Legislature(2023 - 2024)ADAMS 519
03/01/2023 01:30 PM House FINANCE
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 | |
| Fy 24 Budget Overview: Department of Military and Veteran's Affairs | |
| Fy 24 Budget Overview: Alaska Court System | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 39 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 41 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 39
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government and for
certain programs; capitalizing funds; amending
appropriations; making reappropriations; making
supplemental appropriations; making appropriations
under art. IX, sec. 17(c), Constitution of the State
of Alaska, from the constitutional budget reserve
fund; and providing for an effective date."
HOUSE BILL NO. 41
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
capital expenses of the state's integrated
comprehensive mental health program; and providing for
an effective date."
^FY 24 BUDGET OVERVIEW: DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY AND
VETERAN'S AFFAIRS
1:34:13 PM
MAJOR GENERAL TORRENCE SAXE, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
MILITARY AND VETERANS AFFAIRS, introduced himself.
GENERAL SIMON BROWN, COMMANDER OF THE STATE OF ALASKA
DEFENSE FORCE, DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY AND VETERANS AFFAIRS,
introduced himself.
BOB ERNISSE, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF
MILITARY AND VETERANS AFFAIRS, introduced himself.
1:34:30 PM
Commissioner Saxe introduced the PowerPoint presentation
"FY2024 Operating Budget Overview" dated March 1, 2023
(copy on file). He moved to slide 2 and explained that the
mission of the Department of Military and Veterans Affairs
(DMVA) was to protect the state and the nation.
Commissioner Saxe advanced to slide 3 which depicted a map
of Alaska showing the locations of the Alaska Army and
National Guard. Each box on the map represented armories
that were at capacity with soldiers in 1995. The benefit of
having troops across that state was that if there was a
natural disaster, there were already troops in all areas of
the state ready to respond. Additionally, troops would be
on location and ready to respond if there was a federal
threat. All areas of the map with a green box were the
present focus for recruitment for the department.
1:35:14 PM
AT-EASE
1:35:37 PM
RECONVENED
Commissioner Saxe continued on slide 3 and detailed the way
in which the military presence in the state had changed
over the years. The department was trying to recruit in
Western Alaska in particular but was recruiting in many
areas across the state. He reiterated that if there were to
be a natural disaster in the present day, the department
would need to transport troops to the western area of the
state; years ago, troops were already present in the area.
Commissioner Saxe continued to slide 4 and indicated that
the department's largest response to date off the road
system was called the Operation Merbok Response [during the
typhoon in September of 2022]. He reiterated that there
were not many troops in the Merbok area of the state and it
relied upon its large contingent in Nome and in Bethel.
Many of the areas in which there were troops years ago were
presently void of troops. Accessing roughly 30 unserved
communities was a challenge and the department wanted more
troops dedicated to the communities.
Commissioner Saxe moved to slide 5, which included a photo
of the balloon that was found flying over Alaska and shot
down in February of 2023. He shared his concern that there
was a foreign object flying over the state's sovereign
territory. He also posed the question of why the object
would be a balloon rather than a satellite. He noted that
the object was also a threat to aviation and could cause a
catastrophic situation if it collided with a plane.
Commissioner Saxe advanced to slide 6 which showed the
organizational chart of the composition of DMVA. He
indicated that most state militaries only had adjutant
military, but Alaska had many other state entities within
DMVA. He had recently accomplished a long-term goal to
include a branch of the Civil Air Patrol (CAP) in DMVA.
Additionally, DMVA had administrative control over the
Alaska Aerospace Corporation.
Commissioner Saxe indicated that Alaska was the only state
or territory within the nation that had a larger Air
National Guard than an Army National Guard. He relayed that
the state's Air National Guard was the most operational in
the entire country and made roughly one rescue per week.
The official state militia was the Alaska State Defense
Force (ASDF). If there were ever to be a situation where
the National Guard was federalized, it was possible that
the National Guard would relocate to Washington state. He
noted that the situation had occurred during World War II.
Although it was unlikely to happen again, he wanted to
ensure that there were troops stationed in the area to
assuage any fears of there being no military presence in
parts of the state.
Commissioner Saxe added that the role of the Alaska Naval
Militia was primarily to follow state orders, such as to
assist during natural disasters. He relayed that the
militia had served during natural disasters often over the
last few years.
Commissioner Saxe concluded that some of the other entities
within the department were Veteran's Affairs, the Alaska
Military Youth Academy (AMYA), Administrative Services, and
the Homeland Security and Emergency Management System
(HSEMS). He emphasized that the homeland division was an
especially busy one.
1:40:53 PM
Representative Josephson understood that CAP was an entity
that the legislature had repeatedly funded and the governor
had repeatedly vetoed. He asked if the funding was in the
current year's budget.
Mr. Ernisse responded that CAP funding was incorporated
into the prior year's budget and it had continued into the
current year's budget.
Commissioner Saxe added that CAP had to be under the
military because it was an official department of the
United States Air Force (USAF). He emphasized that it was
important that DMVA was utilizing all available assets
going forward.
Mr. Ernisse continued the presentation on slide 7, which
showed a high level comparison between FY 20 actuals and
the governor's request for FY 24. He pointed out that
unrestricted general funds (UGF) had stayed relatively
consistent over the years with a few notable exceptions. In
FY 21, the Alaska Land Mobile Radio (ALMR) communications
system was transferred from the Department of
Administration (DOA) over to DMVA. In FY 23, ALMR was
transferred again to the Department of Public Safety (DPS),
which was the reason for the spike in general funds. Also
in FY 23, there was an increase in funding to help
establish ASDF. There was an additional increase for the
defense force in FY 24 that would be apparent in future
slides.
Mr. Ernisse continued on slide 8. The department's first
request within HSEMS included a decrement of $700,000 in
federal receipt authority. The funding originated from the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and
was simply being transferred to the capital budget as the
department viewed it as a better fit. Secondly, the
department was requesting an increase in the Emergency
Management Performance Grant (EMPG). The increase in
funding was due to an increase in federal funds, which
required an increase in matching funds as well. The final
request on the slide was for an increase in statutory
designated program receipts in relation to the department's
Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC). He shared
that Alaska used to have the ability to offer assistance
when natural disasters occurred in other states, but it
unfortunately no longer had the capacity to send employees
to help other states. The reason for the change was that
there had been a record number of natural disasters within
Alaska, which needed to be the focus of the department.
1:44:15 PM
Representative Hannan asked Mr. Ernisse to elaborate on the
deficit incurred by the transfer of NOAA funding to the
capital budget. She asked what the original project was and
asked for details on the anticipated effect of the $700,000
receipt authority.
Mr. Ernisse responded that it was a grant for NOAA and was
mostly intended for personal services costs for
communities. He clarified that DMVA would still execute the
grant, but that it was simply being transferred from the
operating budget to the capital budget.
Representative Hannan asked what the grant was intended to
do.
Mr. Ernisse responded that he did not have the information
with him but he would follow up in writing.
Co-Chair Johnson asked what the match requirement was for
EMPG.
Mr. Ernisse responded that the match was $3.6 million.
Co-Chair Johnson asked how much the federal increase was.
Mr. Ernisse responded that the federal increase was also
$3.6 million.
Mr. Ernisse continued on slide 9. The first request on the
slide was for $105,500 for an additional administrative
officer under the Army Guard Facilities Maintenance
component and would be funded completely using federal
dollars. The current administrative workload was
unsustainable with the existing staff. The second request
was for an additional $138,000 in the Equipment Maintenance
and Lifecycle Refresh component. It would fund a refresh
for computers and monitors and would fund annual
maintenance for generators statewide to ensure ongoing
functionality. It would also be completely federally
funded.
Representative Galvin asked if there were best practices on
how often computers should be replaced.
Mr. Ernisse replied that he would follow up with the
information.
1:47:42 PM
Mr. Ernisse continued on slide 10 and detailed the Air
Guard Facilities Maintenance component. The first request
on the slide was for an increase of $50,000 in general
funds for janitorial services at the Eielson Air Force
Base. The department had been unable to establish a
janitorial contract with the previously allocated amount of
$99,000 due to inflation and cost of living increases. He
added that the National Guard members were currently doing
their own janitorial service. The second request was for
maintenance and utilities. The National Guard had built a
large hanger known as a "nose dock" and the funding request
was for the amount required to maintain the facility.
Co-Chair Johnson understood that $99,000 had been allocated
for janitorial services but had not been used.
Mr. Ernisse responded in the affirmative and added that the
department had not been able to get a contract despite
placing bids multiple times.
Co-Chair Johnson asked if there was anyone who was able to
complete a partial contract.
Mr. Ernisse responded in the negative and reiterated that
the department had tried to find a contract multiple times.
Co-Chair Johnson asked for confirmation that the total
amount would allow the department to get a janitorial
contract.
Mr. Ernisse responded that the department believed it would
be able to get a contract with the additional funding.
Mr. Ernisse continued on slide 11 which detailed the
requests for AMYA. He relayed that the department had
discovered that it could charge the federal government more
for personal services costs. As the match in federal
authority increased, the general fund match would increase
as well; however, the department was still able to identify
a $543,000 cost savings in general funds.
Representative Ortiz asked for a brief overview of the
operations at AMYA, such as the number of students
currently attending the academy.
Commissioner Saxe responded that there were roughly 85
students currently at the academy and the department's
target was to have at least 125 students. The academy
lasted around eight weeks and the goal was for its students
to either earn a GED, receive a diploma, or return to their
high school. He was a supporter of the academy and thought
that it was a lifechanging experience. He added that many
students would go on to enlist into the military.
Representative Ortiz asked if the students were assigned to
the academy due to past legal issues or if the students
applied voluntarily.
Commissioner Saxe responded that enrollment in the school
was voluntary. The students came from all over the state
and a significant portion of the student body came from
rural areas.
1:52:24 PM
Mr. Ernisse advanced to slide 12 and detailed the Office of
the Commissioner component of the budget. There was an
additional request for the Alaska Distributed Learning
Program (ADLP), which was a program that provided classes
and additional training to soldiers throughout the state.
The program was expanding, and the department was
requesting $75,000 in federal receipts to support the
expansion. The next request was for the addition of a Human
Resource Consultant 1 position. The position was in
response to expected increases in personnel issues as a
result of drill statuses and activations within ASDF. The
majority of the funding would originate from the National
Guard and other divisions.
Representative Stapp asked if there were any plans to use
the Northern Warfare Training Center as an active duty
training facility.
Commissioner Saxe responded in the affirmative and added
that the department wanted to promote all available Arctic
training activities. The department was considered the
Arctic expert because of its location in Alaska. He wanted
to set an example for other state military forces and other
entities interested in potential training in the Arctic. He
emphasized the importance of protecting the Arctic and of
protecting Alaska.
Mr. Ernisse continued on slide 13. The next request was for
about $2.1 million to establish ASDF as a separate division
within DMVA. It would fund five additional employees
including a position for division director.
Representative Galvin noted that part of the funding would
go to the purchasing of fleet vehicles. She understood that
the National Guard, ASDF, and other troops would be
responsible for responding during emergency situations. She
asked if the purchases listed on the slide were a complete
list of what ASDF would need to be appropriately responsive
in emergency situations.
Commissioner Saxe responded that the National Guard and
ASDF would go forward as a team. There were certain areas
in which the guard could excel and other areas in which it
needed assistance. He relayed that the focus of ASDF would
ideally be upon the areas in Alaska without any troops. The
goal was to transport the troops and the equipment to rural
areas of the state because it would make a disaster
response more streamlined.
1:57:02 PM
Mr. Brown added that all soldiers could ride in National
Guard fleet vehicles when the vehicles were available, but
if the vehicles were not available, he would have to
transport his own troops. He emphasized the importance of
having large vehicles readily available to respond quickly
to a disaster. He stated that he needed additional survival
equipment to ensure that when he sends a soldier to respond
to an emergency, the soldier would be properly equipped to
remain in the situation for a long period of time.
Representative Galvin asked Mr. Brown if he was including
airplanes in the list of equipment he needed to transport
troops to remote areas. She asked for more details on the
types of equipment of which he was speaking.
Mr. Brown responded that the military would not be
purchasing airplanes and would purchase commercial tickets
for soldiers if necessary. The requested equipment included
off-road vehicles and other wheeled vehicles that would
allow troops to remain in an area for long periods of time.
Representative Hannan understood that there were
significant barriers preventing ASDF from using the
National Guard's equipment and armories. She asked for
information on any legal restrictions that would prevent
the equipment from being shared. She did not think $2.1
million would go far in rural Alaska, particularly when
establishing a new division or facility. She thought it was
difficult to receive permission to use equipment that
belonged to the federal government.
Commissioner Saxe responded that it was, "one team, one
fight." He relayed that ASDF was presently allowed to use
the equipment at the National Guard's armories,
particularly in areas of the state where a military
presence was lacking. There were some more remote locations
in the state where ASDF was the largest force in the area,
such as Kodiak, where the force had free use of the federal
armories. He did not think sharing equipment was a current
issue nor did he think it would be an issue in the future.
Representative Coulombe understood that the request would
strictly fund the five new positions. It seemed to be an
elevated attempt to respond to emergencies and natural
disasters that happened suddenly. She asked what the job
duties of the five permanent full-time employees would be
when there was not an active emergency situation.
Mr. Brown responded that there were currently 200 people
working for ASDF and he wanted to increase the workforce to
500 people. The process of hiring a high number of new
employees would involve intensive administrative work such
as conducting background checks and preparing training.
Volunteer staff were currently conducting the
administrative duties once a month for one week and it was
not reliable. It was difficult to track progress,
applications, and training without a stable staff. It would
take a permanent and full-time staff to manage the hiring
of 300 additional employees. He reiterated that there
needed to be a certain number of staff already on location
and ready to respond when a disaster occurred.
2:02:53 PM
Mr. Ernisse continued on slide 14, which detailed the final
budgetary request. The defense force was funded $400,000 in
FY 23 and the change would simply move the funding from the
Office of the Commissioner to the ASDF component.
Co-Chair Johnson referred to slide 6. She asked how [the
addition of ASDF as an independent division] would change
the organizational chart.
Commissioner Saxe responded that the chart would not
change.
Co-Chair Johnson asked for clarification that ASDF would
remain in the same location on the chart but would simply
be considered an independent division.
Commissioner Saxe responded in the affirmative and added
that ASDF would continue to report to Mr. Brown who would
then report to Commissioner Saxe himself.
Representative Cronk noted that Fort Greely, which was in
his district, was the only military base in the state that
was not accessible via the railroad. He often saw reports
of convoys running off the road. He asked if there was a
way to expedite improved access to Fort Greely.
Commissioner Saxe responded that in his opinion, the
mission needed to have redundant access. He was looking
holistically at the entire state and needed to have the
ability to transport forces to every area of the state;
therefore, the entire state needed to be accessible by the
military. In addition, all of the airfields needed to be at
least 8,000 feet in length [for military access] and many
of the fields were currently much shorter. He agreed that
the military needed to have access to Fort Greely through
every means possible. He assured the committee that the
department was working on improving accessibility and it
was consulting with the congressional delegation to present
the request persuasively to both the state and federal
governments.
Representative Stapp asked how coordination would work
between the National Guard and ASDF. He wondered how ASDF
would be integrated into the complicated military system in
Alaska.
Commissioner Saxe responded that all requests would go
through a unified command. If there was a disaster,
commands would go through the State Emergency Operations
Center (SEOC) and all military assets would be informed.
There would not be any entity working separately. He added
that the military entities in Alaska had experience
collaborating on situations in the past and the forces
acted as a unified command. The command would then report
to him and he would report to the governor.
Co-Chair Johnson thanked the presenters.
2:08:28 PM
AT-EASE
2:15:39 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Johnson indicated that the following presentation
would be given by the Alaska Court System (ACS).
^FY 24 BUDGET OVERVIEW: ALASKA COURT SYSTEM
2:16:07 PM
DOUG WOOLIVER, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA COURT
SYSTEM, introduced the PowerPoint presentation "House
Finance Committee; Alaska Court System Overview" dated
March 1, 2023 (copy on file).
Mr. Wooliver began on slide 2 and explained that ACS
existed for one purpose: to make decisions on legal issues
that came before the court. The mission statement as seen
on the slide directed ACS to accomplish its purpose as
expeditiously as possible during times of budget crises or
pandemics. Budget cuts and the COVID-19 pandemic made it
challenging to accomplish the court's mission expeditiously
and allow for accessibility. Courts were sometimes closed
in the wake of budget cuts or experienced decreased hours,
which made operations more difficult. All decisions made in
the management of ACS were with its mission in mind.
Mr. Wooliver moved to slide 3 which showed ACS's operating
budget request by funding source. The courts were funded
mostly through the executive branch, but the judicial
branch and legislative branch contributed to the budget in
smaller but critically important ways.
Mr. Wooliver continued on slide 4 and described the court
system's various appropriations. The majority of the
funding went to trail courts, which contained the bulk of
ACS's employees, judges, and cases. The therapeutic court
was a separate appropriation within the budget; however,
the entity was still contained within the trial courts.
Other components included in the appropriation were
appellate courts and administrative costs.
Mr. Wooliver advanced to slide 5 and spoke on the items
funded by ACS. He indicated that the courts mostly funded
personal services costs, followed by contractual expenses,
travel, supplies, and capital outlay. He noted that similar
expenses could be found within any court system.
Mr. Wooliver continued to slide 6 and explained that Alaska
was unique in that it was a unified court system and did
not have separate municipal or county courts. There were
only about eight other unified systems in the country. He
thought that the unification of the system led to increased
efficiencies and made administrative duties more
streamlined. There were two municipal prosecuting offices,
but ACS also worked directly with the Department of Law
(DOL) and the Public Defender Agency (PDA) on issues of
prosecution.
2:20:31 PM
Mr. Wooliver advanced to slide 7 to speak on the factors
that impacted workloads at the courts. As the population of
an area increased or decreased, caseloads at the courts
also increased or decreased. Police and law enforcement
resources were also factors that significantly impacted the
workloads of the courts. The economy could also impact
workloads. It was more difficult to measure economic
factors, but employed people generally committed fewer
crimes than unemployed people. There were also many
statutory changes that impacted workloads, such as a charge
being dropped from a felony to a misdemeanor.
Mr. Wooliver moved to slide 8 and spoke on the breakdown of
the positions within ACS. He stated that over 660 of the
court system's 772 positions were clerical in nature. The
courts also employed five supreme court justices, four
court of appeal judges, 45 superior court judges, 20
district court judges, and 38 magistrate judges. He
elaborated that magistrate judge positions ranged from
full-time lawyer positions in major communities to part-
time non-lawyer positions in small and rural communities.
Mr. Wooliver continued to slide 9, which showed a map of
court locations and employees throughout the state. The
location with the most employees was the southcentral
district with a total of 533 workers. There were 40
different court locations around the state. The larger dots
on the map represented the superior court locations and the
smaller dots represented the locations with magistrate
judges.
Mr. Wooliver advanced to slide 10 and detailed the contacts
that ACS had with Alaskans in 2022. The jury trial rate had
recovered since the pandemic and was almost back to pre-
pandemic numbers. Additionally, the court system had 6,268
contacts within the Family Law Self-Help Center (FLSHC).
The current director of the center was an expert on self-
help centers and gave speeches throughout the country on
the subject. There were many resources on the FLSHC
website, such as forms that could help citizens with legal
issues, informational videos, and links to many other
resources for the public. The center focused mainly on
family law matters, but also helped with probate cases and
guardianship cases. The website remained popular and there
were nearly 7 million visits to the website in 2022.
2:25:25 PM
Mr. Wooliver moved to slide 11. The majority of trial court
caseloads had not changed dramatically since the prior
year; however, Palmer was the one exception. The superior
court in Palmer had seen an increase in caseloads and was
currently the busiest court in Alaska. The growth was
anticipated because the Mat-Su valley was the fastest
growing area of the state. He relayed that the growth in
caseloads in Palmer could be almost completely attributed
to the increase in involuntary mental commitment, which was
a type of probate case. The Mat-Su Regional Hospital
recently opened a facility that could accept involuntary
mental commitment cases; therefore, individuals that would
have previously been transferred to a facility in Anchorage
were now being committed in Palmer. Trial court caseloads
had also increased in Anchorage, but cases were rising
almost everywhere across the nation. Rising cases were
being referred to as the "silver tsunami" due to the aging
baby boomer generation. There were other things that could
impact cases, as he had mentioned on slide 7, but the
increase in involuntary commitments in Palmer stood as an
example.
Representative Josephson asked if a probate case could also
include a dispute over an individual's will.
Mr. Wooliver responded in the affirmative. He explained
that involuntary commitments were a subcategory of probate
cases. There was a slight increase in will dispute cases,
but the reason for the significant increase in caseloads in
Palmer was involuntary commitment cases.
Co-Chair Johnson asked for details on the process of
involuntary commitment.
Mr. Wooliver responded that the first step would be a
petition for involuntary commitment. He noted that anyone
could file a petition, such as a friend, family member, or
mental health practitioner. The petition would need to
allege mental health issues that brought the situation
within the scope of the statute. The court would then
appoint an employee to evaluate the situation and determine
if there was merit. If the court decided there was merit,
it could issue a transport order and the individual could
be involuntarily committed. The court would transmit the
order directly to law enforcement along with a transport
order to empower the police to transport the individual to
an appropriate facility.
Co-Chair Johnson asked for confirmation that a commitment
order would originate from the court.
Mr. Wooliver responded in the affirmative.
2:30:26 PM
Representative Hannan noted that probate cases had
increased by roughly 500 cases since 2020. She asked if the
cases were all unique or if there could be multiple cases
involving one individual. She asked if there had been a
proportionate [probate case] decrease in the Anchorage
courts.
Mr. Wooliver responded that it was possible for multiple
petitions to have been filed for one individual. It was
also possible for a petition to be granted more than once
for one person; however, the total caseload number
represented individual cases. The probate cases in Palmer
would have gone to Anchorage prior to the building of the
new facility and it was likely that the courts in Anchorage
experienced a decrease, but the caseload in Anchorage had
still increased overall.
Representative Hannan asked if Title 47 holds reported by
the Department of Corrections (DOC) were reflected in the
increased caseload numbers. She asked if the reopening of
the Palmer Correctional Center might have had an impact on
the data.
Mr. Wooliver responded that he was not knowledgeable about
the particulars. He emphasized that every petition that was
filed to commit an individual was included in the data.
Mr. Wooliver continued on slide 13, which included the list
of the increment requests for ACS. In order to address the
increase in cases in Palmer, the court system was
requesting an additional magistrate judge position and an
additional clerk position for Palmer's superior court. Each
superior court judge in Palmer was already responsible for
almost 700 cases each and he predicted that ACS would be
requesting additional superior court judges in future
years.
Mr. Wooliver continued that in the prior year, the
legislature had approved an appropriation for the expansion
of the courthouse in Palmer, which was a small step forward
as caseloads continued to grow in the area. All of the
other increment requests merely reflected increased costs
of doing business, such as increased lease costs and
security screening costs. He noted that ACS was in a
similar situation as DMVA in that it was unable to get a
contract for security screenings with the funds that were
currently allocated.
Mr. Wooliver added that the court system was responsible
for court appointed attorney costs in some cases and it was
requesting an increase to $100 per hour from $75 per hour
for the contract attorneys. Lastly, the increased cost for
juror meals was almost entirely related to increased food
costs in Bethel.
2:36:20 PM
Representative Josephson asked about the security screening
costs. He had heard that there were some courthouses in the
state with higher security levels than others. He asked if
every superior court in the state was satisfactorily
secured.
Mr. Wooliver responded that security levels still varied
greatly. Courts with only one judge, such as Kotzebue, did
not employ the same level of security as courts in
Anchorage.
Representative Josephson asked why there was a distinction.
Mr. Wooliver responded that there were a few reasons for
the differing levels of security. The difference was
partially due to the amount of traffic experienced by the
courts in smaller communities. When higher profile cases
were brought to courts in smaller communities, there were
portable security screeners that could be utilized by the
courts. Due to the low traffic and small number of cases,
ACS had not prioritized security in the smaller courts.
Mr. Wooliver continued on slide 14, which contained a list
of non-UGF budget requests. He relayed that there was a
federal program with a formula that determined how much
funding a court received depending upon the number of cases
related to children in need of aid. According to the
formula, Alaska was entitled to about $450,000 in federal
child support interagency receipts. The request would
simply allow the state to receive the federal money. There
was an additional request for $304,700 in federal grant
receipt authority which would help establish a new
veteran's court in Fairbanks. An additional request was for
$304,400 for the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority
(AMHTA), which would allow the state the authority to
receive the funding. Finally, there was a $250,000
decrement in non-federal grant authority. He explained that
ACS had requested additional funding several years prior
intended for a grant related to the Families with Infants
and Toddlers Court (FITC), but it did not receive the
grant.
Co-Chair Johnson asked if the court system had ever
received the grant in the past.
Mr. Wooliver responded that ACS used to receive grant
funding for FITC from the Mat-Su Health Foundation. The
grant that ACS did not receive was also sourced from the
foundation, but it did not come to fruition.
2:40:30 PM
Representative Coulombe understood that the budget for the
therapeutic courts totaled around $7.8 million. She asked
if the $304,000 in federal grant receipt authority all went
to therapeutic courts or if the money had other purposes.
Mr. Wooliver responded that all of the money was intended
for the therapeutic courts.
Representative Coulombe asked for a short description of a
therapeutic court.
Mr. Wooliver continued on slide 15 to describe therapeutic
courts. He relayed that Alaska had been a leader in the
development of therapeutic courts. In 1998, Anchorage judge
Stephanie Rhoades created one of the first mental health
courts in the country. In 1999, another judge in Anchorage,
James Wannamaker, created one of the first DWI courts. In
2004, Anchorage judge Jack Smith created Alaska's first
veteran's court. He thought the programs were terrific but
required a high level of management.
Mr. Wooliver continued that prior to 2011, there were
separate therapeutic court appropriations for legal
services for DOL, PDA, and the Division of Behavioral
Health (DBH). In 2011, Representative Mike Hawker, who was
Co-Chair of the House Finance Committee at the time,
decided to combine the appropriations under one umbrella in
order to better track the ways in which the money was being
spent. The entirety of the funding now flowed through ACS's
budget and could not be used to fund anything other than
therapeutic court expenses. He explained that $1.8 million
of the funding was spent within the court system and the
remainder of the roughly $8 million was appropriated to
other entities such as DBH. The divisions would bill the
court system and were all paid through the appropriation.
He thought it had been helpful to better understand and
track the expenses.
Representative Josephson asked what the FY 23 therapeutic
court budget would be.
Mr. Wooliver deferred to his colleague.
2:44:04 PM
RHONDA MCLEOD, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, ALASKA COURT
SYSTEM, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), responded that the
court system's FY 23 authorized budget was just shy of $7
million.
Mr. Wooliver concluded his presentation and made himself
available for questions.
Representative Stapp asked what the court system's vacancy
rate was and how the vacancies were impacting the court's
backlog.
Mr. Wooliver responded that the official vacancy rate was
intended to be 7 percent. The rate was currently just under
11 percent and there were presently 65 vacant positions
throughout the court system, but the situation had been
improving. A year prior, there were 39 vacant superior
court trial staff positions and there were currently 17
vacant positions. The raise ACS received in the prior year
had reduced the length of time it took to recruit new
employees from 84 days to 51 days.
Representative Stapp presumed that many court staff had
reported several overtime hours to manage the backlog. He
asked if overtime payroll expenses were reflected in the
budget.
Mr. Wooliver responded that there was almost no overtime
incurred in the court system. An employee would need to
receive permission from the administrative director in
order to work overtime. The overtime costs for the prior
year were in the $20,000 range, which were typically
incurred due to judges and clerical staff traveling to
another location to cover a trial.
Co-Chair Johnson reviewed the agenda for the following
day's meeting.
HB 39 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 41 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| FY24 Alaska Court System Budget Overview HFIN March 1 2023.pdf |
HFIN 3/1/2023 1:30:00 PM |
HB 39 |
| FY24 DMVA Operating Budget Overview HFC 030123 v1.pdf |
HFIN 3/1/2023 1:30:00 PM |
HB 39 |