Legislature(2023 - 2024)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
05/02/2024 05:15 PM Senate JUDICIARY
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 | |
| HB66 | |
| SB223 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 66 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 223 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 66-CONTROLLED SUB;HOMICIDE;CRIMES;SENTENCING
5:20:38 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN announced the consideration of CS FOR HOUSE BILL
NO. 66(FIN) am "An Act relating to homicide resulting from
conduct involving controlled substances; relating to misconduct
involving a controlled substance; relating to sentencing; and
providing for an effective date."
5:21:23 PM
TERI WEST, Division Director, Division of Administrative
Services, Department of Corrections, Juneau, Alaska, answered
questions pertaining to fiscal notes on HB 66.
5:21:32 PM
SENATOR TOBIN asked how DOC plans to address the potential
increase in the number of incarcerated individuals and what
treatment services DOC would provide. She pointed out that HB 66
has a zero fiscal note; however, treatment services for
additional individuals would have associated costs.
5:22:15 PM
MS. WEST indicated that DOC is aware that HB 66 may result in an
increased number of incarcerated individuals. While the exact
number is unknown, it is expected to be minimal. She said DOC is
currently at 83 percent capacity. DOC would monitor the increase
for fiscal impacts; however, DOC is funded for general capacity.
5:22:23 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN joined the meeting.
5:22:56 PM
SENATOR TOBIN said that she is a member of the DOC budget
subcommittee and expressed concerns about the potential fiscal
impact of HB 66. She commented that the public may consider a
zero fiscal note to imply zero budgetary impact.
5:23:25 PM
MS. WEST said that the substance abuse component of the DOC
budget, which was approximately $1.4 million for the previous
year, has been lapsing money.
5:23:44 PM
SENATOR TOBIN asked for clarification that DOC anticipates the
aforementioned $1.4 million budget component to cover general
costs, as well as treatment for the increased number of
incarcerated individuals.
5:23:57 PM
MS. WEST replied yes.
5:24:12 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL noted that she is a nurse practitioner and
expressed surprise that DOC has lapsing funds as treatments for
substance misuse can be costly. She asked whether injectables
are being used.
5:24:43 PM
MS. WEST replied that DOC is utilizing all available resources
to address inmates' needs. She added that DOC works closely with
substance abuse treatment providers.
5:25:18 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN said the proposed Senate committee substitute
(SCS), version N, is before the committee.
5:26:05 PM
BREANNA KAKARUK, Staff, Senator Matt Claman, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, presented the following explanation
of changes from version Y to N of HB 66:
House Bill 66
Summary of Changes
Senate Judiciary Committee
Version Y to Version N
In the Committee Substitute to HB 66 version N we
included the following changes:
• Add "affirmative defense in to murder in the
second degree" provisions:
• Sec. 2 11.31.110, page 2, line 19
• Delete "11.41.110(a)"
• Insert: "Sec. 11.41.110. Murder in the
second degree. (a)"
• Sec. 2 11.31.110, page 2, line 21
• Delete the first occurrence of "a"
• Insert "another"
• Add new materials on page 3, lines 22-31 and
page 4, lines 1-3
• Sec. 2 11.31.110, page 3, line 19
• Delete the first occurrence of "a"
• Insert "another"
• Update applicability to include murder in
the second degree provisions
• Sec. 30 AS 12.63.010, page 22
• Delete "appear in person at and" in two
instances.
• Sec. 47.30.706(b), page 30, line 22
• Delete "after entry of the ex parte order."
• Insert "after the respondent's arrival at
the evaluation facility"
• Sec. 47.30.715, page 31, line 11
• Delete "under AS 47.30.705(a) or 47.30.706"
• Sec. 47.30.715, page 31, line 22
• Delete "section, AS 47.30.705(a), or
47.30.706"
• Insert "AS 47.30.700 47.30.815"
• Adding new legislation
• HB 11: CRIME: ASSAULT IN THE PRESENCE OF A
CHILD
• HB 28: ACCESS TO MARIJUANA CONVICTION
RECORDS
• HB 286: CRIME VICTIM RESTITUTION
• Conforming changes:
• Title change
• Renumbering
5:28:01 PM
SENATOR TOBIN expressed confusion and requested a document
detailing the explanation of changes.
MS. KAKARUK said she would provide this to the committee.
5:28:37 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN solicited a motion.
5:28:43 PM
SENATOR KIEHL moved to adopt the Senate committee substitute
(SCS) for CSHB 66, work order 33-GH1482\N, as the working
document.
5:29:00 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN found no objection and SCS CSHB 66, version N, was
adopted.
[CHAIR CLAMAN said that all amendments were drafted to version Y
and would therefore be offered as conceptual amendments.]
CHAIR CLAMAN solicited a motion.
5:29:20 PM
SENATOR KIEHL moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1, work order
33-GH1482\Y.6.
33-GH1482\Y.6
C. Radford
5/1/24
CONCEPTUAL AMENDMENT 1
OFFERED IN THE SENATE BY SENATOR KIEHL
TO: SCS CSHB 66(JUD), Draft Version "Y"
Page 1, lines 8 - 9:
Delete "Rule 6(s)"
Insert "Rule 6(s)(2)"
Page 1, line 11, through page 2, line 12:
Delete all material.
Page 2, line 13:
Delete "Sec. 2"
Insert "Section 1"
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 9, following line 21:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 14. AS 12.40.110(a) is amended to read:
(a) In a prosecution for an offense under
AS 11.41.410 - 11.41.458, hearsay evidence of a
statement related to the offense, not otherwise
admissible, made by a child who is the victim of the
offense may be admitted into evidence before the grand
jury if
(1) the circumstances of the statement
indicate its reliability;
(2) the child is under 16 [10] years of age
when the hearsay evidence is sought to be admitted;
(3) additional evidence is introduced to
corroborate the statement; and
(4) the child testifies at the grand jury
proceeding or the child will be available to testify
at trial."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 36, line 13, through page 38, line 5:
Delete all material and insert:
"DIRECT COURT RULE AMENDMENT. Rule 6(s)(2),
Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure, is amended to
read:
(2) In a prosecution for an offense under
AS 11.41.410 - 11.41.458, hearsay evidence of a
statement related to the offense, not otherwise
admissible, made by a child who is the victim of the
offense may be admitted into evidence before the grand
jury if
(i) the circumstances of the statement
indicate its reliability;
(ii) the child is under 16 [10] years
of age when the hearsay evidence is sought
to be admitted;
(iii) additional evidence is
introduced to corroborate the statement; and
(iv) the child testifies at the grand
jury proceeding or the child will be
available to testify at trial."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 38, line 8:
Delete "sec. 2"
Insert "sec. 1"
Page 38, line 9:
Delete "sec. 3"
Insert "sec. 2"
Delete "sec. 4"
Insert "sec. 3"
Page 38, line 10:
Delete "sec. 5"
Insert "sec. 4"
Page 38, line 11:
Delete "sec. 11"
Insert "sec. 10"
Delete "sec. 12"
Insert "sec. 11"
Page 38, line 12:
Delete "sec. 13"
Insert "sec. 12"
Page 38, line 14:
Delete "secs. 2 - 5, 11 - 13, and 29"
Insert "secs. 1 - 4, 10 - 12, and 29"
Page 38, line 30:
Delete "Rule 6(s)"
Insert "AS 12.40.110(a), as amended by sec. 14 of
this Act, and Rule 6(s)(2)"
Delete "sec. 46"
Insert "secs. 14 and 46"
Page 38, line 31:
Delete "applies"
Insert "apply"
Delete "sec. 46"
Insert "secs. 14 and 46"
Page 39, line 1:
Delete "sec. 46"
Insert "secs. 14 and 46"
Page 39, line 4:
Delete "Rule 6(s)"
Insert "Rule 6(s)(2)"
Page 39, line 8:
Delete "sec. 50"
Insert "sec. 49"
5:29:35 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN objected for purposes of discussion.
5:29:45 PM
At ease
5:30:07 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN reconvened the meeting. Conceptual Amendment 1 was
before the committee.
5:30:16 PM
SENATOR KIEHL said that Conceptual Amendment 1 addresses the use
of hearsay at grand jury hearings. He stated that HB 66 allows
the use of hearsay at grand jury in most cases and opined that
this excessively changes the function of grand juries in Alaska.
He noted that this issue has come up previously. He explained
that Conceptual Amendment 1 makes a much more limited change to
the rules regarding the use of hearsay. It would also make it
easier to use the current statute. He briefly explained the
current statutory requirements which allows children under age
10 to provide testimony without testifying in front of a grand
jury. This is the only hearsay currently allowed in grand jury
hearings. Conceptual Amendment 1 would raise this to children
under age 16.
SENATOR KIEHL emphasized that this would not allow hearsay at
all grand jury hearings. He stated that the grand jury serves as
a buffer between the government and the accused - to determine
if there is probable cause that a crime was committed - and
opined that this is not a high standard. He briefly discussed
the history of grand juries. He opined that, outside of the
current allowance, hearsay is not fair to defendants. He briefly
discussed the role that witnesses play at grand jury hearings.
He expressed concern that allowing hearsay at grand jury
hearings would result in lighter consequences in cases of
perjury. He emphasized that allowing hearsay removes an
important safeguard in criminal felony trials. He asserted that
criminal trials are not meant to be easy and opined that grand
juries are already an easy step in the process. He acknowledged
that grand jury testimony is difficult for victims. He
reiterated that Conceptual Amendment 1 expands the limited
hearsay exception for children (who are the most traumatized and
are potentially retraumatized in each retelling of their
experience). He emphasized that this amendment would also
protect the integrity of the criminal justice system.
5:35:27 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN asked the Department of Law (DOL) to offer its
perspective on Conceptual Amendment 1.
5:35:41 PM
ANGIE KEMP, Director, Criminal Division, Department of Law,
Juneau, Alaska, Discussed Conceptual Amendment 1 to HB 66 and
answered questions. Agreed that Conceptual Amendment 1 expands
current law. She stated that this amendment would allow a
prosecutor to offer the statements that child sexual abuse
victims make to child advocacy centers. (Certain statutory
requirements must be met before this is allowable.) She pointed
out that the age increase only applies to children 15 and under
- which leaves out children aged 16 and older, as well as adult
victims. In addition, young children who witness violent crimes
(e.g. murder) would still be required to testify in front of a
grand jury. She emphasized that Conceptual Amendment 1 has a
narrow scope of application. She pointed out that this issue is
of concern to Alaskans. She offered an example to illustrate
that the majority of victims would not benefit from these
changes. She emphasized that requiring witnesses to recount
violent crimes in front of a grand jury can retraumatize them.
She stated that Conceptual Amendment 1 does not go far enough to
expand victim protections.
5:40:40 PM
MS. KEMP described a case in which the prosecution attempted
unsuccessfully to introduce the testimony given by a 14-year-old
sexual assault victim to a child advocacy center. She explained
that prospective analysis requirements were not met; therefore,
the 14-year-old victim was required to testify in front of a
grand jury. She surmised that this was likely the most traumatic
experience of the child's life. She opined that Conceptual
Amendment 2 does not solve the problem. She pointed to current
regulation that requires prospective analysis and stated that
there is precedent to guide how these cases would be considered.
She commented on the value of grand jury proceedings and related
these to a probable cause analysis. She estimated that 32 other
states, including the federal government, allow this testimony.
She briefly discussed Alaska statehood and the history behind
the preclusion of rules of hearsay. She offered briefly
discussed historical Alaska Supreme Court case law in which
hearsay is shown to be an appropriate foundation for a case at
grand jury. Hearsay was not precluded from case law until 1973.
5:43:52 PM
SENATOR TOBIN pointed out that previously, there was concern
regarding the legislature addressing court rule determinations,
as there is a separate entity that addresses this. She asked
what changed in the last year.
5:44:19 PM
MS. KEMP agreed and briefly described the mechanism by which
criminal rules are determined. She indicated that this can be a
lengthy process.
5:45:21 PM
SENATOR TOBIN asked for clarification regarding what has changed
in the last year.
MS. KEMP clarified that nothing has changed. She stated that the
Department of Law (DOL) believes that this change is within the
legislature's purview. She pointed out that the legislature has
made substantive changes to court rules in the past.
5:45:51 PM
SENATOR TOBIN asked for clarification of her understanding that
nothing has changed in the past year; therefore, the committee's
previous concerns remain salient.
5:45:57 PM
MS. KEMP said that she could not speak to this.
5:46:07 PM
SENATOR TOBIN pointed out that the example of a 9-year-old
victim would not be applicable to HB 66, as current law allows
this testimony from children ages 10 and under. She turned her
attention to the role of peace officers and shared her
understanding that, because a peace officer is involved when the
testimony is gathered, Child Advocacy Centers (CAC) are able to
provide hearsay testimony for grand jury proceedings. She asked
why DOL interprets these changes as applicable to CACs when CACs
are currently able to utilize this type of testimony in grand
jury proceedings.
5:46:59 PM
MS. KEMP said that interviews at CACs are taken in a static
environment and briefly described the role that law enforcement
plays. She agreed that an officer may be in the vicinity;
however, they are not typically able to conduct the interview.
She explained that the interview is not necessarily admissible
at grand jury. She said that the current statutory language
excludes 10-year-olds (they would be required to testify in
front of the grand jury).
5:47:57 PM
SENATOR TOBIN asked for clarification regarding the current
statutory age requirement.
5:48:02 PM
MS. KEMP stated that current statute says "under 10" which is
interpreted as ages 9 and under.
5:48:11 PM
SENATOR TOBIN directed attention to HB 66, page 40, lines 11-20.
She shared her understanding that a peace officer is present
(watching the recording) when a child is being interviewed. She
asked for clarification that this interview testimony would not
be admissible.
5:48:41 PM
MS. KEMP agreed that this would not be admissible. She explained
that there are provisions in the current rule relating to
officers providing summary of the work done by other officers.
Officers are not able to summarize a child's testimony.
CHAIR CLAMAN opined that the same standards should apply to both
state and federal court. He indicated that he does not support
Conceptual Amendment 1.
5:49:56 PM
SENATOR KIEHL responded to earlier comments related to hearsay
and the Alaska State Constitution. He pointed to Costello v
United States (1956) as the keystone hearsay case for federal
courts. He said that this was expanded over time to what it is
today - and these changes occurred after statehood. He opined
that at statehood, the hearsay law would lean toward limiting
the use of hearsay at grand jury. He emphasized that the
language in HB 66 is broad, and this precludes the use of the
grand jury as a check. He expressed a willingness to work with
other committee members to modify Conceptual Amendment 1 and
emphasized that the intention is to protect both child victims
of trauma and the integrity of the criminal justice system.
5:51:30 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN maintained his objection and asked for a roll call
vote.
5:51:34 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Senators Kiehl, Tobin voted in favor
of Conceptual Amendment 1 and Senators Giessel, Kaufman, Claman
voted against it. The vote was 2:3.
CHAIR CLAMAN announced that Conceptual Amendment 1 failed on a
vote of 2 yeas and 3 nays.
5:52:27 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN solicited a motion.
5:52:34 PM
SENATOR TOBIN moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 2, work order
33-GH1482\Y.7.
33-GH1482\Y.7
C. Radford
5/1/24
CONCEPTUAL AMENDMENT 2
OFFERED IN THE SENATE
TO: SCS CSHB 66(JUD), Draft Version "Y"
Page 1, line 6, following "violence';":
Insert "relating to the use and possession of
electronic devices by prisoners;"
Page 2, line 11:
Delete "sec. 46"
Insert "sec. 47"
Page 24, following line 30:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 31. AS 33.30.015(a) is amended to read:
(a) The commissioner may not
(1) make per capita expenditures for food
for prisoners in a state correctional facility
operated by the state that exceed 90 percent of
per capita expenditures for food that is available
to enlisted personnel in the United States Army
stationed in the state;
(2) provide, in a state correctional
facility operated by the state,
(A) living quarters for a prisoner
into which the view is obstructed; however,
the commissioner is not required to renovate a
facility to comply with this subparagraph if
the facility is being used as a correctional
facility on August 27, 1997, or if the
facility was already built before being
acquired by the department;
(B) equipment or facilities for
publishing or broadcasting material the
content of which is not subject to prior
approval by the department as consistent with
keeping order in the institution and prisoner
discipline;
(C) cable television service other
than a level of basic cable television service
that is available as a substitute for services
that are broadcast to the public in the
community in which a correctional facility is
located;
(3) allow a prisoner held in a state
correctional facility operated by the state to
(A) possess in the prisoner's cell
a
(i) cassette tape player or
recorder, [A] video cassette recorder
(VCR), or telephone;
(ii) computer or electronic
tablet unless used for a purpose approved
under (I) of this paragraph [A COMPUTER OR
MODEM OF ANY KIND];
(B) view movies rated "R," "X," or
"NC-17";
(C) possess printed or
photographic material that
(i) is obscene as defined by
the commissioner in regulation;
(ii) could reasonably be
expected to incite racial, ethnic, or
religious hatred that is detrimental to
the security, good order, or discipline of
the institution or violence;
(iii) could reasonably be
expected to aid in an escape or in the
theft or destruction of property;
(iv) describes procedures for
brewing alcoholic beverages or for
manufacturing controlled substances,
weapons, or explosives; or
(v) could reasonably be
expected to facilitate criminal activity
or a violation of institution rules;
(D) receive instruction in person,
or by broadcast medium, or engage in boxing,
wrestling, judo, karate, or other martial art
or in any activity that, in the commissioner's
discretion, would facilitate violent behavior;
(E) possess or have access to
equipment for use in the activities listed in
(D) of this paragraph;
(F) possess or have access to free
weights;
(G) possess in the prisoner's cell
a coffee pot, hot plate, appliance or heating
element for food preparation, or more than
three electrical appliances of any kind;
(H) possess or appear in a state
of dress, hygiene, grooming, or appearance
other than as permitted as uniform or standard
in the correctional facility;
(I) use a computer or electronic
tablet other than those approved by the
correctional facility; the use of a computer
or electronic tablet under this subparagraph
may be approved only to facilitate the
prisoner's rehabilitation or the prisoner's
compliance with a reentry plan or case plan
developed under AS 33.30.011, as part of the
prisoner's employment, education, [OR]
vocational training, access to legal reference
materials, visitation, or health care, or for
another purpose identified by the commissioner
in regulation, and may not be used for any
other purpose;
(J) smoke or use tobacco products
of any kind."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 38, line 30:
Delete "sec. 46"
Insert "sec. 47"
Page 38, line 31:
Delete "sec. 46"
Insert "sec. 47"
Page 39, line 1:
Delete "sec. 46"
Insert "sec. 47"
Page 39, line 5:
Delete "sec. 46" in both places
Insert "sec. 47" in both places
Page 39, line 7:
Delete "Section 45"
Insert "Section 46"
Page 39, line 8:
Delete "sec. 50"
Insert "sec. 51"
5:52:36 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN objected for purposes of discussion.
SENATOR TOBIN commented that HB 66 is inclusive of the state's
criminal legal system. She referred to a recent House floor
debate related to incarcerated individuals, the state's
responsibility, and the notion of restoration. She indicated
that Conceptual Amendment 2 incorporates language from
legislation introduced in the House. She said it would enable
incarcerated individuals access to educational programming,
resources, and electronic tablets. She opined that this would
reduce recidivism and help incarcerated Alaskans find pathways
to harm restoration and repair. She pointed out that discussions
related to incarcerated individuals and electronic tablet use
has occurred over many years and opined that committee members
are familiar with this issue. She noted that this would also
expand medical treatment options for this population. She
emphasized the importance of ensuring that pathways to repair
from harm are available to incarcerated individuals.
5:54:42 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN asked for the Department of Corrections'
perspective on Conceptual Amendment 2.
5:55:40 PM
APRIL WILKERSON, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the
Commissioner, Department of Corrections, Juneau, Alaska, stated
that DOC takes a neutral stance on Conceptual Amendment 2. She
expressed support and said that DOC agrees that these
technologies would expand and increase DOC's efficiency, thus
allowing DOC to provide reformative programming to the
incarcerated population. She noted that DOC has a zero fiscal
note related to the legislation and explained that this is
because the legislation allows DOC to provide tablets to inmates
and indicated that this would be done with existing resources.
She said that DOC would make an additional budget request to the
legislature in the future, if necessary.
5:57:04 PM
SENATOR KIEHL sought confirmation that the department supports
the stand-alone legislation and is neutral on Conceptual
Amendment 2, which would roll that legislation into HB 66.
5:57:19 PM
MS. WILKERSON replied yes.
5:57:30 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN asked if the tablets are connected to the
internet.
5:57:42 PM
MS. WILKERSON replied no. She explained that DOC currently
provides computers to inmates on a very structured, limited
basis. Both the tablets and computers are on a closed, monitored
network.
5:58:24 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN surmised that the tablets would not be used for
telehealth if they are not connected to the internet.
MS. WILKERSON replied that secure video conferencing is
available in certain instances (e.g. for court hearings, which
is a pilot project). She said that, in a secure setting,
telehealth, telepsychiatry, and remote learning could be made
available.
5:59:21 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN asked whether the glass is secure so that
inmates are not able to break the tablet screens and use the
glass as a weapon.
MS. WILKERSON replied yes. She explained that the tablets are
corrections grade and are used by federal and state corrections
facilities. She said that DOC would model its program after
programs that are currently in place in other states. She said
DOC is considering Hiland Mountain Correctional Facility - a
female-only prison in Eagle River - as a pilot location for this
program. She explained that currently, inmates have access to
attorney appointments and the law library. Education/remote
learning and telehealth would be added.
6:00:57 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN asked for clarification regarding the zero
fiscal note, potential costs, and increased efficiency.
6:01:19 PM
MS. WILKERSON replied that DOC's goal is to apply the cost saved
from switching from in-person appointments to cover costs
associated with the tablets, including educational learning or
curricula on the tablets. Identifying inefficiencies would help
to alleviate manual labor, overtime, and officer/administrative
staffing burdens. These funds could then be diverted to cover
the costs of the tablets.
6:02:13 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL commented that HB 66 addresses court rules and
sentencing, and commitment procedures and opined that the
addition of tablets, karate, judo, etc. is unusual.
6:02:53 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN noted that HB 330, which would approve the use of
tablets by DOC inmates, is making progress and asked if there is
companion legislation in the Senate.
6:03:12 PM
SENATOR TOBIN replied that she does not know.
6:03:38 PM
SENATOR KIEHL shared his understanding that the Senate companion
legislation is in its first committee of referral and has not
been heard.
6:03:52 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN maintained his objection. He stated that his
concerns are similar to Senator Giessel's comment. He indicated
his support of tablets in correctional facilities but pointed
out that this issue has come up in previous years (and has not
passed). He surmised that this is likely due to additional
issues that need further consideration.
6:04:30 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN asked for a roll call vote.
6:04:32 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Senators Kiehl, Tobin voted in favor
of Conceptual Amendment 2 and Senators Kaufman, Giessel, Claman
voted against it. The vote was 2:3.
CHAIR CLAMAN announced that Conceptual Amendment 2 failed on a
vote of 2 yeas and 3 nays.
6:04:56 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN solicited a motion.
6:05:04 PM
SENATOR TOBIN said Conceptual Amendment 3 is not offered.
6:05:32 PM
SENATOR TOBIN indicated that she does not support HB 66;
however, she said that she would not object to its forward
progress. She referred to the book, "We Keep Us Safe: Building
Secure, Just, and Inclusive Communities," and explained the
underlying premise of how to create inclusive, healthy, and safe
communities. She quoted the book, which states that, "the
opposite of criminalization is humanization." She opined that HB
66 increases penalties and systems of incarceration and the
opportunity for individuals to become incarcerated. She stated
that she is not against criminal justice or the rule of law;
however, she expressed concern that HB 66 may increase the
duration of incarceration without the opportunity for harm
restoration. She pointed out that people make mistakes for many
reasons and offered examples. She said that Alaska has one of
the highest rates of child sexual assault and suggested that
this can result in cycles of harm - which the state continually
fails to disrupt.
SENATOR TOBIN expressed concerns about the sections of HB 66
that deal with individuals struggling with mental health issues.
She asserted that the legislature has a duty to consider how the
complexities of incarceration impact significant subpopulations.
She said that she fears the unconstitutional detainment of
individuals without due process. She opined that it is of utmost
importance for the legislature to consider how and when
individuals receive treatment. She referred to Centers for
Disease Control (CDC) data that shows an increase in overdose
deaths among those recently released from incarceration. She
asserted that the legislature is not doing its job to help
individuals move through the processes of harm reduction,
restoration, rehabilitation, and repair. She indicated that this
is necessary for individuals to reenter - and thrive in -
communities. She acknowledged that HB 66 addresses victims'
rights; however, she asserted that the legislature has a duty to
take a more inclusive and holistic approach. She expressed
appreciation for the effort involved in drafting the SCS. She
emphasized that she cannot support HB 66 in its entirety.
6:08:38 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN solicited the will of the committee.
6:08:41 PM
SENATOR KIEHL moved to report SCS CSHB 66, work order 33-
GH1482\N, from committee with individual recommendations and
attached fiscal note(s).
6:09:08 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN found no objection and SCS CSHB 66(JUD) was
reported from the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 66 Amendment Y.6.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Amendment Y.7.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Amendment Y.8.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| SB 223 version A.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
SB 223 |
| SB 223 Section Analysis version A 2.27.2024.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
SB 223 |
| SB 223 Transmittal Letter 2.8.2024.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
SB 223 |
| SB 223 Supporting Document - SSTA Hearing Follow Up 3.4.2024.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
SB 223 |
| SB 223 Fiscal Note MVA-COM 1.24.2024.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
SB 223 |
| HB 66 version N.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Letters of Support received as of 5.6.2024.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Amend Letter- Disability Law Center 5.1.2024.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Letters of Opposition received as of 5.6.2024.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Summary of Changes Version Y to N.pdf |
SJUD 5/2/2024 5:15:00 PM |
HB 66 |