Legislature(2015 - 2016)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/12/2016 01:30 PM Senate 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 | |
| SB128 | |
| HB188 | |
| HB83 | |
| HB289 | |
| HB231 | |
| HB268 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 128 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 188 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 83 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 289 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 231 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 268 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 231(FIN)
"An Act extending the termination date of the Board of
Parole; and providing for an effective date."
3:12:07 PM
ESTHER MIELKE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BOB LYNN, testified
that the Board of Parole currently served in Alaska as the
authority over parole setting. She said that it was
currently set in statute to be terminated on June 30, 2016;
HB 231 originally extended that date to June 30, 2022, but
the most current version of the bill extends it to June 30,
2020. She relayed that the board was audited in 2015. The
audit included and examination of the board's performance,
in light of the 11 sunset criteria points provided within
Alaska statute. She continued that the Division of
Legislative Audit had found the board to be in good
standing, but provided 4 recommendations to improve
operations:
1. The executive director should improve procedures to
ensure required documentation for parole hearings is
accurate and consistently included in parole files.
2. The executive director in coordination with DOC
management should implement documentation standards to
ensure all offender and victim notifications are made in
accordance with statutory requirements.
3. The board should ensure proposed regulations address all
statutory requirements related to its duties.
4. DOC's Administrative Services Division director should
take steps to ensure ACOMS complies with state information
technology security standards and national best practices.
Ms. Mielke shared that the board agreed with the
recommendations. She related that HB 231 would fulfill the
constitutional requirement that the state establish a
parole system that kept Alaskans safe. She noted that the
fiscal note would cover the boards operating costs and had
already been included in the Operating Budget.
3:14:28 PM
KRIS CURTIS, LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, ALASKA DIVISION OF
LEGISLATIVE AUDIT, explained that the division had
concluded the board conducted its business in a
professional and efficient manner, and recommended a 6 year
extension. She said that an 8 year extension had not been
recommended because of the current uncertainties in the
field of corrections. She furthered that the division felt
that that the new risk assessment tool that the department
had just implemented required legislative oversight earlier
than in 8 years. She mentioned the 4 recommendations made
by the division, and noted that they were administrative
and had not impacted the recommendation for extension. She
noted that the recommendations could be found on Page 9 of
the audit (copy on file). She reiterated the
recommendations. She echoed that the board and the DOC
concurred with all of the division's recommendations.
Co-Chair MacKinnon OPENED public testimony.
Co-Chair MacKinnon CLOSED public testimony.
3:18:46 PM
JEFF EDWARDS, DIRECTOR, PAROLE BOARD, DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), introduced
himself.
3:18:59 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon opined that the board was costing the
state $1 million in General Fund dollars. She queried the
number of employees on the Parole Board.
Mr. Edwards replied that there were 6 full-time employees
of the board, as well as 5 governor appointed sitting
members who were considered part-time employees.
3:19:59 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon asserted that the board would need to
defend its $1 million dollars.
Mr. Edwards believed that the services that the board
provided would be vastly expanded through the possibility
of SB 91 because criminal justice commissions, on a global
level, had been expanded and their duties increased. He
noted that prison populations were continuing to grow. He
contended that his was the only agency that could release
individuals, who posed low risk, early. He felt that the
paroling authority provided a pathway to reintegration and
re-entry for low-risk prisoners into society, which was an
efficient use of state dollars. He relayed that housing
low-risk prisoners in jails was expensive and ineffective.
He believed that the board would be at the forefront of
saving hard-bed costs for the DOC.
3:22:37 PM
Vice-Chair Micciche queried a breakdown of the $852,000 in
personal services reflected on the fiscal note.
3:22:55 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon referred to Page 1 of the audit:
The board is funded by the general fund. Expenditures
are primarily for personal services, travel, and
office rental costs. Budgeted expenditures for FY 15
were $896,700.
Co-Chair MacKinnon noted that there had been a staff
vacancy and wondered how long the position remained vacant.
Mr. Edwards replied that the position was vacant for a
period of time. He added that during the position's vacancy
there had been an expansion of the Probation Accountability
and Certain Enforcement (PACE) program, which had provided
the board with an additional staff position. He said that
the vacant position was filled once the board completed the
institution of the new program, which had been
legislatively mandated through SB 64 [SB 64 was passed
during 2013-2014]
3:23:57 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon wondered whether the position had
remained vacant for all of FY 15.
Mr. Edwards agreed to provide that information.
Co-Chair MacKinnon understood that the board was
dovetailing in with the PACE program, which had resulted in
an additional position.
Mr. Edwards relied that one position control number (PCN)
had been designated to the parole board to support the PACE
program.
3:24:42 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked whether Mr. Edwards managed 6
individuals, while someone else managed the PACE program.
Mr. Edwards replied that the DOC supervised the individuals
on the actual program, the board's role was to identify who
was acceptable for the program and to track violations. He
added that the PACE position was responsible for analyzing
data and providing data on behalf of the departments to the
effectiveness of the program.
3:25:25 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon requested a written document detailing
the personal services and travel lines of the fiscal note.
CSHB 231(FIN) was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.