Legislature(2021 - 2022)BARNES 124
03/15/2022 08:00 AM House COMMUNITY & REGIONAL AFFAIRS
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 | |
| HB298 | |
| HB256 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 298 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 256 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 256-LAW ENFORCEMENT: REGISTRY; USE OF FORCE
8:46:43 AM
CO-CHAIR HANNAN announced that the final of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 256, "An Act relating to the Alaska Police
Standards Council; relating to municipal correctional officers
and municipal correctional employees; making municipal police
officers subject to police standards; requiring the Department
of Public Safety to submit a yearly use-of-force report to the
legislature; requiring a municipality that employs a person as a
municipal police officer or in a municipal correctional
facility, the Department of Corrections, or the Department of
Public Safety to report to the Federal Bureau of Investigation
incidents of use of force by state and municipal police,
probation, parole, and correctional officers and municipal
correctional facility employees; and providing for an effective
date."
8:47:05 AM
CO-CHAIR SCHRAGE moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 256, Version 32-LS1341\B,
Ambrose/Radford, 3/11/22, as a working document.
CO-CHAIR HANNAN objected for the purpose of discussion.
8:47:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GERAN TARR, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, addressed the changes to HB 256 proposed in the
committee substitute, as outlined in the explanation of changes
[included in the committee packet], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
Explanation of Changes
CS for HB 256 Ver: 32-LS1341\B
Following feedback from our partners, we have included
several changes to HB 256:
? Section 7 in Version 32-LS1341\A, referring to DOC
reporting use of force from probation officers, parole
officers, or correctional officers to the FBI, is
removed. All subsequent sections are renumbered in
Version B.
? Section 8*: References to village public safety
officers and regional public safety officers are
removed.
? Section 9*: A reference to the Department of
Corrections is removed.
? Section 12*: Increases the one-year compliance
timeline to two years in order to allow for more
training academy cycles.
? Section 13*: References to the Department of
Corrections and correctional facilities are removed.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR mentioned the term "law enforcement official
killed and assaulted" (LEOKA).
8:49:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR, in response to Representative Patkotak,
reviewed that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) recently
began collecting "use of force" data and has asked states to
submit information. The proposed legislation would bring Alaska
in line with that process. She explained the reason some law
enforcement was removed in Version B is because under LEOKA, law
enforcement must have full arrest powers.
8:52:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY directed attention to the term "prepared
to use deadly force", on page 1, line 13, and he recalled it was
suggested that as soon as the officer puts on the belt, he/she
is prepared. He questioned the ambiguity of that phrase.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR deferred to Kelly Howell.
8:54:12 AM
KELLY HOWELL, Special Assistant to the Commissioner; Legislative
Liaison, Office of the Commission, Department of Public Safety,
noted that the bill language points to the definition of deadly
force under AS 11.81.900(b)(16), and that statute gives
examples. She pointed to where HB 256 references the statute,
on page 3, line 1. In response to a follow-up question, she
offered her understanding that information compiled would be
added to overall aggregate data regarding use of force among law
enforcement professionals.
8:57:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND highlighted use of "against a person"
following "prepared to use deadly force" and said she didn't
think putting on a holster before leaving home equals intent to
use deadly force against a person at that point.
8:58:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCABE talked about "color codes" related to
carrying a weapon. He opined that a cop is always prepared to
use deadly force. He maintained that the question is different
and appears not to include the use of a taser, for example.
8:59:30 AM
MS. HOWELL clarified that which would be reported under the FBI
database. She said the use of force data collection program
collects information related to where a fatality occurs, there
is serious bodily injury, or in the absence of both those
when a firearm is discharged by an officer "at or in the
direction of a person." Further, there is a definition of
"serious bodily injury," which is under U.S. Code. She stated
that in context with HB 256, the mention of deadly force in
Section 1 is in relation to a law enforcement officer reporting
to a supervisor when the officer has observed another officer
using or preparing to use deadly force against a person, "and
then there's the information that's required to be reported out
to the FBI for the use of force date collection effort." In
response to a clarification of the question, she said there is a
definition of "dangerous instrument" in statute, and she offered
his understanding that "use of force" includes using a taser
against someone.
9:02:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PATKOTAK asked Ms. Howell to speak to Section 5
as it relates to Village Public Safety Officers (VPSOs).
MS. HOWELL offered her understanding that the language to which
Representative Patkotak referred was a conforming amendment
based on what is being added in Section 1 related to training.
She said HB 256 would complement other bills currently
circulating to address the issue of VPSOs because it refers back
to the training standards under the Alaska Police Standards
Council (APSC).
9:04:06 AM
CO-CHAIR HANNAN removed her objection to the motion to adopt the
proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 256, Version 32-
LS1341\B, Ambrose/Radford, 3/11/22, as a working document.
There being no further objection, Version B was before the
committee.
9:04:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR, in response to a question from
Representative Patkotak regarding municipal correction employees
and mandates that they shall meet certain requirements, directed
attention to page 4, to language regarding transition
employment, and she mentioned the academy where municipal
officers can receive training and the change from one year to
two in order to give two full academy cycles to get all
employees certified. This works out so that there is no fiscal
note.
9:07:37 AM
KELLY GOODE, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Corrections,
highlighted the use of the word "shall" and said the mandate
"will have small implications," because the majority of
communities currently have municipal officers attending the
academy, including those in the North Slope Bureau. In response
to a question from Co-Chair Hannan, she identified the two
municipalities whose officers who currently get training, but
not at the academy, as Bristol Bay and Craig, Alaska.
9:08:46 AM
MS. GOODE, in response to Representative Prax, confirmed there
are no new training requirements, just that they get the
training of 120 hours, and the fiscal note will remain at zero.
In response to a follow-up question, she explained that these
communities get funding from the state for their jails, and they
already have to train. She reiterated that the training dollars
would be used for the academy. The department does not
anticipate it will be a hardship for any of the communities.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR, in response to another question from
Representative Prax as to whether the same would apply to
municipal police departments that may not run a jail, stated
that "all of the individuals would already be required to go
through the academy for certification" prior to being able to
serve, and that would not change. To another question, she
explained that there are seven bills that are part of a package
from Senator Gray-Jackson, and Representative Tarr said she
created companion bills. She advised that HB 256 is limited to
use of force reporting.
9:14:19 AM
CO-CHAIR HANNAN opened public testimony on HB 256, Version B.
9:14:52 AM
DON ETHERIDGE, representing self, testified that the various
pieces of related legislation are tying the hands of law
enforcement officers rather than giving them more strength to
put those in jail that are breaking the law. He talked about
the numerous robberies in his neighborhood prior to a volunteer
neighborhood patrol. He encouraged giving support to law
enforcement, not giving them more paperwork and regulations.
9:19:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND spoke about her experience with a
neighborhood watch.
MR. ETHERIDGE shared his methods for watching his neighborhood.
9:23:03 AM
CRYSTAL BERWICK, representing self, testified in support of HB
256, stating that she is disturbed that "this is not already
done." She expressed the need for consistent policies and the
importance of recording use of force.
9:25:00 AM
CO-CHAIR HANNAN, after ascertaining there was no one else who
wished to testify, closed public testimony on HB 256, Version B.
9:25:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX suggested that it would be good to have
input from local police agencies regarding HB 256, as well as to
identify "more specific problems, targets, that we're trying to
resolve."
9:25:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY concurred. He said this situation is not
unique to Alaska. He spoke about reporting requirements
preventing law enforcement officers from being able to be out
patrolling. He talked about "community patrols" keeping
communities safe. He expressed appreciation for the
neighborhood watch in his own neighborhood.
9:28:57 AM
CO-CHAIR HANNAN announced that HB 256 was held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 298 APIA Support Letter.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 298 |
| HB 298 Sponsor Statement 2.7.2022.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 298 |
| HB 298 Sectional Analysis Version A 2.7.022.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 298 |
| HB 298 Testimony -- Recieved as of 3.8.2022.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 298 |
| HB 298 Ver. A.PDF |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 298 |
| HB 256 Fiscal Note 1 DPS.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 256 |
| HB 256 Fiscal Note 2 DPS.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 256 |
| HB 256 Letters of Support.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 256 |
| HB 256 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 256 |
| HB 256 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 256 |
| HB 256 Supporting Documents.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 256 |
| HB 256 Version A.PDF |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 256 |
| HB298 Fiscal Note LEG-COU-03-14-22.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 298 |
| CSHB 256 Version B 3.11.22.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 256 |
| HB 256 Version B Summary of Changes 3.11.22.pdf |
HCRA 3/15/2022 8:00:00 AM HCRA 3/17/2022 8:00:00 AM |
HB 256 |