standing Committee.
At ease from 1:34 p.m. to 1:35 p.m.
SB 210-MILITARY DEPLOYMENT AND CHILD CUSTODY
1:35:41 PM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of SB 210 and asked for
a motion to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS).
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to adopt work draft CS for SB 210,
labeled 26-LS1243\N, as the working document. There being no
objection, version N was before the committee.
1:36:21 PM
CHAIR FRENCH moved Amendment 1 and objected for discussion
purposes.
Amendment 1
26-LS1243\N.1
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR FRENCH
TO: CSSB 210( ), Draft Version "N"
Page 2, line 25, following "section.":
Insert "In addition, there is a rebuttable presumption
that a deployed parent's visitation rights may not be
delegated to a family member who has a history of
perpetrating domestic violence against a spouse, a
child, or a domestic living partner, or to a family
member with an individual in the family member's
household who has a history of perpetrating domestic
violence against a spouse, a child, or a domestic
living partner."
Page 4, line 10, following "section.":
Insert "In addition, there is a rebuttable presumption
that a deployed parent's visitation rights may not be
delegated to a family member who has a history of
perpetrating domestic violence against a spouse, a
child, or a domestic living partner, or to a family
member with an individual in the family member's
household who has a history of perpetrating domestic
violence against a spouse, a child, or a domestic
living partner."
CHAIR FRENCH asked Ms. Mischel to tell the committee what the
amendment intends to do.
JEAN MISCHEL, Drafting Attorney, Legislative Legal Services,
Legislative Affairs Agency, explained that the amendment
clarifies that both subsection (g) on page 2 and subsection (g)
page 4 provide for consideration of the best interest of the
child. Both subsections cross reference AS 25.24.150(c) and AS
25.24.150(g) pertaining to violence in the home when there is a
custody dispute. AS 25.24.150(g) provides a rebuttable
presumption against awarding custody to a parent who has
perpetrated domestic violence. The amendment responds to the
concerns expressed by the Alaska Network on Domestic Violence
and Sexual Assault ("Network") and clarifies that the rebuttable
presumption also applies if there is a delegation under this
bill to a family member who has a history of domestic violence.
The amendment language mirrors AS 25.24.150(g) as it relates to
parents. It clarifies that the presumption against visitation
requested by a military parent for a family member if that
family member has a history of perpetuating domestic violence.
It is not a substantive, but it makes it abundantly clear, she
said.
1:39:53 PM
CHAIR FRENCH asked Mr. Tempel if he and the sponsor have
reviewed the language in Amendment 1.
JOSH TEMPEL, Staff to Senator Huggins, replied they did review
the language and have no objection.
CHAIR FRENCH removed his objection; finding no further
objection, he announced that Amendment 1 passes.
1:40:27 PM
CHAIR FRENCH moved Amendment 2 and objected for discussion
purposes.
Amendment 2
26-LS1243\N.2
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR FRENCH
TO: CSSB 210( ), Draft Version "N"
Page 4, line 4, following "court":
Insert "; if a valid court order issued under
AS 12.61.120 or AS 25.20.060 or an equivalent
provision in another jurisdiction is in effect that
requires that the address or contact information of
the parent who is not deployed be kept confidential,
the notification shall be made to the court only, and
a copy of the order shall be included in the
notification"
MS. MISCHEL explained that the amendment responds to a concern
expressed by the Network that immediate notification of the
address of the nondeployed parent might contradict another
protective order. The amendment cross references current law and
provides that the notification will be made to the court only
and will be kept confidential if a valid order is in effect.
CHAIR FRENCH asked Mr. Tempel if he and the sponsor have
reviewed the language.
MR. TEMPEL replied Senator Huggins supports the amendment.
CHAIR FRENCH removed his objection and announced that without
further objection Amendment 2 passes.
1:42:30 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI moved to report CS for SB 210, [26-LS1243\N
as amended], from committee with individual recommendations and
attached fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSSB 210(JUD)
moved from Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.
At ease from 1:42 p.m. to 1:43 p.m.
SJR 21-CONST. AM: INCREASE NUMBER OF LEGISLATORS
1:43:39 PM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of SJR 21.
SENATOR DONALD OLSON, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor of SJR
21, read from the following the sponsor statement:
" ….Each house district shall be formed of
contiguous and compact territory containing as
nearly as practicable a relatively integrated
socio-economic area…." Alaska Constitution
Article VI, Section 6, titled Legislative
Apportionment.
SJR 21 will put a constitutional amendment before the
voters in the 2010 general election that would
increase the size of the legislature to 48
representatives and 24 senators. Upon voter approval,
the measure would apply to the 2012 determination of
election district boundaries.
In 1913, Congress established the first territorial
legislature with 8 senators and 16 representatives.
The size of the legislature was increased to 12
senators and 24 representatives in 1942. 17 years
later a constitution for the State of Alaska was
ratified further increasing the size of the
legislature to the current 20 senator and 40
representative membership. A feature of that
apportionment was that most of the senate membership
was equally distributed among the 4 judicial districts
in order that one region may not dominate the others.
The U.S. Supreme Court decision requiring "one man,
one vote" eliminated redistricting by this method.
In the first 50 years of statehood, Alaska has not
changed the size of its legislative body, the smallest
bicameral legislature in the nation. In this time
span, the population of the state has more than
tripled. Most significantly, the population increase
is disproportionate, strongly favoring large urban
areas over rural and small community areas. The task
then of applying the Article VI, section 6
requirements for contiguous, compact areas with
integrated socio-economic features has correspondingly
become more difficult and contentious. Except for the
1960 reapportionment right after statehood, all
subsequent reapportionments have faced successful
legal challenges, requiring boundary adjustments and
on several occasions, a court constructed
reapportionment plan.
Federal protections in the U.S. Voter Rights Act of
1965 for large minority concentrations further
complicate Alaska's reapportionment process. Indeed,
they can act to counter the Section 6 requirements.
Rural election district distortions are evident in the
current plan. There is a probability that the new
population distribution of the 2010 census cannot
reconcile Section 6 and the Voter Rights Act without
increasing the size of the legislature. Indeed, the
Alaska Supreme Court has established redistricting
priorities that place voter rights considerations
before the compact, contiguous language of Section 6.
Between 1960 and 2006, twenty nine states have changed
the size of their legislative body. For the nine
states with small populations similar to Alaska
(509,000 to 1,429,000), the average size of their
legislative bodies is 134 members.
Another measure of the effect of the state's growth
and complexity on the work of the legislature is its
budget responsibilities. Legislative expenditures for
government programs and projects has risen from a
figure of $104 million in FY 61 to somewhere in the
neighborhood of $7 billion currently. This is an
increase from $2,700 per capita in 1961 nominal
dollars to $10,000 per capita today.
1:49:07 PM
SENATOR OLSON distributed a spreadsheet showing population
trends in Alaska's 40 election districts. In 2000 the average
population per district was 15,673 and the projected 2010
average population is 17,309 per district. It's disturbing that
certain areas of the state will significantly drop below the
average, he said. If SJR 21 is implemented the average
population per district will be 14,424, which is much closer to
the 2000 average.
CHAIR FRENCH said he appreciates the history; it's a reminder
that we can and do change when times change.
1:52:30 PM
GORDON HARRISON, representing himself, said he is the former
director of legislative research and he found the sponsor's
comments regarding the history of the Alaska Legislature
particularly interesting and important. The overriding concern
of the delegates at the 1955-56 Constitutional Convention was to
assure broad representation throughout the state, particularly
in rural areas. In an effort to ensure rural representation, the
delegates did two things. They increased the number of
legislators from 40 to 60 and they apportioned the Senate on a
basis of geography. In a complicated apportionment scheme each
judicial district got a set number of senators, and then each
got additional senators based on the number of election
districts within the particular judicial district. Southeast and
Central Alaska each got five senators, Southcentral got six
senators, and Northwest got four senators for a total of 20. In
the early '60s the U.S. Supreme Court overturned this scheme in
a series of reapportionment decisions. Federal law required all
state senates to be apportioned on the basis of population.
1:54:58 PM
MR. HARRISON said it's interesting that in 1955 when Alaska's
population was only 200,000, the delegates felt compelled to
increase the size of the Legislature to 60 members. With a
population that is now approaching 700,000, he suggested that
it's a very timely and good idea to incrementally increase the
Legislature by eight House districts and four Senate districts.
This accomplishes the goal of maintaining a vital Legislature by
having rural and Native interests adequately represented. The
other objective is to make these districts workable and
manageable for the people. Right now, some districts are huge
and their many issues compete for time and attention. It's
nearly impossible for legislators to travel to all the
communities and adequately represent them.
1:56:45 PM
The spreadsheet that the sponsor distributed demonstrates that
absent this legislation, rural districts will be hurting. It's
almost inevitable that Southeast will lose District 5 and it's
likely that either District 6 or District 37 will be lost along
with a Senate seat. That means 3 Native rural districts will
probably be lost. He hasn't done the calculations, but he
assumes that MatSu will gain 1.5 and Anchorage will gain 0.5. By
increasing the number of House districts to 48, the population
is reduced to 14,424, which is manageable. The Railbelt will get
the additional 12 legislators, but the existing districts will
probably stay whole.
MR. HARRISON said he realizes that changing an institution is a
big step, but this is one that he would recommend. It doesn't
portend any fundamental change in the legislative process.
SENATOR EGAN asked how the House and Senate districts would be
affected geographically because some Senate districts are
already huge.
MR. HARRISON responded that without this change they promise to
get even larger. If this were to pass, most House districts
would hold their own while urban areas like Anchorage would have
relatively small geographic districts. He confirmed that each
Senate district is comprised of two House districts.
2:00:37 PM
CHAIR FRENCH pointed out that this won't create new seats in
Native areas; it simply maintains the status quo. The new seats
will go to the Railbelt. The MatSu area will have 4 or 5 more
representatives here in Juneau representing their interests.
"They're not going to be outweighed or outnumbered by anybody,"
he said.
MR. HARRISON agreed that this does nothing to change the balance
of power between rural and urban areas. Rural districts will
simply maintain some presence and the districts will be a more
realistic size for traveling and campaigning.
2:03:04 PM
JIM BALDWIN, representing himself, told the committee that
during the last districting he represented the Office of the
Governor. He said he supports SJR 21 as a valuable tool for the
redistricting board; it may ameliorate the effect of the Voting
Rights Act on the process.
He explained that Alaska is covered by Section 5 of the Voting
Rights Act and as such it has to pre-clear any changes to the
election process or procedure with the U.S. Department of
Justice (DOJ). Any proposed change requires proof that it does
not abridge anyone's right to vote on the basis of race, color
or minority language. The idea is to prevent any back slide, or
retrogression, in the level of representation for minority
voters, he said.
CHAIR FRENCH asked how it's possible to avoid conflict with the
Voting Rights Act when population ratios change. Non-Natives
moving to the state dilute the voting power of Natives.
2:06:29 PM
MR. BALDWIN conceded that it may not be possible, but the Voting
Rights Act and the regulations require the state to examine all
possible alternatives before saying that retrogression cannot be
avoided. The board- the state government - bears a fairly heavy
burden in order to stay in compliance with the Voting Rights
Act, he said.
CHAIR FRENCH asked what prompted Congress to pass the Voting
Rights Act.
MR. BALDWIN replied it arose from post-Civil War constitutional
amendments dealing with the treatment of minority voters,
principally in the south. Other states were brought in because
they had either literacy requirements in their constitutions or
significant language minorities. According to the federal
register, Alaska has been covered since 1972, principally on the
basis of language minorities. The federal government wants to
ensure that states protect minority voters and one means of
doing that is to apply the retrogression test. He noted that
it's been fertile ground for litigation during every
redistricting cycle, primarily on the national scene. He cited
Georgia v. Ashcroft as the most recent case.
He said he agrees with Mr. Harrison that a retrogression
determination seems to be looming. With just 40 districts the
DOJ will possibly pressure the state to find minority
populations wherever it can to try to meet the non-retrogression
standard or to minimize it to the greatest extent possible. It's
likely that the DOJ will emphasize finding where the previously
rural populations exist and moving lines to pick them up.
MR. BALDWIN said that the Alaska Constitution also has
redistricting standards that require socially integrated and
compact districts. He thinks that when the census is complete
and the locations of minority populations are known, there could
be pressure to pick up populations in urban areas - or to redraw
districts in a way that keep Native populations together. If the
number of legislators remains constant it will be a problem for
everyone to confront, not just rural districts, he concluded.
2:12:58 PM
CHAIR FRENCH asked him to tell the public why this resolution
needs to pass this year.
MR. BALDWIN said there's a very compressed time schedule for the
board to do its work. Census materials will arrive in March 2011
and the board then has to develop a plan and go through
preclearance in the court process by June 1 of the next election
cycle.
CHAIR FRENCH closed public testimony and held SJR 21 in
committee.
SB 214-CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
2:15:23 PM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of SB 214.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI, sponsor of SB 214, said the link between
animal cruelty, domestic violence and other violent crimes has
been well documented since the 1970s. SB 214 works hand-in-hand
with the governor's platform against domestic violence by
increasing the punishment to a felony offense for the most
heinous crimes of animal cruelty. The bill provides the
opportunity to identify and punish perpetrators of domestic
violence early on, before they can do further harm to people in
the community.
Currently, animal cruelty is a misdemeanor offense and a class C
felony on the third offense if it occurs within 10 years. Forty
five other states have animal cruelty provisions with a felony
on the first offense. Alaska is the only state that requires a
third offense prior to triggering the felony clause. This bill
will amend current statute to ensure that the most heinous acts
of animal cruelty are a felony on the first offense. This bill
creates a felony animal cruelty provision for knowingly
inflicting severe and prolonged physical pain or suffering on an
animal or for killing or injuring an animal by the use of a
decompression chamber or poison. By comparison, the penalty for
a serious injury of a person is typically a class A or a class B
felony. The penalty for killing a person with poison is an
unclassified felony.
SB 214 also creates a class A misdemeanor for a first offense
and class C felony for second offense within 10 years for
failing to care for an animal with criminal negligence resulting
in death, severe pain or suffering or for knowingly killing or
injuring an animal with the intent to intimidate, threaten or
terrorize another person. By comparison, the penalty for
negligent child endangerment is a class C felony and stalking is
a class A misdemeanor on the first offense and a class C felony
on the second offense. In nearly all these provisions, the
penalties for crimes inflicted on humans are much greater than
the penalties for crimes inflicted on animals. The penalty for
stalking, however, is the same as that for knowingly killing or
injuring an animal with the intent to intimidate, threaten, or
terrorize another person. The provision for animal cruelty is
essentially one component of stalking or terrorizing another
person.
2:18:13 PM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI highlighted that in Alaska, stealing a $500
purebred dog or vandalizing a $500 portrait of an animal is
currently a Class C felony, but killing or severely injuring
that same pet is only a class A misdemeanor. This doesn't make
sense, he said.
As previously mentioned, there is a direct and proven link
between crimes of domestic violence and animal cruelty. Over 70
percent of pet owners entering domestic violence shelters report
that their batterer had threatened, injured, or killed family
pets. Over 90 percent of violent attacks on animals are
committed in the presence of a partner or a family member to
seek revenge or control. SB 214 provides an opportunity to
prevent further violent acts by identifying those dangerous
individuals before they can do more harm to both animals and
people.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI noted that SB 214 is supported by the
Alaska Department of Public Safety, the Council on Domestic
Violence and Sexual Assault, Alaska Network on Domestic Violence
and Sexual Assault, Alaska Veterinary Association, the
Municipality of Anchorage Animal Control Advisory Board, the
Humane Society of the U.S., the Alaska Peace Officers
Association, and many other groups and individuals.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI related two recent instances of violence
and animal cruelty in this state to show why it's time to join
45 other states and allow felony prosecution for the most
despicable acts of animal cruelty.
2:22:28 PM
CHAIR FRENCH recalled that animal cruelty has to rise to the
level of torture for it to be a felony.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said it's essentially torturing on three
occasions.
2:23:48 PM
DOUG MOODY, Attorney, Public Defender Agency, Alaska Department
of Administration, said he is available to answer questions and
that the PDA seconds Ms. Carpeneti's testimony.
COLONEL AUDIE HOLLOWAY, Alaska State Troopers, Department of
Public Safety (DPS), said that domestic violence perpetrators
use threats or violence to pets to coerce their victims.
Numerous studies show that cruelty to animals is linked to
crimes against persons. The troopers receive frequent requests
to investigate animal cruelty ranging from starvation to using
animals for target practice. Because of other priorities they
are unable to investigate most of those cases. Hopefully
increasing the penalties will cause perpetrators to think twice
about committing these acts, he said.
2:25:30 PM
JACKIE KAHN, Detective, Anchorage Police Department, said she is
the point of contact for animal cruelty cases and she believes
that people don't realize how much animal cruelty goes on. In
less than two years she has reviewed at least 60 cases of
reported animal cruelty ranging from neglect to torture. She
highlighted the point that people that commit acts of animal
cruelty are statistically linked to other violent crimes and
other criminal activity. I've seen that in practice in
Anchorage, she said. SB 214 is an important bill that will help
keep these people from committing future crimes.
2:29:11 PM
KAYLA EPSTEIN, member, Anchorage Animal Care and Control
Advisory Board, said the board unanimously supports SB 214. Most
people want to protect small helpless creatures from harm and
pedophiles know and take advantage of this. While people like to
think that pedophiles are strangers, the fact is that 70 percent
are either family members or someone that the family knows.
Abuse of animals is an aid to perpetrators in cases of domestic
violence. They use abuse or threats of abuse to demonstrate
power and control, to isolate, to force submission, to
perpetuate an environment of fear, to prevent the victim from
leaving or to coerce them to return, and to punish a victim for
leaving or for showing independence. 71 percent of pet-owning
women entering shelters report that their batterer has injured,
maimed, killed, or threatened family pets for revenge or
psychological control. In those cases, 87 percent of the women
witnessed the abuse and 76 percent of children were witness. 25
percent of abused women will not leave their situation out of
fear for the animals they care about. In homes where a spouse is
abused, child abuse is twice as likely to occur if there is also
animal abuse. Increasing the penalty for animal abuse to a
felony would give prosecutors one more weapon to fight the very
difficult domestic violence and sexual abuse of a minor cases.
2:33:49 PM
RONNIE ROSENBERG, Chair, Fairbanks North Star Borough Animal
Control Commission, said she is also the founder and president
of the Fairbanks Animal Shelter Fund. From time to time over the
years they have seen egregious animal abuse and it's time to
join the other 45 states and prosecute them on the first offense
as a felon. These events are very disruptive to the fabric of
neighborhoods and communities.
MICHELE GIRAULT, Friends of Pets, Anchorage, stated support for
SB 214. She reported having received many calls over the years
from women whose pets had been killed by their partners. The
link between violence toward pets and violence toward women and
children is better recognized now and she believes that passing
this bill will help address other violent issues and perhaps
save a child or woman from being battered. Alaska needs to take
a stand and make animal cruelty a felony, she said.
2:37:34 PM
ADAM PARASCANDOLA, Director, Animal Cruelty Campaign, Humane
Society of the United States, stated support for SB 214. He
cited a study released by the Chicago Police Department in 2008
that found "a startling propensity for offenders charged with
crimes against animals to commit other violent offenses towards
human victims." Investigators examined the criminal records of
animal cruelty and animal fighting arrestees and found that 86
percent had two or more past arrests, 70 percent had been
arrested for felonies including homicide, 70 percent had past
narcotics arrests, and 65 percent had been arrested for battery
crimes. A Canadian police study similarly found that 70 percent
of those arrested for animal cruelty had prior records of
violent crimes including homicide. This research makes it clear
that people who are capable of atrocious acts of cruelty to
animals are similarly dangerous to humans and communities. He
noted that after the District of Columbia passed a felony law
against animal cruelty the first case he investigated was linked
to domestic violence. SB 214 is reasonable and practical, he
concluded.
2:40:44 PM
SALLY CLAMPITT, Executive Director, Alaska SPCA, stated
enthusiastic support for SB 214. Alaska SPCA receives numerous
calls from across the state reporting incidents of cruelty or
inhumane treatment of animals, particularly dogs. Local animal
control ordinances are frequently weak and ineffective and when
there is no enforcement agency these cases are handled by the
state troopers that have many other pressing obligations. If
animal cruelty were a felony on the first offense and the law
was energetically and decisively enforced, the word would get
out. It would likely be an effective and long-term deterrent to
people who commit heinous acts against animals. Alaska has a
long history of having some of the worst animal cruelty laws and
SB 214 would bring it closer in alignment with legislation in
other states. This is appropriate as there is growing
intolerance for animal cruelty.
2:43:26 PM
DR. MYRA WILSON, Veterinarian, Anchorage Animal Care and
Control, stated support for SB 214. She could reiterate previous
testimony from an animal control perspective. Her agency has
seen numerous cases of animal cruelty and would like to see all
the hard work that APD, animal control officers, and
veterinarians put into these animal cruelty cases result in more
stringent penalties.
2:45:16 PM
ANNE CARPENETI, Attorney, Criminal Division, Department of Law
(DOL), said the department isn't taking a position on SB 214,
but in the past it has testified in opposition to felony level
penalties for animal cruelty. She reported that in 1978 the
Criminal Code Revision Commission debated whether or not animal
cruelty should be a felony and the majority decided it ought to
be resolved as a class A misdemeanor. The maximum penalty of
which is one year in jail. Over the years DOL has held that the
prosecution of animal cruelty cases should be less serious than
the prosecution of assault and other offenses against humans.
MS. CARPENETI said Senator Wielechowski is correct when he
points to the elements of the offenses. Murder of a human being
is a higher level than a class A misdemeanor. Torturing and
killing a person is an unclassified felony that would probably
bring a mandatory 99 years in jail. However, the reality of
criminal prosecution of crimes against people in this state,
particularly domestic violence crimes, is that they tend to be
resolved as class A misdemeanors - assault in the fourth degree.
Not until the third assault in the fourth degree within a ten
year period does one get a class C felony. DOL's concern is that
crimes against people generally get resolved as class A
misdemeanors. It's an issue of parity; humans should be
protected more seriously than animals.
CHAIR FRENCH said he's surprised, given the governor's focus on
domestic violence, that he or the attorney general isn't willing
to rethink that historical opposition. He doesn't believe anyone
is seeking parity between harm against pets and harm against
humans, but he knows that many serious assaults against women
and children that resolve as misdemeanor do so because of the
leverage a potential felony conviction affords. If this becomes
law, many felony animal cruelty charges will similarly resolve
as misdemeanors, but with less fuss and muss, he said.
2:49:43 PM
MS. CARPENETI said that's probably true. It's clear that animal
cruelty should be taken seriously because the evidence shows
that it is a gateway crime to domestic violence. However, a
gateway crime shouldn't have a larger penalty than the target
crime.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said it's factually incorrect to say that
these proposed penalties are at parity with the penalties for
similar acts committed against humans. Knowingly inflicting
severe and prolonged pain or suffering on an animal would be a
class C felony. A similar act committed against a human is
either a class A or a class B felony and possibly an
unclassified felony. Killing or injuring an animal by poison or
decompression chamber would be a class C felony, which is the
lowest form of felony. Doing the same to a human is an
unclassified felony.
2:51:52 PM
MS. CARPENETI said, "It could be that since 1978 our state has
matured and gotten to a point where animal cruelty ought to be a
felony." I was simply giving the historical perspective, she
added.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he has a big problem if this
administration is allowing criminals who inflict severe and
prolonged pain and suffering on other humans to plead out to a
misdemeanor. Let me know if you need more resources to address
that, he said.
CHAIR FRENCH announced he would hold SB 214 in committee.
HB 6-CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
2:53:06 PM
CHAIR FRENCH announced the consideration of HB 6. [CSHB 6(JUD)
am was before the committee.]
REPRESENTATIVE BOB LYNN, sponsor of HB 6, said this bill expands
the animal cruelty statutes to include bestiality. Jokes on this
topic abound, but it's no laughing matter; it's linked to sexual
abuse of a minor crimes. He reported that the impetus for the
bill was an incident that arose in Klawock involving a convicted
sex offender who tied a dog to a tree, taped its muzzle shut,
and then sexually assaulted it. He was surprised to learn that
there is no state law prohibiting this activity and that this
was not an isolated incident.
He noted that the bill packet includes a list of frequently
asked questions and answers about bestiality. For example:
· Is there a connection between animal sexual abuse and
domestic violence, child abuse, and other violent crimes? -
Yes, and it is worse than expected.
· Is animal sexual abuse illegal in other states? - Yes, at
least 35 other states outlaw bestiality.
· Are there exemptions in the bill for accepted veterinary
and animal husbandry procedures? - Yes.
· Is bestiality a problem in Alaska and the rest of the U.S.?
- Yes, and that's why most states have laws against
bestiality. Alaska should also have such a law.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN noted that the packet also contains letters
of support from the Alaska Department of Corrections; the Alaska
Farm Bureau, Inc.; Alaska Peace Officers Association; the
American Humane Association; and the Humane Society of the
United States. In addition to addressing bestiality, the bill is
also addressing public safety, particularly for children, he
concluded.
2:57:49 PM
MIKE SICA, Staff to Representative Lynn, said HB 6 seeks to
expand the current provision on animal cruelty to include
offenses of sexual abuse of animals. Senator Wielechowski is
asking for the tougher penalties in his bill and this bill is
saying don't leave holes in the law.
Section 1 amends AS 11.61.140(a) adding paragraphs (6) and (7)
that say that a person commits animal cruelty by knowingly
engaging in sexual conduct with an animal, and by intentionally
permitting sexual conduct with an animal to occur on any
premises under their control. Section 2 adds a definition of
what constitutes sexual conduct with an animal, and is lifted
almost word for word from Washington statute.
MR. SICA said this bill is simple, but it is not trivial. The
established link between animal cruelty and cruelty to humans
extends to sexual behavior. He directed attention to the human
pet abuse section of petabuse.com site and remarked that it's
stunning to see the hundreds of cases, including the one in
Klawock. When Washington State was considering similar
legislation, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer headline simply
said, "Welcome to No-Brainsville."
3:01:51 PM
DON MARVIN, Mayor, Klawock, stated strong support for HB 6. The
previously mentioned case of animal sexual assault was a
nightmare for the community to live through. The residents
didn't feel safe, but the person could not be held or prosecuted
under current law.
RONNIE ROSENBERG, Chair, Fairbanks North Star Borough Animal
Control Commission, said she is also the founder and president
of the Fairbanks Animal Shelter Fund. The commission unanimously
supports HB 6. They have seen these cases and are mindful of the
link between this and sexual abuse of a minor and the harm it
causes a community. This is not a victimless crime; there isn't
any good reason that this conduct shouldn't be criminalized, she
concluded.
3:05:08 PM
LESLIE ISAACS, City Administrator, Klawock, stated support for
HB 6. He related that when the sexual abuse of an animal
incident came to light in Klawock the police visited the
individual, but they couldn't press charges because there wasn't
an applicable law. Some community members began to talk about
vigilante justice, which caused another citizen to comment that
it would be a miscarriage of justice if someone sought
retribution and ended up in jail.
CHAIR FRENCH closed public testimony and held HB 6 in committee.
3:07:41 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair French adjourned the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee
at 3:07 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 214 sponsor statement.pdf |
SJUD 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM |
SB 214 |
| Nat Coalition Agains Dom Viol.PDF |
SJUD 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM |
SB 214 |
| Humane Society.PDF |
SJUD 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM |
SB 214 |
| HSUS Letter of Support - SB 214.pdf |
SJUD 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM |
SB 214 |
| SB252 Letter.PDF |
SJUD 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM |
SB 252 |
| SBS 252 Sectional Analysis.PDF |
SJUD 2/12/2010 1:30:00 PM |
SB 252 |