Legislature(2021 - 2022)GRUENBERG 120
04/12/2021 01:00 PM House 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 | |
| HB116 | |
| HB66 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 116 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 66 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 116-JUVENILES: JUSTICE,FACILITES,TREATMENT
[Contains discussion of HB 105]
1:04:56 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 116,
"An Act relating to care of juveniles and to juvenile justice;
relating to employment of juvenile probation officers by the
Department of Health and Social Services; relating to terms used
in juvenile justice; relating to mandatory reporters of child
abuse or neglect; relating to sexual assault in the third
degree; relating to sexual assault in the fourth degree;
repealing a requirement for administrative revocation of a
minor's driver's license, permit, privilege to drive, or
privilege to obtain a license for consumption or possession of
alcohol or drugs; and providing for an effective date."
CHAIR CLAMAN recalled to the committee that the bill had been
previously introduced during the Thirtieth and the Thirty-First
Alaska State Legislatures.
1:05:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE IVY SPOHOHNOLZ, Alaska State Legislature, as
prime sponsor, explained that HB 116 would accomplish three main
objectives: close a loophole pertaining to sexual abuse of a
minor; update terminology that defines and references the
definition of juvenile justice facilities and staff; and codify
the Division of Juvenile Justice's (DJJ) best practices.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ paraphrased from the sponsor statement
[included in the committee packet], which read as follows
[original punctuation included]:
In 2013, Daniel Carey, staff at a Division of Juvenile
Justice (DJJ) facility, engaged in a sexual
relationship with a 17-year-old girl he had previously
supervised at work. The State of Alaska
sought conviction of Mr. Carey for sexual abuse of a
minor. However, the court found that DJJ
staff are not explicitly listed as being in a
"position of authority" under AS 11.41.470(5). Mr.
Carey was acquitted in 2017 due to this finding.
HB 116 closes this loophole. If such inappropriate
behavior were to occur again with youth in their
custody, DJJ staff could be prosecuted for the offense
of sexual abuse of a minor.
In addition, HB 116 updates terminology in state
statute referring to facilities operated by DJJ and
clarifies the authorities and responsibilities of DJJ
staff. HB 116 does not substantively change DJJ
operations. The updated definitions, clarifications,
and codified best practices will:
? provide clarity for law enforcement;
? give the division the authority needed to
oversee juvenile cases in court, and;
? close a loophole for sexual abuse of a minor in
the 2nd degree as exhibited by the Carey case in 2017.
HB 116 enhances DJJ's ability to operate with clear
policies and regulations and, codifies best practices,
and strengthens protections against the sexual abuse
youth in their custody to ensure safe and secure
treatment of juveniles in Alaska.
1:07:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ explained that HB 116 would update
language that describes the division's facilities, which, in
current statute, has been determined to be outdated, inaccurate,
or obsolete. She added that the passage of HB 116 would result
in codification of best practices within the division that had
been determined not to reflect the authority nor the standard
operations of the division. She explained that HB 116 would add
division staff and probation officers to the list of mandatory
reporters of child abuse and neglect, would clarify that
probation officers would have the authority to file amended
petitions on behalf of youth. She added that the bill would add
language to permit DJJ to disclose confidential information
related to an offense. She offered that HB 116 would permit the
division to better complete its mission.
1:08:47 PM
MEGAN HOLLAND, Staff, Representative Ivy Spohnholz, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Spohnholz, prime
sponsor of HB 116, directed attention to the presentation
included in the committee packet entitled "HB 116 PowerPoint
Presentation 4.12.2021". She explained that slide 2 listed the
definitions in Section 6 of the bill that would clarify that
division staff are in a position of authority of a minor and
referred to the acquittal that was referenced by the bill's
sponsor. She explained that slides 3 [and 4] illustrate a list
of definitions that would be changed or repealed with the
passage of HB 116, and [slide 5] illustrates additional
definitions that would be amended by HB 116. She explained the
reason for the change of definition from "youth counselors" to
"juvenile probation officers" was because the former position
title had not been in use since 2003. She added that Section 3
of the bill would repeal the definition for juvenile probation
officers and stated that, currently, it inaccurately defines the
position and limits the officers to only those in custody
between the ages of 18 and 19. She added that a new definition
in Section 26 would expand the age range up to 21 years,
reflecting current practices.
1:11:45 PM
MS. HOLLAND directed attention back to slide 4 in the
presentation which illustrated the repeal of several outdated
definitions as listed for added accuracy and consistency
throughout the statute. She directed attention to slide 5,
highlighting the change in Section 30 of HB 116 to amend the
definition of "minor" to more accurately reflect the age of
individuals in custody of the division that may exceed the age
of 18. She explained that the definition of "juvenile detention
facility" is currently limiting a facility to separate quarters
in a city jail, and that some communities do not have adequate
sight and sound separation of facilities as federally required
between adult and youth detention areas.
1:13:45 PM
MS. HOLLAND explained that the new definitions depicted on slide
6 were a change from "institutions" to "facilities" and that the
division had advocated to the change of definition to more
accurately reflect the facilities which they operate. She noted
that Section 31 of the bill would create a new definition for
"Temporary Secure Juvenile Holding Area" to more accurately
reflect various communities that do not maintain adequate
juvenile facilities. She highlighted Section 26 of the bill,
which would create a new definition for "juvenile probation
officers" for which one does not currently exist. She drew
attention to slide 7, which depicts the alignment of statute
with the best practices within the division. She said Section
5clarifies that employees if juvenile treatment institutions and
juvenile probation officers qualify as legal guardians for those
youth committed into their custody. She added that Sections 16
and 18 would provide officers with authority to file amended and
supplemental petitions. She noted that Sections 24 and 25 would
clarify that the authority to arrest and detain minors would
rest with juvenile, not adult, probation officers.
1:16:38 PM
MS. HOLLAND referenced slide 8, which illustrated that Section
27 would add "secure residential psychiatric treatment centers"
to the list of facilities from which, when a juvenile is
released, victims would receive notification, adding that
current statute limits the notification requirements to only the
release of those in DJJ facilities. She noted that Section 28
would correct language authorizing the department to disclose
confidential information in cases that have been adjudicated.
She noted that Section 40 would add juvenile probation officers,
DJJ office staff, and staff of juvenile facilities to the list
of mandatory reporters of child abuse or neglect. Section 41
would repeal revocation of juvenile driver licenses for offenses
involving a controlled substance that were handled informally by
the division; the proposed legislation would not provide that
youth driver licenses cannot be revoked, rather, the division
would address the matters in the district courts.
1:18:09 PM
MS. HOLLAND drew attention to slide 9, which summarized the
three key changes that would occur under HB 116: closing a
loophole regarding the sexual abuse of minors; updating terms
and definitions pertaining to DJJ facilities and staff; and
codifying best practices to improve the division's ability to
complete its mission.
1:18:58 PM
TRACEY DOMPELING, Director, Division of Juvenile Justice,
Department of Health and Social Services, stated that HB 116
would address long identified and newly emerging statutory
issues related to juvenile justice. She stated that HB 116 had
been submitted at the request of the division. She reiterated
that previous versions of the bill had been submitted and it is
similar in content to House Bill 133, which passed out of
committee during the Thirty-First Alaska State Legislature. She
explained that the statutes had been drafted approximately 20
years prior, when the division had been created as a separate
division within the department. She offered that, while most of
the bill contains conforming language, the definitions have a
direct impact on the operations of the division and the duties
and authority of its staff.
1:21:25 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN stated that during a hearing on HB 105, matters
related to the sight and sound [separation] requirements had
been discussed, and he asked whether there exists overlap
between the two proposed bills, and how the committee should
proceed should any overlap exist.
1:22:04 PM
MATT DAVIDSON, Social Service Program Officer, Division of
Juvenile Justice, Department of Health and Social Services,
confirmed that there exists overlap in a couple of Sections in
both bills, but that the language is not in conflict. He stated
that [HB 116] was conceived in response to changes in federal
law pertaining to holding minors in custody. He added that HB
105 did not mirror the changes proposed in HB 116 intentionally.
He suggested that the bills were not in conflict; however, the
division would monitor the progression of both bills and attend
to any issues that may arise and work with the legislature in
order to align both bills. He added that the term "juvenile
detention home" would remain in statute should HB 105 pass.
1:23:31 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN asked whether the provisions in HB 105 appeared in
HB 116.
1:23:47 PM
MR. DAVIDSON answered that the changes proposed in HB 116 do not
appear in HB 105. He added that HB 105 corrects alignment with
federal laws.
1:24:26 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN stated his understanding to be that the bills
pertained to one another topically but that both bills would
effect separate, but related, outcomes.
1:24:37 PM
MR. DAVIDSON stated his agreement with Chair Claman's statement.
1:25:02 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN referred to Section 41 pertaining to driver license
revocation involving substance abuse charges delegated by the
district courts, and asked whether it was the intention to
direct these cases to district court, rather than superior
court.
1:25:57 PM
MR. DAVIDSON offered background information related to
misconduct involving controlled substances among minors and
effects of past legislation on the ability for DJJ to advocate
for revocation of a minor's driver license.
1:28:03 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN clarified that his question pertained more to the
jurisdiction of juvenile delinquents between superior court and
district court. He asked how juvenile delinquency is within
district court jurisdiction now, and what effect on jurisdiction
HB 116 would have on defendants under the age of 18, if passed.
1:28:47 PM
MR. DAVIDSON answered that drug offenses would not be within the
jurisdiction of district court for minors, but that underage
drinking offenses were currently under the jurisdiction of
district court. He added that the district court has the
privilege of requesting revocation of driver licenses under
another title.
1:29:35 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN asked whether juveniles were treated as non-
juveniles in the cases of underage drinking, in that they were
identified in [district] court [records].
1:29:48 PM
MR. DAVIDSON stated that in 2016, there passed legislation that
made those cases not available in CourtView. He referred Chair
Claman to Ms. Meade to provide additional information on that
legislation.
1:30:12 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN asked Ms. Meade to offer clarification on juvenile
jurisdiction pertinent to cases of underage drinking.
1:30:23 PM
NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Office of the Administrative
Director, Alaska Court System, stated that under Title 47,
juveniles charged with minor consuming are not treated as a
juvenile, they are treated as an adult. She drew a comparison
to the offense as akin to a traffic ticket, which goes to
district court, not superior court. She said the district court
does not revoke driver licenses for minor consuming; but rather
the defendant, if convicted, is imposed with a fine. She added
that the court may revoke driver licenses for possession of a
controlled substance or the illegal use or possession of a
firearm. She confirmed the chairman's earlier statement that
some of those charges would be within the jurisdiction of the
superior court as correct.
1:31:49 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN asked whether the charges of possession of a
controlled substance or the illegal possession or use of a
firearm could be brought in district court.
1:32:16 PM
MS. MEADE stated her belief that those charges would be in the
jurisdiction of superior court, not district court.
1:32:26 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN asked whether HB 116 would change what types of
charges could be brought in juvenile court.
1:32:47 PM
MS. MEADE offered her understanding that the proposed bill would
not affect jurisdiction of charges related to controlled
substances for minors.
1:33:02 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN asked whether the bill, if passed, would pertain
only to minor consumption of alcohol.
1:33:19 PM
MR. DAVIDSON stated that HB 116 would not make any changes to
jurisdiction. He offered that the referral of any controlled
substance or weapons charges to the division would be in the
jurisdiction of superior court, and that HB 116 would address
the matter of driver's license revocation in cases involving
minor consumption.
1:34:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN, referring to Sections 24 and 25, asked
to what extent HB 116 would change the ability for adult
probation officers to aid in the arrest of minors.
1:34:46 PM
MS. DOMPELING answered that Department of Corrections adult
probation officers do not have the authority to intervene on
juvenile arrests that have been referred to the Department of
Health and Social Services, Division of Juvenile Justice.
1:35:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked for confirmation that the bill
would not have any impact on the authority of adult probation
officers.
1:35:25 PM
MS. DOMPLING confirmed this as correct.
1:35:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to Section 28 and asked who has
access to the confidential information currently in statute, and
how the passage of HB 116 would change that.
1:36:04 PM
MR. DAVIDSON cited the existing statute 47.12.135(c) and pointed
out a lack of alignment with Sections (a), (b), and (c). He
offered that the proposed language would align the language to
the timing of when information could be released to the public;
specifically, the information can be publicly released after
adjudication. He added that the proposed language would allow
for the matter that was adjudicated - the defendant's conviction
- to be released to the public, not the original charge or
allegations filed in the first petition.
1:37:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked to whom the division would be
authorized to release information prior to adjudication with the
passage of HB 116.
1:38:17 PM
MS. DOMPELING stated that the bill would provide that
information only be released to an inquiring entity for a
specific juvenile after adjudication.
1:39:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN offered a scenario wherein a child is
alleged to have committed an offense, and he asked whether a
parent or guardian would be allowed access to the information of
the allegations deemed confidential.
1:39:36 PM
MS. DOMPELING explained that, in the example described by
Representative Eastman, a parent or guardian would be a party to
the hearing and would have access, but not individual
representation, at the actions and hearings pertaining to the
allegations. She added that a parent or guardian would have
access to confidential information such as probable cause.
1:40:50 PM
MS. HOLLAND added that HB 116 would not change what information
would or will be disclosed; rather, it would clarify who could
receive such information.
1:41:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether confidential information
would be allowed to be released to anyone who is not party to
such charges, prior to adjudication.
1:42:09 PM
MR. DAVIDSON explained that those who are party to a case, such
as the victim, parents, and attorneys, will have access to
confidential information throughout the case. He added that
there exist provisions that allow the division to share
confidential information with entities such as insurance
companies and other law enforcement agencies for continuing
investigations. He noted that juveniles in the system will
often receive referrals for services prior to or in lieu of
adjudication, and that some confidential information could be
shared with service agencies involved with the juvenile as part
of his/her delinquency proceeding.
1:43:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE stated that HB 105 was currently under
consideration by the House Health and Social Services Standing
Committee and encouraged that any overlapping language between
HB 105 and HB 116 be taken into consideration early in the
process for consistency and conformity.
1:44:15 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN explained that the order of referral of the bills
had resulted in the House Judiciary Standing Committee hearing
HB 105 prior to that of the House Health and Social Services
Standing Committee. He suggested that the committee compare HB
105 and HB 116 to confirm the division staff's claims that the
language in both bills is not in conflict.
1:45:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE opined that the sponsor's intent would be
to create consistency among definitions and encouraged the
committee to scrutinize each bill for consistency. She
expressed her concern of the bill having taken so long to gain
passage, and she asked the sponsor to provide some history on
the bill.
1:46:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ expressed her belief that the bill
would have passed in the prior legislative session. She added
that a companion bill had been taken into consideration by the
Senate. She offered that there exist other legislative
priorities that may take precedence, and that the passage of
this bill is subject to those priorities. She added that HB 116
is a long and complex bill.
1:47:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to Section 30 of the sectional
analysis [included in the committee packet] regarding the
definition of a minor. He asked how broad in scope the change
in definition of a minor would be under HB 116 and what other
statutes the change of definition might affect.
1:48:37 PM
MS. DOMPELING responded by offering some historical background.
She said previously if a minor committed a crime and the crime
was not discovered until after the individual turned 18, the
division did not have jurisdiction. There occurred a change in
statute to enable jurisdiction to petition an individual -
especially in serious cases such as those involving restitution
- in such cases where the individual is over the age of 18 and
the offense was committed prior to his/her eighteenth birthday.
She expressed her opinion that under HB 116, the change of
definition would apply only to the specific chapter under
statute.
1:50:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN expressed his understanding that an
individual under the age of 18 is traditionally referred to as a
minor and asked whether anyone had evaluated the impacts within
the chapter that a change to the definition of "minor" would
bring [should HB 116 pass].
1:51:04 PM
MR. DAVIDSON stated that the change of definition would be a
change to the delinquency statute. He said he could not speak
to the impacts that a change of definition would have on other
statutes but expressed that it was not intended that the
definitions of other statutes would be impacted.
1:53:11 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN offered that, due to the language in the bill
changing the definition in Title 4, chapter 12, which deals with
delinquent minors, the change would only apply to the
definitions contained therein.
1:53:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ, in response to Representative Vance's
earlier question regarding a previous version of the bill,
clarified that it had been passed by the House and, prior to
adjournment, the bill had been heard and passed out of the
Senate Health and Social Services Standing Committee and had
been referred to Senate Judiciary Standing Committee as the last
committee of referral.
1:54:23 PM
MR. DAVIDSON offered to provide to the committee a comparative
analysis between HB 116 and HB 105.
1:55:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER, as co-chair of the House Health and
Social Services Standing Committee requested that the division's
comparative analysis be provided to that committee for its
consideration of HB 105.
1:55:49 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN opened public testimony on HB 116. After
ascertaining that there was no one who wished to testify, he
closed public testimony.
1:56:15 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN announced that HB 116 was held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Alaska Police Standards Council Appointment - Joseph White Resume.pdf |
HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM |
|
| HB 66 v. B 2.18.2021.PDF |
HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/19/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Sponsor Statement v. B 4.12.2021.pdf |
HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/19/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Sectional Analysis v. B 4.12.2021.pdf |
HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/19/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Additional Document - National Vote at Home Institute 2020 Review 4.12.2021.pdf |
HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/19/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Additional Document - Sightline Institute Absentee Voting Article 12.15.2020.pdf |
HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/19/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Additional Document - Alaska 2020 Ballot Statistics 4.12.2021.pdf |
HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/19/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Supporting Document - Letters Received as of 4.8.2021.pdf |
HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/19/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 66 Fiscal Note OOG-DOE 4.9.2021.pdf |
HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/19/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 66 |
| HB 116 v. A 2.24.2021.PDF |
HHSS 4/29/2021 3:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/16/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB 116 Sponsor Statement v. A 4.12.2021.pdf |
HHSS 4/29/2021 3:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/16/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB 116 Sectional Analysis v. A 4.12.2021.pdf |
HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/16/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB 116 Supporting Document - FAQs 4.12.2021.pdf |
HHSS 4/29/2021 3:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/16/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB 116 Supporting Document - Carey Acquittal 2017 4.12.2021.pdf |
HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/16/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB 116 Supporting Document - Temporary Secure Juvenile Holding Areas 4.12.2021.pdf |
HHSS 4/29/2021 3:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/16/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB 116 Supporting Document - DJJ Letter 4.9.2021.pdf |
HHSS 4/29/2021 3:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/16/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB 116 PowerPoint Presentation 4.12.2021.pdf |
HHSS 4/29/2021 3:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |
| HB 116 Fiscal Note DHSS-PS 4.9.2021.pdf |
HHSS 4/29/2021 3:00:00 PM HJUD 4/12/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/14/2021 1:00:00 PM HJUD 4/16/2021 1:00:00 PM |
HB 116 |