Legislature(2019 - 2020)BUTROVICH 205
03/20/2020 01:30 PM Senate HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
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 | |
| HB133 | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s) | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 133 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 133-JUVENILES: JUSTICE,FACILITES,TREATMENT
1:41:03 PM
CHAIR WILSON announced the consideration of HOUSE BILL NO. 133,
"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."
1:42:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE IVY SPOHNHOLZ, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau,
Alaska, sponsor of HB 133, said this bill does three things.
First, it will close a loophole related to sexual abuse of a
minor that was discovered a few years ago; second, it will
update terminology that defines and references Division of
Juvenile Justice (DJJ) facilities and staff; and finally, it
will codify some of the division's best practices.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ said a loophole related to the crime of
sexual abuse of a minor came to light in 2017 when a DJJ staff
member was acquitted after sustaining an inappropriate sexual
relationship with a minor previously under his supervision. HB
133 would close this loophole by adding DJJ staff to the list of
individuals who are defined as being in a position of authority
over DJJ-affected youth.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ said HB 133 makes important
clarifications in the language used to describe DJJ facilities
and staff and updates the statutes to reflect the authority and
responsibilities of the division. Some of the current statutory
language is outdated, inaccurate, and obsolete. For example, HB
133 would eliminate the term juvenile work camps from statute
because they have never existed in Alaska. She described 133 as
largely a cleanup bill.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ said HB 133 will codify best practices
and clarify the division's authority. These changes resolve
issues that reflect the standard operations of the division. For
example, it will add DJJ staff and probation officers to the
list of mandatory reporters of child abuse and neglect. The
division does this in practice, but it should be in statute. HB
133 clarifies that DJJ probation officers have the authority to
file amended petitions. In the past, some petitions have been
denied, inhibiting DJJ probation officers from advocating for
youth when new information comes to light in their cases. It
will also add secure residential psychiatric treatment centers
to the list of facilities for which victims will be notified
when a juvenile is released. It will amend language authorizing
the department to disclose confidential information relating to
the offense when a minor has received adjudication, rather than
the offense the minor was alleged to have committed.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ said modest but important updates will
ensure that the division, law enforcement, and the courts have
essential clarity.
1:45:39 PM
MEGAN HOLLAND, Staff, Representative Ivy Spohnholz, Alaska State
Legislature, began a PowerPoint presentation on HB 133. She
reviewed slide 2:
Closes a loophole for sexual abuse of minors.
Daniel Carey case in 2013DJJ staff sustained an
inappropriate sexual relationship with a juvenile
under DJJ supervision. They were acquitted because a
judge found that sexual abuse of a minor statute does
not explicitly list DJJ staff as being in a position
of authority over DJJ youth.
Section 6Clarifies that DJJ staff are in a position
of authority over minors in their custody
MS. HOLLAND reviewed slide 3:
Updates and definitions
Repeals
youth counselors, juvenile detention home, youth
detention facility, correctional school, juvenile work
camp, juvenile probation officers, correctional school
Amends
juvenile detention facility, minor
New Definitions
juvenile treatment facility, temporary secure juvenile
holding area, juvenile probation officers
MS. HOLLAND reviewed slide 4:
Repeals
Youth Counselors," Section 24
"Youth Counselors" have not been used in the division
since 2003, the duties described under this section do
not apply to facility staff but to probation officers.
"Juvenile Probation Officers," Section 3
Inaccurate definition, corrected with new definition
in Section 24.
"Juvenile Detention Home," "Youth Detention Facility,"
"Correctional School," and "Juvenile Work Camp,"
Sections 1, 10, 11, 12, 13, 18, 20, 21, 30, 31 and 32
All are repealed and replaced with "juvenile detention
facility" and "juvenile treatment facility" for
accuracy and consistency.
MS. HOLLAND reviewed slide 5:
Amended Definitions
"Minor," Section 28, referenced in section36
Amends the definition of minor to include a person who
was under 18 at the time they committed an offense and
is subject to the jurisdiction of DJJ.
If a minor commits an offense then turns 18 after,
they will remain in DJJ's custody.
"Juvenile Detention Facility," Sections 27 and 35,
referenced in sections 1, 2, 9, 10, 13, 15, 16, 19,
20, 21, 30, 32
Corrects the definition to be a secure facility for
the detention of delinquent minors under DJJ custody.
The current definition limits it to separate quarters
within a city jail, some communities do not have such
a jail suitable for juveniles and use other
facilities.
1:50:01 PM
SENATOR SHOWER read from slide 5, If a minor commits an offense
then turns 18 after, they will remain in DJJ's custody.and
asked how long someone can be detained.
MS. HOLLAND deferred to Matt Davidson.
1:50:42 PM
MATT DAVIDSON, Social Services Program Officer, Division of
Juvenile Justice, Department of Health and Social Services,
Juneau, Alaska, stated that youth can remain in the division's
custody up until their 18th birthday. Under court order, if the
youth is an adjudicated delinquent and has been convicted of a
crime under the juvenile court statutes, the person can stay in
custody an additional year. In some circumstances and with the
minor's permission, youth can say in DJJ custody to continue
services up until the age of 20, but this is relatively rare.
SENATOR SHOWER asked if youth would be remanded to the adult
system the day they turn 20 years of age.
MR. DAVIDSON replied that only happens in rare instances. As a
general rule, youth remain in the juvenile system until their
court order ends and then they are out of the justice system.
SENATOR SHOWER said he wants to prevent housing a 25-year-old
with a 15-year-old.
1:52:38 PM
SENATOR BEGICH pointed out that a juvenile who has committed a
crime that it is so severe that the juvenile is tried as an
adult is not left in the juvenile justice system. He agreed with
Mr. Davidson that it is rare that DJJ jurisdiction would be
extended for an extra two years, but there are some instances
where it will help rehabilitate or improve the youth's chance of
success.
MR. DAVIDSON confirmed that youth whose crimes are waived into
the adult system are not considered juveniles and proceed
through the adult court.
MS. HOLLAND reviewed slide 6:
New Definitions
"Juvenile Treatment Facility," Section 29, referenced
in sections 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 19, 30 and
31.
Current statute refers to "juvenile treatment
institutions", however DJJ feels that this terminology
is not reflective of the facilities they operate.
Temporary Secure Juvenile Holding Area," Section 29,
referenced in sections 13, 14, 16, 21, 23 and 32
DJJ already operates with a list of temporary secure
holding areas in various communities throughout the
state.
"Juvenile Probation Officers," Section 24, referenced
in sections 4, 5, 6, 16, 22, 23, 29, 37 and 38.
There is no accurate definition for "juvenile
probation officers" under current statute. Section 24
repeals the definition for "youth counselors" and
replaces it with an updated definition for "juvenile
probation officers", affording them powers of a
probation officer and describing their duties.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ said this slide highlights three
definitions that the bill seeks to streamline.
SENATOR BEGICH expressed concern about the temporary secure
juvenile holding area change and asked for assurance that this
will not remove the requirement that the state has to adhere to
the reporting requirements of the Federal Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention Act that provides protections for youth.
He specifically asked for assurance that the new definition of
"temporary secure" does not remove these facilities from
reporting requirements. He noted the state has previously had
difficulty with compliance and it cost the state hundreds of
thousands of dollars.
1:57:53 PM
MR. DAVIDSON assured Senator Begich that the definition will not
negatively impact reporting. The intent of adding a definition
of temporary secure juvenile holding area is to give a term of
reference for part of the federal reporting requirements. The
division has improved its reporting of holding juveniles in
secure locations other than juvenile facilities. Although these
facilities were described in statute, the facilities were not
defined. The division seeks to continue to comply with the
federal law, he said.
SENATOR BEGICH expressed appreciation for the assurance and
acknowledged that the division has worked in the last decade to
bring Alaska fully into compliance.
MS. HOLLAND reviewed slide 7:
Policy Updates: codifying best practices
Section 5: Clarifies that employees of juvenile
treatment institutions and juvenile and adult
probation officers qualify as legal guardians.
Section 8: Clarifies that secure juvenile treatment
facilities are excluded from the definition of
"private exposure."
Section 9: Includes DJJ facilities in the list of
places where public education must be provided.
Sections 16 and 17: Provides juvenile probation
officers with the authority to file amended and
supplemental petitions, and clarifies that for
juveniles this duty falls upon juvenile probation
officers, not adult probation officers.
Sections 22 and 23: Clarifies that the authority to
arrest and detain minors rests with juvenile, not
adult, probation officers.
SENATOR SHOWER asked for an explanation of Section 8.
MS. HOLLAND deferred to Mr. Davidson.
2:01:11 PM
MR. DAVIDSON responded that Section 8 addresses laws relating to
taking images or exposure of people's private parts. There is an
existing exclusion for correctional facilities, detention
facilities, hospitals, and psychiatric centers. This is updating
the terms used to describe juvenile justice facilities in that
section. There is no change in the practice. The division works
to give youth privacy, but there are times when youth are
exposed accidentally. This protects the division against any
litigation or criminal when this happens.
SENATOR SHOWER asked how youth are accidentally exposed and if
this could create a loophole.
MR. DAVIDSON answered that examples include youth exposing
themselves intentionally and photos taken in a hospital setting
to an area that might be considered sensitive. There are times
when youth are potentially exposed, and the bill is attempting
to protect against criminal action.
SENATOR SHOWER asked for the intent of Section 9 and if it
codifies any changes to current practice regarding providing
public education in DJJ facilities.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ explained that DJJ facilities are
already required to provide education and this clarifies that
obligation in statute.
SENATOR BEGICH added that the bill is modernizing definitions.
Section 9 clarifies what is meant by juvenile detention
facilities as it relates to providing education for children in
such facilities. The language provides coherence and clarity for
the public in this area. He said he is pleased that Senator
Shower is asking questions because people need to hear the
intent on the record and know that nothing nefarious is going
on.
2:06:05 PM
MS. HOLLAND reviewed slide 8:
Policy Updates: codifying best practices
Section 25: Adds "secure residential psychiatric
treatment centers" to the list of facilities from
which, when a juvenile is released, victims will
receive notification.
Section 26: Corrects language authorizing the
department to disclose confidential information
related to an adjudicated offense, rather than the
offense the minor was "alleged to have committed."
Section 38: Adds juvenile probation officers, DJJ
office staff, and staff of juvenile facilities to the
list of mandatory reporters of child abuse or neglect.
Section 39: Repeals revocation of juvenile driver
licenses for offenses involving a controlled substance
that were handled informally by the division.
CHAIR WILSON asked whether Section 25, secure residential
psychiatric treatment centers, was in lieu of going to a
different type of secure facility. Someone convicted of a crime
may be sentenced to a residential psychiatric treatment center
and the state may not have the proper level of care. Many kids
in Alaska are sent to a rehab center in Texas. If someone is
released from the center in Texas, he asked who has the
responsibility to make the notification, DJJ or the entity in
Texas.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ replied DJJ is responsible for victim
notification but that is not clear right now for youth sent to
secure psychiatric treatment centers. The bill seeks to ensure
that victims are notified when someone who is alleged to have
committed or has been convicted of a dangerous crime is
released.
SENATOR BEGICH said notification currently is limited, and might
abrogate the victim's right to know, because the statute only
identifies a juvenile justice facility. This provides better
protection.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ added that this is about clarity for
victim notification and ensuring that it can happen. Now it is
essentially prohibited.
CHAIR WILSON summarized that the victim would only know that the
person was released from custody, but the notification would not
break HIPAA rights by stating that someone was released from a
psychiatric center.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ agreed.
SENATOR SHOWER asked if Section 38 codifies current practice.
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ answered yes; this is happening in
practice, but identifying DJJ personnel as mandatory reporters
should be law because it is so important. The department
supports this provision.
SENATOR SHOWER asked for a plain English explanation of Section
39.
2:10:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ said Section 39 relates to substance
use abuse issues. She explained that it is technically legal for
the department to negotiate an informal agreement to take away a
juvenile's driver's license in such a case instead of going to
court, but that is not allowed in cases that have gone to trial.
She said the system should be equitable and punishment for a
less serious case being resolved informally should be the same
as for a more serious case being resolved formally.
SENATOR SHOWER asked if this might tie the department's hands by
requiring it not enforce something or moving it to the
appropriate place for adjudication.
MS. HOLLAND advised that in 2016, DJJ's authority to petition
for revocation of driver licenses for adjudicated cases was
repealed, but the court's authority to revoke driver's licenses
for the same offenses was not repealed. The courts still have
this discretionary tool under AS 28.15.185(k).
SENATOR BEGICH added that it is an automatic revocation under AS
47.12.06(b)(5). He said this still allows discretion, depending
on the nature of the crime, but it eliminates an automatic
revocation that makes no sense in many diverted cases. With
diversion, the attempt is to keep a kid out of the system and
there should be as many tools as possible for the kid to
succeed, he said.
SENATOR SHOWER asked for confirmation that with this bill the
department retains the ability to do this.
SENATOR BEGICH said yes; all sorts of conditions can be in a
probation agreement or diversion agreement or informal
agreement. In an adjudicated case, those decisions would be in
the hands of a judge and out of the probation officer's hands.
MS. HOLLAND summarized that HB 133 closes a loophole regarding
sexual abuse of minors, updates terms and definitions pertaining
to DJJ facilities and staff, and codifies best practices to
improve the division's ability to complete its mission.
2:15:43 PM
CHAIR WILSON thanked the sponsor for carrying the bill and
solicited a motion.
2:16:12 PM
SENATOR SHOWER moved to report HB 133, version M, from committee
with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note.
There being no objection, HB 133 was reported from the Senate
Health and Social Services Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HSS Mental Health Trust Boyles #1.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
Governor's Appointee to AMHT BOT |
| HSS Mental Health Trust Halterman#1.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
Governor's Appointees to AMHT BOT |
| HSS Medical Board Bigelow #6.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
Governor's Appointees to State Medical Board |
| HSS Medical Board Mielke #6.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
Governor's Appointee to State Medical Board |
| HB 133 ver M 2.3.2020.PDF |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 Sponsor Statement 2.19.20.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 Sectional Analysis v. M 2.3.2020.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 Fiscal Note 4.18.19 DHSS-PS 2.3.2020.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 FAQ's 3.4.20.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 Letter of Support, APEA 3.5.20.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 Letter of Support, CDVSA 3.9.20.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 Letters of Support 3.3.20.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 Carey Case 4.22.2019.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 One-Sheeter 2.19.20.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 LOS Carpeneti 3.16.20.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 Temporary Secure Juvenile Holding Areas 2.3.2020.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 Fiscal Note DHSS 2.12.20.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |
| HB 133 PPT 3.20.20.pdf |
SHSS 3/20/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 133 |