HB 50-ARREST;RELEASE;SENTENCING;PROBATION  HB 51-PROBATION; PAROLE; SENTENCES; CREDITS  4:23:20 PM CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 50, "An Act relating to pretrial release; relating to sentencing; relating to treatment program credit toward service of a sentence of imprisonment; relating to electronic monitoring; amending Rules 38.2 and 45(d), Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure; and providing for an effective date." and HOUSE BILL NO. 51, "An Act relating to probation; relating to a program allowing probationers to earn credits for complying with the conditions of probation; relating to early termination of probation; relating to parole; relating to a program allowing parolees to earn credits for complying with the conditions of parole; relating to early termination of parole; relating to eligibility for discretionary parole; relating to good time; and providing for an effective date." CO-CHAIR FIELDS expressed his concerns regarding the circumstances surrounding the resignation of Quinlan Steiner, as Director of the Public Defender Agency (PDA), Department of Administration (DOA). Mr. Steiner had tendered his resignation effective on appointment of a new public defender appointed by the Alaska Judicial Counsel consistent with AS 18.85.030. Co- Chair Fields offered that his concern is that [Governor Michael J. Dunleavy] has accelerated the dismissal of Mr. Steiner and appointed an interim public defender, and the statute does not give him the authority to do so. He maintained the public defender is, by design, an independent position, and the public defender can only be removed for cause. He asserted that is an important principle in terms of a public defender advising the legislature on matters of criminal justice and not being subject to political pressure. He said that currently there is no public defender nominated by the judicial council, which impairs the legislature's ability to ensure a fair hearing on the crime and public safety legislation. 4:25:05 PM JOHN SKIDMORE, Director, Criminal Division, Department of Law (DOL), on behalf of the House Rules Standing Committee, sponsor of HB 51, by request of the governor, relayed that HB 51 is designed to address probation and parole. He referred to the document, entitled "HB 51 Probation and Parole Highlights" and included in the committee packet, which read in part: • Caps on Sanctions for Technical Violations and Absconding Repeals the caps on the sanctions for technical violations (currently 3, 5, and 10 days for the first three violations respectively) and absconding (up to 30 days). Returns discretion to judges and the parole board to impose a sanction appropriate for the offender, the type of violation, and the underlying offense. MR. SKIDMORE explained that Senate Bill 91 [passed during the Twenty-Ninth Alaska State Legislature, 2015-2016, and signed into law 7/11/16] placed caps on the amount of time that could be imposed for either probation or parole violations; however, the caps, instead of being for a single violation, ended up being for the entire petition. Consequently, there can be many violations, but the maximum sanction that can be imposed is three days. He added that returning discretion to judges and the parole board allows them to consider the underlying offense, the length of time the offender has been under supervision, the number of past allegations or violations that have occurred, and the current allegations. 4:29:05 PM MR. SKIDMORE moved on to the second bullet in the document to review the proposal for earned compliance credits (ECC), which read in part: • Earned Compliance Credits Reduces credits to one day for every three days without a violation. If a person violates their probation or parole they will lose all credits accrued up until the violation and have to start over. Prohibits sex offenders from earning credits. MR. SKIDMORE explained that currently, every day that an offender is on probation or parole without a violation, his/her probation or parole time may be reduced by one day. The proposed legislation changes that ratio to 3:1, such that every three days of good behavior earns one day off. REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked whether there is any evidence to justify the change. MR. SKIDMORE answered that there has been no research on it; however, during the time of its implementation, there have been problems with calculating ECC. He maintained that the proposed legislation would help with the calculations. He stated that when the state and the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission (ACJC) evaluated probation and parole, they learned that keeping offenders on probation and parole for very long periods of time was not helpful. They considered three options - ECC, early termination, and reduced maximum periods of probation that could be imposed - and ended up adopting all three. The proposed legislation offers a more "digestible" and balanced approach. He added that the 1:3 ratio was recently adopted by the federal government for ECC, as well as some other states. CO-CHAIR FIELDS referred to page 2 of the Department of Corrections (DOC) fiscal note (FN) [Identifier: LL0031-2-DOC- PP-01-22-19], included in the committee packet, and pointed out the analysis relays several scenarios with estimated costs but no total. He asked why DOC did not total the costs and what the total additional costs would be for offenders being in incarceration longer. MR. SKIDMORE responded that he was not prepared to answer questions about the DOC FN. 4:36:25 PM MR. SKIDMORE continued with the third bullet in the document, which read in part: • Early Termination Of Probation And Parole Returns to a true recommendation of the probation or parole officer instead of a mandated recommendation after 1 or 2 years without violation. MR. SKIDMORE explained that before Senate Bill 91, a parole officer had the ability to recommend termination of probation and parole based on his assessment as to whether the offender was a good candidate for it. Under Senate Bill 91, instead of a recommendation, it became a requirement to recommend the termination of probation and parole after one year. Under HB 51, the recommendation would again be based on the individual's history and behavior. REPRESENTATIVE WOOL asked whether the option of early termination was used very much. MR. SKIDMORE relayed that he could answer the question only in terms of probation, since his experience is as a prosecutor. He said that he did see recommendations but could not give statistics. He added that more frequently he saw what is called "placing someone on a minimum bank." He explained that an offender is required to report to the probation officer once a month; if the person was doing well, the probation officer would shift that person to the minimum bank, which means the offender no longer must report on a monthly basis. This lessened the restrictions of probation. 4:42:25 PM MR. SKIDMORE continued reviewing the highlights of HB 51 by addressing parole. He mentioned that he would be discussing two areas of parole: 1) the eligibility for parole; and 2) a determination of who should be released on parole. He explained parole by way of the following example: An individual is sentenced in court to five years in jail - with two years suspended and three years to serve. The two years that are suspended is the length of time that "hangs over the person's head" so that if he/she violates a condition of probation, there is the potential that those two years could be imposed. Parole refers to the scenario in which the person is released from jail prior to the completion of the three years and is returned to the community; there are conditions set for parole, and if the person violates conditions of parole, the person may be required to return to jail to serve the remainder of the sentence. MR. SKIDMORE said that there are two types of parole - mandatory and discretionary. Mandatory parole, also known as "good time," occurs when someone is released from prison early - after serving approximately two-thirds of the sentence - and is meant to help the person adjust back out to the community and alleviate prison overcrowding. Parole eligibility, under HB 51, refers to discretionary parole. Discretionary parole is when the offender applies for early release after serving approximate one-third of his/her sentence; this early release is earlier than mandatory release. The parole board evaluates the case and decides whether the person is a good candidate for release. In the example, the person would be eligible for discretionary parole after one year. MR. SKIDMORE relayed that under Senate Bill 91, the eligibility for discretionary parole was broadened. He reviewed the changes in eligibility for discretionary parole under HB 51, shown on the document, which read in part: • Parole Eligibility Returns to restricting what crimes are eligible for discretionary parole. Makes the following crimes ineligible: • Non-sex class A felonies (Robbery 1, Assault 1, Arson 1, Escape 1, MIW 1); • B felonies if the person had one or more prior felony convictions; • C felonies if the person had two or more prior felony convictions; and • B and C sex felonies (Sexual Assault 2, Sexual Abuse of a Minor 2, Distribution of Child Pornography). 4:47:40 PM CO-CHAIR FIELDS opened public testimony on HB 50 and HB 51. 4:48:08 PM KATIE BOTZ said she supports the idea of HB 51. She opined that there should be stronger policy to not allow probationers to repeat crimes upon release. She suggested classes could be offered to help people on probation be successful when their probation period ends. She indicated the classes could help a person with his/her work success and state of mind. She said Alaska ranks number one for sex crimes, and she said "they" are the ones that should have "maximum probation punishment without any parole." 4:50:53 PM The committee took an at-ease from 4:51 p.m. to 4:52 p.m. 4:51:49 PM LYNETTE CLARK, Chair, Alaska Independence Party, stated concern that the legislation does not have "any real teeth." She said she would like to see HB 50 and HB 51 not passed. She said she supports what the Senate has done regarding the Crime Bill, and she wants to see Senate Bill 91 repealed. She expressed appreciation for the work that has been done on HB 50 and HB 51, but indicated that the Senate's proposed legislation is more in depth and focused on making criminals pay for what they have done. She reiterated that she cannot support HB 50 and HB 51. 4:53:04 PM NORIA CLARK stated that she used to feel safe [in Anchorage, Alaska]. She said she once lived in Chicago, where her mother survived being shot on her way to work; she once lived in Southern Arizona, where there is drug cartel and constant crime. She said Senate Bill 91 gives more rights to criminals than law- abiding citizens have. She stated, "Currently we are number one in multiple violent and non-violent crimes per capita." She said these crimes includes those sexual violence, car and property theft. Ms. Clark talked about voting and that the people of Alaska will take back their power. She said there are those who represent Alaskans and those who only claim to do so. She stated that Senate Bill 91 should be repealed, with new law put in the books directing how to handle criminals. She said time given to allow Senate Bill 91 to work is time wasted when it results in lives lost. She characterized Alaska as "a nightmare game of Monopoly," where there is "get out of jail free" and taxes on those who must "pay for it," because "criminals don't pay taxes." Ms. Clark stated that HB 50 and HB 51 are only Band-Aids. She posited that Alaska is probably the last state in the Union that could actually be saved. She concluded by saying that she is tired of being afraid. 4:55:29 PM BERT HOUGHTALING stated that he is disturbed to hear it said that people do not understand what is wrong with Senate Bill 91. He stated support of "anything that Governor Dunleavy is trying to pass right now," and suggested that HB 50 and HB 51 could be a good start toward getting tougher on criminals who are repeat offenders. 4:56:55 PM CO-CHAIR FIELDS closed public testimony on HB 50 and HB 51. CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that HB 50 and HB 51 would be held over.