Legislature(2023 - 2024)ADAMS 519
03/25/2024 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 | |
| HB116 | |
| HB169 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 116 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 169 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 116
"An Act relating to appropriations from the
restorative justice account."
1:35:40 PM
Co-Chair Foster asked for a brief explanation of the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE JULIE COLOUMBE, SPONSOR, thanked the
committee for hearing the bill again. She provided remarks
on why the bill was important. She stressed that
policymakers should direct the funding in the Restorative
Justice Account to go towards helping victims, the original
purpose.
1:39:14 PM
Co-Chair Foster OPENED public testimony.
BRENDA STANFILL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA NETWORK ON
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT, represented the 24
member programs that were part of the network. She thanked
the committee for the opportunity to testify. She spoke in
support of the bill
1:43:43 PM
Representative Josephson suspected there was a lot of
strong support for the bill. He asked if the bill did not
get through to the finish line, he surmised that the $3.7
million in the budget was not adequate.
Ms. Stanfill responded that the current proposal in the
budget provided flat funding, but did not cover the need.
Representative Josephson surmised that the need was closer
to $6.7 million.
Ms. Stanfill agreed.
Co-Chair Foster CLOSED public testimony.
1:45:12 PM
Co-Chair Foster provided the contact information for
written public testimony.
Representative Josephson wanted to hear from the Department
of Corrections (DOC) and Department of Public Safety (DPS)
on whether the bill would create a hole in their budgets.
TERI WEST, ADMIN SERVICES DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS (via teleconference), answered that the FY 25
funds were related to the physical healthcare component;
therefore, the department would request general funds to
operate.
Co-Chair Johnson asked what the funds were used for by DOC.
Ms. West replied that the funds were used for operating
funds. The FY 25 funds were going to physical healthcare,
the medical care for offenders.
Co-Chair Johnson asked if the department did not use any of
the funds for rehabilitation in DOC.
Ms. West replied that the funds were not allocated to other
programs in FY 25. In other years the funds had been used
for other programs or other costs related to incarceration
or probation.
1:49:24 PM
Representative Stapp asked how much money the current
inmate health services cost per year.
Ms. West responded that she did not have a final number on
hand; it varied from year to year.
Representative Stapp asked if it was more or less than $7.8
million.
Ms. West replied it was significantly more.
Representative Stapp asked for verification that if the
bill passed the department would no longer receive $7.8
million in the restorative justice funds. The state was
required to pay for inmate medical services.
Ms. West replied that the department was required to pay
for the services by statute.
Representative Stapp asked if the cost would go up or down.
Ms. West responded that the costs were projected to
increase, and the services would be significantly short if
the department did not receive the funding. The department
would request a fund source change.
Representative Stapp asked if the bill passed, the
legislature would have to backfill at least $7.8 million in
inmate health services.
1:52:59 PM
Co-Chair Foster asked Mr. Painter to come to the table.
ALEXEI PAINTER, DIRECTOR, LEGISLATIVE FINANCE DIVISION, was
available for questions.
Co-Chair Foster asked Ms. West to review the DOC fiscal
note.
Ms. West reviewed fiscal note OMB component number 2952.
The note asked for a fund source change for $7.8 million
from restorative justice funds to general funds.
1:55:53 PM
PAM HALLORAN, ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT
OF PUBLIC SAFETY, reviewed the fiscal note OMB component
number 521.
Mr. Painter pointed out neither of the fiscal notes had
change in fund source. The bill provided ranges that were
up to the legislature to determine. The bill did not tell
whether it should result in decreased funding to DOC or
DPS.
2:00:08 PM
Representative Galvin asked what the guidelines and
parameters were for the restorative justice fund. She
referred to DOC's testimony that the FY 25 funds would be
spend on inmate healthcare.
Mr. Painter referred to page 2, line 12 of the legislation
pertaining to DOC. He pointed to the cost related to
incarceration and probation, both fit the statutory
guidance.
Representative Galvin stated her understanding based on the
sponsor statement was leading towards truing up the name of
the fund with how the funds were used.
Mr. Painter confirmed that the DOC operations fell under
the topic outlined in the fund.
Representative Galvin thanked the bill sponsor and surmised
that most people would probably think the funds would be
spend differently based on the name of the fund.
Co-Chair Edgmon shared that he had been in the legislature
in 2018 when the restorative justice funds had been
implemented.
2:05:56 PM
Representative Josephson wondered whether an amendment
could be adopted to restore general fund dollars to DOC to
care for the health of inmates, or a fiscal note could be
added to the bill.
Mr. Painter answered that following the guidelines outlined
in the bill with the addition of funding in the budget
could have that result. He acknowledged that the funding
could also be changed within the fiscal note.
Representative Josephson asked if part of the reason was
because of the lack of replacement funding.
Mr. Painter replied that it was based on policy.
Representative Josephson stressed that the bill had no
money for the Council on Domestic Violence and Sexual
Assault (CDVSA).
Mr. Painter answered there was funding of $3.7 million for
CDVSA in the committee substitute, but was not within the
governor's original budget.
Representative Josephson asked if in combination of the
bill removed $47 million from DOC.
Mr. Painter clarified that the bill did not change the
department's funding level.
2:09:15 PM
Co-Chair Johnson was hearing that by default the funding
for DOC would stay the same because the bill did not reduce
their budget.
Mr. Painter responded that the fiscal note did not
currently make any changes to appropriations, weather the
fiscal note for the budget bill would have to make the
change. He stressed that the options were up to the
committee.
Co-Chair Johnson was present when the statute had been
changed. She thought she heard they would be facing another
request for additional money.
Mr. Painter agreed that the bill reflected a policy shift
to direct funds more towards victims services rather than
inmate costs.
Co-Chair Foster asked Representative Coulombe to provide
any thoughts.
Representative Coulombe relayed that the bill had been
introduced the previous session resulting from her budget
work on DPS. stated the issue was whether they were going
to make domestic violence and sexual assault agencies come
before the legislature to beg for funds. She understood
DOC's plight with expenses but she was hearing from child
advocacy centers and shelters that they could not pay their
heating bill and were turning people away. Shelters were
not going away and they would be back every year to ask for
funds. She pointed out that the restorative justice account
ebbed and flowed. The previous year it was $19 million. She
stated that CDVSA understood there would not be $7 million
available every year. She thought the funds should be go
towards victims services.
2:17:36 PM
Representative Stapp supported moving forward with the
bill. He stated that the legislature put CDVSA money into
the operating budget in the current year. He asked if the
operating budget should include contingency language
Mr. Painter responded that conference committee could adopt
fiscal notes that added additional funds on top of the
existing amount or reduce the amount or do a fund source
change.
Representative Coulombe stated that the money was a one-
time appropriation in the operating budget.
Representative Ortiz concurred with the intent of the bill.
He thought it was a misnomer to think that going with the
bill the state would see DOC asking for funding. He stated
it was a matter of statutory responsibility.
Representative Coulombe stated that DOC designated to
health services in the current year but it was not always
the case.
2:21:47 PM
Representative Josephson did not know DOC would fill the
gap because they had asked for supplemental funding.
Representative Coulombe asked for clarification on the
question.
Representative Josephson responded that it related to
Representative Ortiz's comments, and said that he did not
want DOC to feel they had to specify, because the state
would pay for it all. He thought that the bill would do
what the public believed a restorative justice fund should
do. He did not believe the bill moved the needle on the
state budget.
Representative Coulombe recalled that the funds had gone
towards population management the previous year. She did
not necessarily oppose a fiscal note to fill in the hole,
but she did not want that to be the message to the
department. She did not want to decrement healthcare.
2:25:32 PM
Co-Chair Johnson struggled with the issue. She did not
think there was anything wrong with using the funding for
prisoners. She thought if they felt like they wanted to
fund restorative justice they should fund it. She wanted to
know how much things cost.
Representative Coulombe replied that one of the reasons she
moved forward with the legislation was because by statute
they were required to have a prevention program, but they
did not have one due to inadequate funding.
Representative Tomaszewski thanked Representative Coulombe
for bringing the bill forward. He cosponsored the bill
because he believed victims should be funded first. He
thought the legislature should be scrutinizing the funding
for criminals much more thoroughly.
Co-Chair Foster set an amendment deadline for Monday, April
1, 2024 at 5:00 p.m.
HB 116 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
2:30:57 PM
AT EASE
2:37:22 PM
RECONVENED
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 116 Supporting Documents Support Letters 032224.pdf |
HFIN 3/25/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB 116 Public Testimony Rec'd by 032524.pdf |
HFIN 3/25/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB 116 - Supporting Doc - Support - Redacted.pdf |
HFIN 3/25/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 116 |