Legislature(2025 - 2026)GRUENBERG 120
03/27/2025 03:15 PM House STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB58 | |
| HB35 | |
| HB16 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 16 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 104 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 58 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 35 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 35-PRISONERS: ELECTRONIC DEVICE ACCESS/USE
3:38:44 PM
CHAIR CARRICK announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 35, "An Act relating to the use and possession of
electronic devices by prisoners." [Before the committee was
CSHB 35(CRA).]
3:38:52 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 3:38 p.m. to 3:41 p.m.
3:41:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT, as prime sponsor, presented CSHB
35(CRA). She explained that this bill concept has been around
before and this was the third legislature that handled this
topic. She said that the proposed legislation would bring
Alaska into alignment with 48 other states that allow the use of
electronic tablets in a Department of Corrections (DOC)
facility. The goal of the bill is to reduce recidivism through
additional access to training and family visitation. She said
that it would help inmates learn how to use tablet devices as
well, common tools in the public space. The goal is to allow
inmates to leave corrections on a better footing to reduce the
chances of returning to a correctional facility.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT said that security threats could be
reduced with the proposed legislation. This includes increasing
access to telehealth options and the reduction in transport to
medical care facilities. She noted that a DOC pilot program was
underway that allowed limited use of electronic tablets and
reports indicated that it was having positive outcomes. She
said that since this allowance has not been addressed in Alaska
Statute (AS), DOC cannot provide electronic tablets to all the
states correctional facilities. She said that the pilot program
made determinations for how this tool could be deployed at a
larger scale. She clarified that these electronic tablets were
not free access to the Internet nor a luxury item that had games
and other entertainment access. Access to library materials,
training courses, telehealth, and family visitation is
permitted. She said that she wanted to ensure that policies
were in place to give DOC the latitude needed to provide these
devices but with sufficient guardrails to ensure appropriate use
amongst inmates.
3:44:38 PM
ELLA LUBIN, Staff, Representative Rebecca Himschoot, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Himschoot, prime
sponsor, gave the sectional analysis for CSHB 35(CRA) [included
in the committee file], which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Section 1: Adds an exemption (I) to the prohibition
against electronic devices for prisoners. It also adds
television show ratings to the list of banned movie
ratings. Subparagraph (I) adds additional accepted
uses for electronic devices including use for
rehabilitative and case plan purposes, legal material
access, health care access, or another purpose
identified by the commissioner in regulation.
Subparagraph (4) adds language that prohibits
correctional centers from charging fees for electronic
device use.
Section 2: States that electronic devices may not be
used to replace in-person visitation.
Section 3: Adds clarifying language regarding the
applicability of the effective date.
CHAIR CARRICK stated that the committee would hear invited
testimony.
3:46:31 PM
TERI TIBBETT, Coordinator, Alaska Reentry Partnership; Co-Chair,
Juneau Reentry Coalition, began invited testimony by talking
about the coalition's purpose of helping people transition out
of incarceration and back into the public community. She gave a
PowerPoint presentation [hard copy included in the committee
file], titled "Alaska Reentry Partnership Presentation to House
State Affairs Committee 3/27/25." She brought attention to
slides 4 and 5, which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
HB 35 - Access to Digital Technology in Prisons
• HB 35 removes a barrier in state law that restricts
inmates inside correctional facilities from utilizing
certain electronic devicessuch as computers or
digital tabletsfor improved access to rehabilitative
programming and activities.
• The Alaska Reentry Partnership supports efforts to
expand digital technology in prisons for vocational
training, education, treatment and recovery, reentry
planning, housing and employment assistance,
telehealth, peer support, faith-based, Tribal,
visitation, and more.
• Rehabilitative programming increases the likelihood
of success in the community after release. Successful
reentry means safer communities.
• In today's world, people need to be 'digitally
literate' for basic functioningto fill out an
application, apply for a job, banking, communication,
and more. People who have been incarcerated for
decades need basic digital skills to function in
today's world.
• The Alaska Reentry Partnership supports DOC's
efforts to improve digital infrastructure to best
provide safe and secure access to telehealth, video
teleconferencing, closed circuit education channels,
digital tablets, computer labs, and more.
MS. TIBIT brought attention to a graph on slide 6, titled
"Offender Returning to Incarceration Within 3 Years of Release,"
which shows a graphical summary of decreasing recidivism rates
from 2015 to 2021. She said that there was not any state data
available to group data from reentry efforts and recidivism
rates. However, data from nationwide efforts regarding reentry
efforts suggested positive outcomes. On the additional slides
she discussed reentry efforts with the State of Alaska (SOA).
She concluded the presentation by commenting that national
recidivism rates are 23 percent lower than 2008 and commented
that achieving these rates were due to changes in policy and
increasing opportunities and resources to support employment,
behavioral healthcare, and housing.
3:54:43 PM
BARBARA MONGAR, Coordinator, Mat-Su Reentry Coalition, began her
invited testimony in support of CSHB 35(CRA). Representing the
Mat-Su Reentry Coalition, she noted that she has worked as the
coordinator for the group for the past five and a half years.
The coalition consists of state agencies such as the Alaska
Department of Labor (DOL) and the Department of Corrections
(DOC), community substance treatment centers such as Set Free
Alaska, Inc. and True North Recovery, Inc.; Mat-Su Health
Services, Inc.; tribal agencies; and nonprofit and private
community service agencies. She said that the close community
partnership through the coalition has made it easier to provide
wrap-around services. A reentry case manager starts planning
with individuals scheduled for release at least 30 days before
their release. These services include comprehensive case
planning, housing support, employment support, parole and
probation support, and referrals for substance and mental health
treatment. She remarked that the case managers also assist
individuals in obtaining clothing and hygiene items, applying
for benefits such as Medicaid or food stamps, and accessing
other services needed for post-incarceration success.
MS. MONGAR said that the coalition supports HB 35 because the
bill would help remove barriers that restrict inmates from
utilizing certain electronic devices such as computers or
digital tablets for improved access to rehabilitation activities
and programs. She stated that early access to these services
would increase the likelihood that individuals will successfully
integrate into the community once they are released from
incarceration.
3:57:07 PM
BOBBY DORTON, Consultant, Healing Homes, began his invited
testimony on CSHB 35(CRA) by talking about his experience while
incarcerated. He noted that he was last incarcerated for over
eight years; five years in a corrections facility and three
years using an ankle monitor. He said that while incarcerated
he wanted to learn how to read and did a lot of reading.
Additionally, he engaged with some of the available programs for
inmates such as the substance abuse program. He said that he
"hungered" for a career once he was able to leave incarceration
but felt that he did not have all the appropriate avenues
available to study these different skills. He said that while
there was a culinary program, it was limited in nature and not
many people were selected, and it required being in the right
institution. He did, however, mention that following his
release a few more programs have been made available to inmates.
MR. DORTON emphasized what he "could have been" if he were able
to satiate his "hunger" for learning given the time he had
available. He felt "warehoused" and "stored away" in prison.
He said that a lot of money was spent on him to be incarcerated;
he believed around $150 a day, and during this time he was ready
to learn but everything was on hold. He said he had to wait to
be released to begin training, school, and the ability to
acquire a career that he wanted. He reiterated that while in
prison, he could have been getting ready for a career but was
instead "warehoused."
MR. DORTON said that for the last seven years he has worked on
facilitating reentry for inmates. He said that once many
inmates are released, they are lost and often end up doing jobs
that involve labor or other lines of work that do not fit their
individual passions. This is largely due to the inability to
train when incarcerated. He said that if training tablets were
available in prison, then the "sky is the limit" and the
educational opportunity for expanding career prospects was
substantial. He opined that his educational level would have
been much higher had these educational tools been available for
him while incarcerated. He believed that expanding the
educational tools for inmates would allow for reentry into
careers and not just jobs. He said that many inmates' following
incarceration are working in fast food venues or washing dishes.
He said that many of these jobs do not last and there was risk
of recidivism when placed in the wrong job category. He said
that putting opportunities in place for inmates and trying to
mold individuals in preparation for a career of choice would
create a better Alaska. In conclusion, he said that the
educational benefit to electronic tablets would be substantial
in supporting reentry for incarcerated Alaskans.
4:02:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY thanked the testifiers. She asked the bill
sponsor and testifiers whether they knew what kind of security
measures could be expected with electronic tablets as this was a
point of concern for some people.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT said that Deputy Commissioner April
Wilkerson could help address this question. She remarked that
this type of device would be offline system to her
understanding.
4:04:05 PM
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON, Deputy Commissioner, Department
of Corrections, in response to Representative Story, commented
that security details were a concern for DOC as well. She said
that the current pilot program is occurring at Highland Mountain
Correctional Center. She said that DOC is utilizing a vendor
that operates multiple corrections related network systems to
provide electronic tablets to individuals in various
correctional settings. She said that there is a structured and
closed network that only allows departmentally approved content
to be displayed on electronic tablets. She commented that the
network is so "tight" that prisoners would not be able to take
these tablets into the cells without disconnection occurring.
She remarked that DOC is building trust with the devices and has
faith in the possibilities of utilizing the tablets with the
pilot program. She reiterated that the network was quite
limited and restricted in use.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked whether Ms. Wilkerson could elaborate
on the current pilot program and how the electronic tablets were
being utilized.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON remarked that the electronic
tablet program at Highland Mountain Correctional Center was
available to all offenders following orientation. The
orientation consists of a medical and mental health assessment,
an orientation video, an acknowledgment, and meeting with an
institutional probation officer. She said that inmates are
issued a unique personal identification number (PIN) that allows
them access to the tablet. She said that the tablets have the
digital law library, offender handbook, and allow for
professional visitation with attorneys. She remarked that
currently, visitation with friends and family was not allowed
but electronic mail ("e-mail") can be received via a service
paid by the sender, about half the price of a stamp. She said
the tablets allow for instant messaging; however, these were
monitored and tracked by staff in the facility. She said that
the facility was piloting communication between the correctional
superintendent and the population. She said that there had been
a maintenance issue and the water had to be shut off.
Notifications were made to inmates via the tablet regarding
where bottled water would be stored, how long the water was out
of service and other details. She remarked that the tablets can
facilitate communication.
DEPUTY COMMISIONER WILKERSON said that DOC was also piloting
requests for information (RFI). The process is for the offender
to get a piece of paper and write out and complete the form; the
form goes in a box; a sergeant will collect that information and
distribute it, whether to medical, to disciplinary, jobs, or
wherever the request is going. She said that individuals on the
back end of RFIs will write responses that return to the box.
She said that this was a very manual process. She said that DOC
is trying to streamline this process via the use of the
electronic tablets.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON said that DOC is also converting
the grievance process, which much like RFIs is a manually
intensive process. She noted that manual processes for
completing forms were still available for those who do not have
or want a tablet for use.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON said that more recently DOC was
looking at expanding the education that is available on the
program. This includes career exploration and preparation,
computer literacy, and other employment and work skills. She
said that currently, educational materials are limited as they
were just being deployed.
DEPUTY COMMISIONER WILKERSON said that there is another program
running out of Goose Creek Correctional Center following
partnership with the courts. She said that this involved using
tablets to engage in court proceedings to avoid transportation
of inmates to and from courts. She said that DOC was in the
process of bringing this service to Highland Mountain
Correctional Center as well. She clarified that both facilities
are using different tablets on separate networks.
4:11:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY said that she was hoping to hear more about
technical coding skills that incarcerated inmates could get when
they reenter society but based on testimony it appeared the DOC
was not quite there yet. She said that there are various
network security companies in the United States, and she asked
whether there could be any elaboration to what systems DOC uses.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON responded that DOC was not at the
point at which it could offer coding education to inmates via
the electronic tablets but wanted to get there. She recognized
the nationwide workforce challenges that everyone is facing and
expanding programming opportunities for the population could
help.
4:13:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE said that the zero fiscal note concerned
him. He said that he has researched these companies for why
they provide electronic tablets at no cost. He compared the
tablets to printers, where the front-end cost is cheap, but the
back-end cost is where they make considerable money. He said
all the Internet providers for these secure networks utilized by
tablets make huge money off prisoners and the states. He asked
whether there was a request for proposal (RFP) out for these
types of electronic tablets. He understood that one of the
providers charges 50 cents an email and four times as much if it
has a video or picture attached. He reiterated that the costs
can be huge with these types of devices. He asked whether there
was an anticipated cost when moving forward to scale this type
of service. He said that it was important to know what these
back-end costs may be before moving forward with providing the
service. He understood that these networks needed to be secure
and asked for elaboration on what companies DOC has spoken with
and what the anticipated costs may be.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON responded that the zero fiscal
note attached to the proposed bill is because the legislation
only gives the SOA the authority to use electronic tablets.
Pending any final version of legislation, DOC is planning to
evaluate how these tablets can be rolled out in the most
beneficial fashion for the department while maintaining costs.
She said that she envisioned the future use of an RFP and
hopefully reducing expenditures and becoming more efficient,
some of the savings could get redirected towards the cost of
tablets. She noted that the cost of tablets at Highland
Mountain Correctional Center is $60 per month per user and that
it is based on current operations.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON said that most vendors such as
JPay, Securus, and ViaPath can offer reduced costs or limited
services based on the functions of the tablets. She said that
DOC was waiting to see what the final form of the proposed
legislation may be to get an RFP prepared to expand the current
pilot program into other institutions. It would likely be a
budget request in the future.
4:17:14 PM
CHAIR CARRICK asked for explanation of cost avoidance in other
areas regarding the use of electronic tablets.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON responded that reduced paper
printing was one example of a cost avoidance since forms could
be filled out digitally. She said that tablets would also
reduce the manual burden of RFP requests around the facility and
their distribution amongst personnel, freeing up this time,
which would allow resources to be focused on other areas.
Additionally, another area of savings would be document
delivery, unless a hard copy is requested. She also speculated
that visitation opportunities on the tablets could reduce in
person visitation and reduce strain on staffing required for in-
person accommodation. Lastly, he reiterated that telehealth and
programming could reduce the movement of inmates in and out of
the facility, which would also be a form of cost avoidance.
4:19:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLLAND thanked the previous testifiers for their
comments. He said that he has learned recidivism is significant
in Alaska and how much cost is associated with it. He offered
support to any remediation that could help drive down costs
associated with incarceration. He commented that he hoped that
as this technology continues to develop it could be an
opportunity to engage with Alaska companies and entrepreneurs
for service coverage. He was aware of Alaska startups already
providing hardened tablets, but not specifically for prisons.
He said that this could be an opportunity for Alaska, allowing
those business opportunities to stay in the state.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLLAND asked whether there was a current method
to track individuals using tablets to assess whether there was
any meaningful impact following reentry. He said it may cost a
small amount of money, but the cost savings given reduced rates
of recidivism would save substantially more. He said SOA spends
roughly $70-$80 thousand to keep someone in the prison system
and a fifty-dollar investment in a tablet would be a
considerable return on the investment. He said that being able
to see the savings in action would make these decisions
straightforward, but it would require the collection of data.
He reiterated his question into whether DOC was collecting
reentry data for individuals who used tablets and if not, could
DOC begin collecting this information.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT responded that the question of
causation and correlation always play into this discussion. She
noted that there was some research in the committee's bill
packets about recidivism at a national level [copy included in
committee file]. She said that research indicates that
recidivism is reduced with increased educational opportunities.
She said that while there were educational programs available
right now, nobody could force inmates to participate. She
commented that it was human nature to want to occupy time with
something. She deferred Deputy Commissioner Wilkerson for
further comment.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON said that DOC intends to track as
much data as possible to ensure the success of the tablet
program. She said that the tablet infrastructure was put in
place the previous March and devices were not rolled out until
the beginning of April, with limited tablet functionality
consisting of the handbook, digital library, and attorney-client
visits. She remarked that only last October had DOC been able
to work with the vendor to get the RFI process established,
grievance process and communications started with the tablets.
Furthermore, the educational components of the tablets are only
beginning to be "turned on". Due to recent implementation of
the tablets, only limited data was available regarding outcomes
from tablet use. She said that DOC plans to have tracking
capabilities to monitor and report on the success and
utilization of the tablets. She noted that everything on the
tablet was recorded except for professional visits with their
attorney clients.
4:24:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT noted that the committee should not
overlook opportunities for faith-based services and family
visitation. She commented on the vast nature of Alaska and the
distance that many inmates have from families. She noted that
Sitka has no long-term correctional facility and at best an
inmate might be housed in Juneau. She said that at a minimum, a
tablet would provide an opportunity for family visits when in-
person visitation was not possible.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT also referenced a study evaluated by
her research team that explained the impact of education on
reentry success. She clarified that it was a national study and
not specific to Alaska but indicated that educational
opportunities reduce post-release incarceration rates by 13
percent. It also indicated a savings of five dollars in
correctional costs for every single dollar spent on correctional
education. She emphasized that the tablets are directly tied
into educational access.
REPRESENTATIVE HOLLAND said that based on previous comments it
is understood that DOC can track the use of the tablets and will
be expanding what the tablets can be used for. He reiterated
that his question pertained to tracking reentry for individuals
who used a tablet and those who did not and their respective
outcomes following reentry. He was interested in whether
recidivism data could be correlated to tablet access. He
acknowledged that the statistical significance might be
speculative but explained that he was looking at data that could
correlate from national studies as well and provide Alaska-
specific information. He remarked that this type of data would
help infer whether tablets had an impact on reducing recidivism
rates in the state. Being able to see a change in Alaska's
recidivism rates and correlating it back to different services,
products, or tools would be ideal.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON said that DOC can track recidivism
rates. For individuals returning to custody, the department can
review what programming those individuals previously received,
whether they had participated, completed it, or successfully
completed it. She said that with regards to tablets, DOC can
evaluate whether those inmates were issued a tablet and what it
was used for. She said that this was a component that could be
added to reports generated by the Department.
4:27:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MOORE asked whether Deputy Commissioner Wilkerson
could elaborate on what was included in the $50 a month cost
associated with the electronic tablets.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON responded that this covers costs
associated with setting up the system, setting up users,
software updates, security elements, and services that were
being provided. She compared it to costs associated with
setting up phones.
REPRESENTATIVE MOORE noted that based on the language of the
bill, some of the features were already being piloted on the
tablets, such as entertainment and online education. He noted
that in other states, entertainment is charged to the inmate,
and inmates pay for online education courses. She said that
inmates in other states often pay for text messaging and emails
as well.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON clarified that from DOC's
standpoint and the way the proposed legislation reads, there is
no ability to allow for entertainment under the current bill
language. She said that email and visitations are prohibited
from being charged back to inmates. Because of this, any such
services would require negotiation with the vendor, the
department would need to return to the legislature to seek
funding for full implementation.
REPRESENTATIVE MOORE asked, if the bill carries forward, whether
DOC would also charge for entertainment and online educational
courses. Furthermore, she inquired whether there had been any
conversations about whether the department would charge inmates
$50 to cover the monthly fee associated with the tablets. She
said that this would need to be addressed in a fiscal note.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILKERSON reiterated that DOC understands
that the proposed legislation would not allow the use of tablets
for the purpose of entertainment. Furthermore, she reiterated
that email and electronic visitations could not be charged to
inmates. Because of this, negotiations would be required with
the vendor regarding costs and required funding for full
implementation.
4:31:51 PM
CHAIR CARRICK announced that CSHB 35(CRA) was held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 16 Version A Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HSTA 3/27/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB0016A.pdf |
HSTA 3/27/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB 16 Version A Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HSTA 3/27/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB 16 Fiscal Note DOA-APOC-3-21-2025.pdf |
HSTA 3/27/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB 16 Support LTR Alaska Voter Hub.pdf |
HSTA 3/27/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB 16 Written Testimony Rec'd 3-26-25.pdf |
HSTA 3/27/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| HB 16 Presentation 3-27-25 UPDATED.pdf |
HSTA 3/27/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 16 |
| CS HB 35 Sponsor Statement - Version G 3.13.25.pdf |
HSTA 3/27/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 35 |
| CS HB 35 Sectional Analysis - Version G 3.13.25.pdf |
HSTA 3/27/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 35 |
| CS HB 35 CRA Ver G.pdf |
HSTA 3/27/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 35 |
| CS HB 35 - Version G Explanation of Changes 3.13.25.pdf |
HSTA 3/27/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 35 |
| HB 35 Presentation ARP 3-27-25.pdf |
HSTA 3/27/2025 3:15:00 PM |
HB 35 |