Legislature(2017 - 2018)HOUSE FINANCE 519
10/28/2017 10:00 AM 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 | |
| SB54 | |
| Presentation: Alaska Criminal Justice Commission | |
| Public Testimony: Statewide | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 54 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 54(FIN)
"An Act relating to crime and criminal law; relating
to violation of condition of release; relating to sex
trafficking; relating to sentencing; relating to
imprisonment; relating to parole; relating to
probation; relating to driving without a license;
relating to the pretrial services program; and
providing for an effective date."
10:05:32 AM
JORDAN SCHILLING, STAFF, SENATOR JOHN COGHILL, provided a
sectional analysis titled "Senate Bill 54" (copy on file).
He began on slide 2 with a list of the bill's set of
recommendations:
Mr. Schilling moved to slide 3 and read from a statement.
He turned to slide 4 and addressed sex trafficking
provisions and read from a statement.
10:09:27 AM
Co-Chair Foster noted that Senator John Coghill had joined
the meeting online.
SENATOR JOHN COGHILL, BILL SPONSOR (via teleconference),
provided opening remarks related to the bill. He emphasized
that the changes in the bill were not small. The bill
increased jail and sentencing time. He addressed alcohol
related times. The Alcohol Safety Action Program would have
a higher volume of traffic as a result and how that would
work would have to be monitored. There were a broad range
of issues - lower violence to high violence. The commission
had recommended 90 days and it ended up at 120 days. He
questioned whether a treatment program would be effective.
He stated that thieving in Alaska was too high and was
unacceptable. There would be a five-year lookback plus
aggravators. The violations and conditions of release would
be ramped up to a crime.
10:14:32 AM
Senator Coghill continued to provide opening remarks. He
referred to a modification of pretrial services that would
come into effect in January 2018. It was one of the primary
public safety elements in SB 91 that would be shown as a
good outcome. He appreciated the chance to present to the
committee. He had been trying to keep new context out of
the bill and to ensure public safety was paramount. The
goal was to save money, but keep public safety stringent.
Representative Pruitt stated there were many people asking
to repeal [SB 91]. He believed one of the concerns was that
SB 54 would end the discussion. He wondered if the bill was
passed whether he could go back to his constituents and say
that the bill was not the "fix it and we're done bill" but
providing continued work and compromise with more to come
in the future.
Senator Coghill believed the question was on everyone's
mind - was criminal justice reform working. He believed the
answer was "yes." There would be an ongoing progress
relationship between the legislature and the criminal
justice system in the state. The Alaska Criminal Justice
Commission would play a significant role. He referred to
the current opioid epidemic facing the state. He discussed
what had been done previously - The goal was to take some
of the avenues in prison and introduce them into //. He
underscored that the crime in many areas such as domestic
violence and violent crimes was too high. The bill was a
response to the outcry related to the issue. The bill was
not a total repeal - he believed there were myriad good
things that had come from SB 91 including the focus on
high-risk, reducing sentences for people who do well,
working to reduce recidivism, and other.
10:21:14 AM
Representative Pruitt referenced the commission and its
role. He noted the individuals were unelected. He believed
the commission's goal was to decrease the prison
population. He thought concern about public safety had been
missing from that mission. He wondered if Senator Coghill
would consider a revision to the commission's mission to
include public safety.
Senator Coghill stated that recidivism meant return rate.
The commission had been asked to address what could be done
to reduce the return rate. There were several places the
commission had been asked to look at public safety, with
the idea of keeping the public safe. He did not know how it
got out that the commission had not been considering public
safety.
Representative Pruitt believed the commission may be
misunderstanding the goal. He mentioned testimony in the
House Judiciary Committee.
10:25:00 AM
Senator Coghill stated that the commission would provide
some testimony. He assured that the statement in the House
Judiciary Committee was pertaining to public safety. He
encouraged the committee to ask the commission to clarify
the statement at a later time.
Co-Chair Foster addressed the remaining agenda.
Mr. Schilling moved to slide 5 of the sectional related to
C-felonies. He continued to read from a statement. The
commission had heard numerous concerns about the specific
provision. He stated that SB 54 established a presumptive
sentence up to one year.
10:27:15 AM
Mr. Schilling addressed Section 16 regarding sex offender
probation. A decision had been made in one of the
legislative committees, and it was recommended to establish
a mandatory minimum. The minimums previously existing prior
to SB 91 would be reinstated.
Mr. Schilling turned to Sections 17, 21, and 22 on slide 7
of the presentation. He continued to read from prepared
remarks. He mentioned that in another section a five-year
lookback was established.
10:29:19 AM
Mr. Schilling addressed Sections 1, 2, and 19 related to
Class B misdemeanor sentencing. He continued to read from
prepared remarks.
Co-Chair Foster recognized Representatives Ivy Sponholz and
Zach Fansler in the audience.
Mr. Schilling continued to address the presentation through
slide 13. He continued to read from prepared remarks.
Co-Chair Foster asked committee members to write their
questions down and ask at a later time.
^PRESENTATION: ALASKA CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMISSION
10:35:05 AM
Co-Chair Foster listed individuals available online and in
the room for questions.
GREG RAZO, CHAIR, ALASKA CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMISSION (via
teleconference), provided a PowerPoint presentation titled
"Alaska Criminal Justice Commission" dated October 26, 2017
(copy on file). He began on slide 2: "Commission Process."
The commission process started with research. They had
primarily been addressing what would work to reduce
recidivism. The recidivism rate was about 56 percent - two
out of three individuals returned to prison within three
years. The commission had kept in mind accountability and
public safety. He underscored that public safety was at the
core of the commission's mission. The recommendations to
the commission had come from over 53 public hearings by the
commission.
10:39:49 AM
Mr. Razo continued to address the commission process on
slide 2. He discussed system assessment.
10:42:34 AM
Mr. Razo moved to slide 3 and addressed the commission
makeup and the cost of funding the commission. He pointed
to the questions listed on slide 3:
1. Avert all future prison growth
2. Avert all future prison growth and reduce current
population by 15 percent
3. Avert all future prison growth and reduce current
population by 25 percent
Mr. Razo elaborated on slide 3.
10:46:44 AM
Mr. Razo moved to slide 4: "Goals of Criminal Justice
Reform" and slide 5: "Reinvest in Programs Proven to Reduce
Recidivism and Protect Public Safety: Reinvestment in FY 17
and FY 18":
1.Reinvest in Programs Proven to Reduce Recidivism and
Protect Public Safety
2.Implement EvidenceBased Pretrial Practices
3.Focus Prison Beds on Serious and Violent Offenders
4.Strengthen Probation and Parole Supervision
5.Improve Reentry Programming
6.Ensure Oversight and Accountability
Mr. Razo looked at slide 5: "Goals of Criminal Justice
Reform":
Reinvest in Programs Proven to Reduce Recidivism and
Protect Public Safety -
Reinvestment in FY 17 and FY 18
Substance Abuse Treatment: $2,500,500
Reentry Support: $3,000,000
Violence Prevention Programs: $3,000,000
Two-year total: $8,500,000
Mr. Razo moved to slide 6: "Reinvestment Detail."
Mr. Razo highlighted slide 7: "Reinvest in Programs Proven
to Reduce Recidivism and Protect Public Safety: Future
Reinvestment 2019 2022":
Reinvest in Programs Proven to Reduce Recidivism and P
rotect Public Safety Future Reinvestment 2019 2022:
•$4,000,000 for treatment in CRCs
•$4,000,000 for treatment in prison
•$8,000,000 for treatment in the community and re
ntry services (note about ¼ of this amount
projected to come from Medicaid reform)
•$8,000,000 for violence prevention programs in
the community
Mr. Razo addressed slide 8: "Invest in EvidenceBased
Pretrial Practices."
Mr. Razo advanced to slide 9: "EvidenceBased Pretrial
Practices":
Pretrial Before and After SB 91 - What's the
Difference?
Pre-SB 91
Release based on payment of bail to ensure
appearance
Amount of bail set is used as a proxy for a
defendant's risk
No supervision of defendants who are
released
Heavy reliance on civilian third-party
custodians
Starting January 2018
Release based on results of a risk
assessment and the offense
Risk assessment calculates a defendant's
risk of failure to appear and of a new
arrest
Supervision (based on risk level) of
defendants who are released
Restrictions on use of third-party
custodians
10:51:25 AM
Mr. Razo slide 10: "Focus Prison Beds on Serious and
Violent Offenders."
Mr. Razo addressed slide 11: "Strengthen Probation and
Parole Supervision."
Mr. Razo moved to slide 12: "Strengthen Probation and
Parole Supervision."
Mr. Razo advanced to slide 13: "Reduce Prison Expenses
while preserving Public Safety."
Mr. Razo addressed slide 14: "Prison Population Decreased
437 Beds Since Implementation":
Avoided costs:
$3.8 million in annual prison growth costs in FY1
7
Reduced operational costs:
$5.6 million saved by DOC's closure of the 500bed
Palmer Correctional Center (inmates were sent to
other facilities);
Costs about $42/day to house a prisoner -marginal
cost
Mr. Razo turned to slide 15: "Alaska Criminal Justice
Commission Recommended Changes to Sentences: For firsttime
Class C Felonies":
For firsttime Class C Felonies
Commission Recommendation
Enact a zero to 90 day presumptive sentencing
range
Retain suspended time of up to 18 months
Current
SB54 contains a zerotoone year presumptive sente
ncing range
Fiscal implications: more prison use = more priso
n costs
10:57:37 AM
Mr. Razo addressed slide 16: "Alaska Criminal Justice
Commission Recommended Changes to Sentences: Return VCOR to
misdemeanor status":
Return VCOR to misdemeanor status
B Misdemeanor
Punishable by up to 5 days in prison
Allow imposition of a term of probation
10:58:32 AM
Mr. Razo moved to slide 17: "Alaska Criminal Justice
Commission Recommended Changes to Sentences: Increase
penalties for repeat Theft 4 offenders (e.g.,
shoplifting)":
Increase penalties for repeat Theft 4 offenders (e.g.
shoplifting)
Up to 10 days in jail for thirdtime offenders
SB54 allows up to 10 days active time for thirdtime pe
tty theft offenders, and also raises penalties for fir
stand secondtime offenders to include active jail tim
e.
Fiscal implications: In 2014, when Theft 4 penalt
ies included active jail time, DOC received 324 a
dmissions for Theft 4.
Mr. Razo directed attention to slide 18: "Alaska Criminal
Justice Commission Recommended Changes to Sentences:
Changes to ASAP." He reported that ASAP had been around for
a long time, but did not have the resources to continue
with the workload it was being given.
Mr. Razo looked at slide 19: "Arrest and Intoxication
Issues":
Changes to ASAP
Commission found: ASAP received many referrals,
did not necessarily have time to actively monitor
so many offenders
Recommended that ASAP referrals be limited unless
more funding given; SB 91 limited referrals but
increased workload to high risk offenders
Amendments to SB 54 in HJUD expands referrals
again
11:02:03 AM
Mr. Razo looked at slide 19: "Other Issues":
Disorderly conduct
SB 54 as amended in HJUD raises penalty from 24
hours to up to five days.
Fiscal implications: in 2014, before reform,
DOC received 271 individuals admitted for
disorderly conduct.
Changes to release rules for some intoxicated
arrestees -
Commission is actively working on this issue
Mr. Razo concluded his presentation on slide 20: "Arrest
and Intoxication Issues":
Disorderly conduct
SB 54 as amended in HJUD raises penalty from 24
hours to up to five days.
Fiscal implications: in 2014, before reform,
DOC received 271 individuals admitted for
disorderly conduct.
Changes to release rules for some intoxicated
arrestees -
Commission is actively working on this
issue.
11:03:03 AM
AT EASE
11:07:49 AM
RECONVENED
^PUBLIC TESTIMONY: STATEWIDE
11:07:56 AM
Co-Chair Foster opened public testimony.
11:08:49 AM
JULIE KITKA, ALASKA FEDERATION OF NATIVES, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), spoke in support of SB 54. She reported
that AFN had deliberated over the legislation. Originally
the entity opposed SB 54 because SB 91 was policy based. AT
the 2017 convention redirected its position and was in
support OF SB 54and urged the legislature to act quickly.
She emphasized the need for access to treatment
immediately. She urged members to pass SB 54.
Co-Chair Foster recognized Representative Johnathan Kreiss-
Tomkins.
11:14:22 AM
DAVID MANZA, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), spoke in
favor of a total repeal of SB 91. He mentioned someone's
car getting broken into in the Doyon parking lot. He opined
that. He argued that jail time was a deterrent. He
mentioned suspended time and ankle monitoring. He indicated
that non-violent crimes had victims. He believed the crime
in Alaska was akin to living in the Wild West. He referred
to Representative Lora Reinbold's Facebook page. He
advocated a full repeal of SB 91. He read from a top ten
list from Representative Reinbold.
11:22:01 AM
MIKE COONS, SELF, PALMER (via teleconference), opposed SB
54 and SB 91. He wanted to see pedophiles in jail for a
minimum of 10 years. He advocated killing the bill, repeal
SB 91 and to redesign the bill during regular session. He
reminded members about what happened in the Wild West.
Vice-Chair Gara indicated that the rape of a child
sentencing was not changed with SB 91.
11:27:33 AM
SARAH VANCE, SELF, HOMER (via teleconference), advocated
for a full repeal SB 91 and SB 54. The majority of the
people felt they were no longer protected. She claimed that
there was a lack of public trust at present. She thought
the way the law was written encouraged citizens to carry
concealed weapons. She spoke about her own mother carrying
a weapon when she was in Anchorage up from Homer. A
punishment needs to truly be a punishment. The citizens
felt unsafe. She asked the legislature to protect Alaska's
citizens. She spoke of Alaska being the 6th worst state for
car theft incidents. She advocated for sustentative changes
to SB 54 and a full repeal of SB 91.
11:32:57 AM
JACOB KLAPAK, SELF, GLACIER VIEW (via teleconference),
spoke in opposition of SB 54 and in favor of a full repeal
of SB 91. He indicated he had a friend with first-hand
experience around SB 91. He encouraged a change for
generating morale within the police force as well. He spoke
of a friend who was a police officer. He relayed that he
had only heard negative stories regarding the effects of SB
91. He spoke of the importance of accountability in
people's lives. He commented on the remarks from the
previous testifier about criminals being rehabilitated. He
continued to relay a personal experience. He wondered if
legislators had heard success stories from SB 91. He
thought criminals should stand in front of a judge instead
of being put back on the streets.
11:38:37 AM
Co-Chair Foster indicated that there were a number of
department heads needed to leave at noon and would allow
committee members to ask questions until noon.
Representative Ortiz asked Mr. Razo about slide 17
regarding the ASAP program. He wondered if MR. Razo had
testified about the effectiveness of the ASAP program.
Mr. Razo deferred to Mr. Piper.
11:40:55 AM
TONY PIPER ASAP PROGRAM MANAGER, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
AND SOCIAL SERVICES (via teleconference), stated that the
ASAP program was a cost-effective program in the study.
Representative Ortiz queried the ways in which the ASAP
program was effective.
Mr. Piper replied that the monitoring program put people
into treatment sooner, and ensured that the participant
completed the program.
Representative Pruitt wondered whether the focus of the
commission was on the fiscal impact of criminal justice.
Mr. Razo responded that the focus was always public safety
and recidivism reduction.
Representative Pruitt believed that the goal was not to
save money with a larger focus recognizing that the
legislature had not given you the focus outside of fiscal
responsibility.
Mr. Razo indicated that the statute that form the
commission AS 44.19.645 made it clear that the
responsibilities were already outlined. He read from the
statute.
11:48:51 AM
Representative Pruitt returned to the presentation that did
not have any statute references and focused on the fiscal
aspects of SB 91. He thought Mr. Razo was not taking into
account the rights of citizens and that the aspects of the
presentation had more to do with finances.
Mr. Razo rebutted that he had prepared a presentation based
on the fact that it was being presented to the House
Finance Committee. He was happy to present on
Co-Chair Foster acknowledged Representative Geran Tarr in
the room
11:51:39 AM
Representative Grenn referred to pages 8 and 9 regarding
pre-trial practices. He queried the results from other
states. He also wondered how the program would make the
public safer.
Mr. Razo deferred to Ms. Depietro. He stated that the pre-
trial division of DOC would not begin until the beginning
of 2018, so that portion of SB 91 had not gone into effect.
He remarked that the bail schedule was the most troubling
for people in the state.
11:53:59 AM
SUZANNE DIPIETRO, ALASKA CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMISSION (via
teleconference), stated that pre-trial risk assessment and
evidence based pre-trial practices were programs that had
been enacted in many other states. She stated that the best
documented was in Kentucky. She stated that the idea behind
pre-trial risk assessment was that additional information
was provided to the decision makers. She stated that the
pre-trial risk assessment tool developed in Alaska would be
used to provide more information to the judges, and to the
lawyers in the courtroom. She stated that another element
of the program were pre-trial enforcement officers who
would monitor those who released pre-trial.
11:57:54 AM
Co-Chair Foster wanted to return to public testimony. He
would come back to questions from the committee shortly.
11:58:14 AM
TODD SMOLDON, SELF, WILLOW (via teleconference), spoke
negatively about the actions of the legislature. He felt
the legislature was manipulating the numbers. He noted that
oil production and oil revenues were up. He opined that SB
91 was passed to reduce costs rather than to reduce crime.
He suggested that it was a priority issue rather than. He
asked members to repeal SB 91 and gavel out.
12:01:36 PM
MARNA SANFORD, SELF, FAIRBANKS (via teleconference),
reported being angry about the misinformation about SB 91
and what it did. She thanked Vice-Chair Gara for correcting
a previous testifier about sentencing for rapists. She //.
She was a public defender with many years of experience
sitting in the courtroom. Ultimately, she did not believe
it would be a good thing for the state to repeal SB 91. She
encouraged investment in treatment and reentry programs.
12:04:39 PM
Vice-Chair Gara shared her comments about accurate
information. He wondered if Ms. Sanford knew the details of
SB 91 and SB 54.
Ms. Sanford responded that she was pretty familiar with
both bills.
Vice-Chair Gara asked about her affiliations with other
groups.
Ms. Sanford responded that she often testified on behalf of
the Tanana Chief's Council.
Vice-Chair Gara spoke about her husband's car getting
broken into.
Ms. Sanford agreed and mentioned a testifier in the House
Judiciary Committee.
12:08:29 PM
Vice-Chair Gara commented that SB 91 still left jail time
if someone broke into someone's home. Under SB 54 a first-
time theft there would be jail time.
Ms. Sanford had not been excited about SB 91 at first.
However, she had a lot of confidence in the Alaska
Commission on Criminal Justice.
12:11:30 PM
Vice-Chair Gara had practiced criminal law for a brief
time. He wanted to ask a question about the "No drinking"
rule.
Ms. Sanford definitely could get behind the "No drinking"
rule. She appreciated the committee's work and supported SB
54.
12:13:45 PM
Representative Guttenberg appreciated Ms. Sanford's
perspective.
Ms. Sanford thought the reform had to be carefully
considered. She reported that when she heard about the
reform she wanted to be involved. There were huge problems
and she was glad Alaska was trying to tackle the problem.
She indicated that whatever the legislature decided to do,
she believed the system was broken and was glad something
was being changed. She was sympathetic to the concerns of
citizen, but also felt that some of the people were
misinformed.
12:17:15 PM
Co-Chair Seaton was concerned with Alaska's judicial
system. He remarked that there were disproportionate
sentences, specifically related to disorderly conduct. He
wondered whether there was a concern about up to a five-day
hold would be a way to return to disproportionate
sentencing based on the offender rather than the offense.
Ms. Sanford agreed that those who had higher sentences
tended to be part of minority populations. She stated that
the statute for disorderly conduct contained a large array
of conduct.
12:19:51 PM
Representative Grenn mentioned crimes on a person. He
expressed concern that some of the felonies did not have
jail time. He wondered whether there was a support for more
jail time for Class C felonies.
Ms. Sanford replied that prior to SB 91 it was possible
someone would receive zero jail time. She noted that the
range for a Class C felony was a range of zero to 2 years.
She supported allowing a bit more discretion.
Representative Pruitt had received information that people
in the public who felt that allowing an attorney who had an
interaction with OPA had given more time than the other
public.
Co-Chair Foster remarked that it was the committee's
discretion.
12:23:26 PM
GEORGE PIERCE, SELF, KASILOF (via teleconference), spoke in
favor of SB 54. He urged members not to repeal SB 91
forcing starting all over again. He had read the
commission's report. He thought reform needed to include
punishment that fit the crime. Crimes needed punishment. He
thought he should clean out his gun and take care of the
problem himself. He urged members to address the problem
immediately.
12:26:42 PM
Representative Pruitt asked if Mr. Pierce had read the
entire bill.
Mr. Pierce indicated he had not read the bill. However, his
wife had read the bill.
Representative Pruitt praised Mr. Pierce's wife for reading
the bill.
Mr. Pierce wished everyone had read the bill because it was
a big mess.
12:28:18 PM
JOE SCHLANGER, SELF, MATSU (via teleconference),
advocated for a full repeal of SB 91.
12:29:24 PM
NICK BROCKETT, SELF, MATSU (via teleconference), spoke
in opposition of SB 54.
12:30:46 PM
EDITH GRUNWALD, SELF, PALMER (via teleconference), spoke in
opposition of SB 91 and thought it should be repealed. She
wanted to see SB 54 implement tougher sentencing. She
thought when a person committed a crime there needed to be
consequences. She urged members to make tough consequences
for criminals. She thought criminals needed to know there
would be consequences. She shared a story of her friend's
murder. She also advocated improving recruitment and
retention of Alaska State Troopers.
Representative Tilton thanked Mrs. Grunwald for her
testimony and offered her condolences. She encouraged her
to also submit her written testimony as well.
12:36:13 PM
Representative Pruitt asked if Mrs. Grunwald had read the
bill and asked if she felt her concerns were being
addressed.
Mrs. Grunwald responded that she did not think so.
12:37:57 PM
JEFFERY TEMPLE, FRED MEYER, PORTLAND, OREGON (via
teleconference), offered support for SB 91. It was an
unacceptable increase in theft. The numbers were only what
had been caught. He read from a prepared statement.
Co-Chair Foster asked Mr. Temple to send in his written
testimony as well.
12:42:36 PM
Vice-Chair Gara asked Mr. Temple to send the details of the
knife incident. He wanted to contact the Anchorage Police
Department to find out why the person was not arrested.
Mr. Temple asked for Vice-Chair Gara's information.
12:43:54 PM
Representative Grenn had a Fred Meyer in his district.
Recently, the store had closed one of its entrances because
of shoplifting. HE wondered if it was impacting business at
his store and whether it was impacting customer shopping
behavior.
Mr. Temple would try to provide more information.
12:45:36 PM
BUTCH MOORE, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), stated
that his daughter had been murdered, and he helped advocate
for the passage of SB 91. He also stated that he helped to
pass Bree's Law. The governor had authorized the go-ahead
about education in the Anchorage School District. They put
forward that there was no education. He wanted to see her
name incorporated into the new law, because it was not
currently included.
12:50:35 PM
Representative Pruitt asked about Mr. Moore's thought on
the amendment that had passed earlier.
Mr. Moore responded that after it had passed, he had worked
with Harry Crawford. He thought the legislature could do a
lot of good with SB 54. He wanted her name in statute which
would help at the federal level.
12:54:58 PM
BONNIE LILLEY, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
reported that 6 separate shootings had occurred on her
street. She mentioned that every local convenience store
had been robbed. She no longer felt safe to leave her house
at night. She lived in an area where a significant amount
of drug trafficking was occurring. She now barricaded her
door at night in order to hear an intruder ahead of being
able to get out her gun. She thanked the committee for its
time.
1:01:37 PM
SEAN FITZPATRICK, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
stated that the drug climate was already bad. He shared a
story of crime in his community. He stated that law
enforcement could not really doing anything.
1:04:13 PM
LARRY WHITAKER, LICENSED PROFESSIONAL COUNSELOR, KODIAK
(via teleconference), believed the bill was moving in the
right direction, but did not go far enough. He spoke to the
importance of consequences for individuals' actions. He
supported stronger sentencing.
1:05:59 PM
TRACIE RECTOR, SELF, HOUSTON (via teleconference),
opposed SB 54 and supported a repeal of SB 91. She read
from a prepared statement sent to legislators: (FIND THIS
TO INSERT).
1:08:24 PM
OLIVIA FELLERS, SELF, WASILLA (via teleconference), spoke
of a personal experience of having her house broken into.
Some weapons and cash were stolen from her. She thought
crime had become more of a problem She provided examples of
people on drugs and acting strangely in her neighborhood.
She advocated for harsher laws. She opined that criminals
were having their hands slapped but have continued
committing crimes. She indicated one of her children had
moved in with her.
1:10:53 PM
Vice-Chair Gara wondered whether a longer sentence for a
second time offence would be satisfactory.
Ms. Fellers responded affirmatively and encouraged
additional counseling for the offender.
Vice-Chair Gara also mentioned that breaking into someone's
house was a Class C felony and was a jail able offense.
Co-Chair Foster indicated that he would consult with
committee members then come back.
1:12:38 PM
AT EASE
1:13:58 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Foster indicated that the committed would
reconvene at 1:45 PM.
1:14:28 PM
AT EASE
1:47:30 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Foster asked the public to communicate whether or
not they support SB 54.
1:48:22 PM
DON RASMUSSEN, SELF, JUNEAU (via teleconference), testified
against the legislation. He spoke from the perspective as
retired law enforcement. He believed SB 54 and the
previously passed SB 91 were a waste of time. He believed
much time was being spent on protecting the rights of
criminals. He asked about the rights of citizens victimized
by criminals. He provided a scenario about burglarizing
homes. He applauded the efforts and what the bill was
trying to accomplish, but he did not believe it was
working.
1:51:50 PM
SHONDA ERICKSON, SELF, WASILLA (via teleconference),
testified against the bill. She shared that she had been
following SB 54 and was familiar with SB 91. She referred
to amendments to SB 54 passed earlier in the week in the
House Judiciary Committee meeting. the state was not
showing that the victims of the crimes were being
protected. She stated that SB 91 had been a mistake to
begin with. She believed the changes under the bill were
wrong.
Vice-Chair Gara agreed that only getting a ticket for car
theft was not sufficient. He noted that under the bill //
an aggravator was longer. He asked if the changes would
work for her.
Ms. Erickson answered that the needed amendments had not
been passed. She believed recovery was possible, but she
believed the government needed to show more respect for
recovery.
Vice-Chair Gara stated that it would be a conviction for
first offense.
1:56:45 PM
NORIA CLARK, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified against the bill. She opposed the prior passage
of SB 91. She believed SB 54 was putting a band aid on the
problem. She provided detail. She stated that currently the
FBI was doing the job the state should be doing. She found
it very offensive. She found some of the actions under the
bill ridiculous. She implored the committee to get it
together. She stressed that the legislature was wasting the
public's time.
2:01:49 PM
Co-Chair Foster relayed that the committee would also hear
public testimony on Monday evening. He relayed the time was
5:00 to 9:00 pm on Monday.
2:02:35 PM
KAREN KIRKPATRICK, SELF, MEADOW LAKES (via teleconference),
shared that her renter's insurance was increasing due to
more claims made in the region. She was upset because she
was living on a fixed income. She relayed that someone had
tried to break into her unoccupied apartment below her the
previous night. She was upset she was having to pay for the
government's mistakes. She reemphasized making the laws
stricter and stop making plea deals. She thought crime
would diminish. She also noted that the cars being stolen
could be being shipped out of the state.
2:05:53 PM
DEBORAH MCINTYRE, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
spoke in favor of being tougher on crime. She had been a
resident of Anchorage since 1976. She noted she was 33
years sober. She indicated she did not feel safe in her
home. She also noted Fred Meyer locking one of its
entrances. She mentioned hearing the word "security" in
stores. Another testifier had verbalized her feelings. She
mentioned judges releasing criminals early in their
sentences. She continued to testify about not feeling safe
in Anchorage. She also noted that forcing someone into
rehab. She wanted the legislature to provide safety to
Alaska citizens. She thought Representative Pruitt cared
but was unsure about other legislatures.
2:11:07 PM
ROBERT MOORE, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), did not
believe Alaska's penal system was working. He spoke to the
need for consequences to committing crimes. He did not
think criminals would stop without consequences. He wanted
the state to be tougher on crimes. He favored
rehabilitation. He wondered who benefited from SB 91. He
asked if legislators represented citizens or criminals. He
thought people who were being released needed proper tools
to prevent them from returning to crime. He wanted
criminals to be rehabilitated.
2:15:07 PM
GARY MCDONALD, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), spoke
against SB 54 and SB 91. He was disappointed with the
legislature. He suggested using one of the prison facility
as a rehabilitation center. He thanked Representative
Pruitt, Representative Reinbold, and Representative Eastman
for their work.
Co-Chair Foster indicated there was no one online. He
advised that anyone wanting to testify to make sure to sign
up online by 4:30 PM. The committee would stand at ease
until 3:00 PM.
2:17:56 PM
AT EASE
3:02:16 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Foster indicated the committee would continue
hearing public testimony.
3:02:47 PM
DON HABEGER, JUNEAU REENTRY COALITION, JUNEAU, read from
a prepared statement:
"The Juneau Reentry Coalition supports the State's
efforts to implement Smart Justice as defined by the
Alaska Criminal Justice Commission.
We support the implementation of statewide and
community level treatment and services that are
designed to increase the successful return to our
community and decrease recidivism rates.
The coalition supported SB 91.
We recognized that SB 91 was an expansive change to
our criminal justice laws, may require refinements,
and SB 54 is a part of the refinement process.
We ask that during your deliberation on SB 54, you
stay mindful of our Smart Justice precepts, avoid
reverting back to a "lock'em up and throw away the
key" mentality, and continue the application of
community reinvestment into appropriate treatment and
services. The Juneau Reentry Coalition supports SB 54.
Thank you."
3:04:03 PM
Representative Grenn asked Mr. Haberger to share some
success stories with the committee.
Mr. Haberger indicated there were several success stories.
He indicated that approximately 20 people that were at
Lemon Creek that were being helped.
Representative Grenn asked how a repeal of SB 91 would
affect the coalition's efforts.
Mr. Harberger responded that there was an effort to work
with those prior to release.
3:07:06 PM
Representative Guttenberg wondered how the coalition's
program helped to make communities safer.
Mr. Haberger replied that approximately 90 percent of those
incarcerated ended up back into the program, and return to
cycles of criminal behavior. He stated that there was a
hope to connect those who want to change with treatment,
which was a lower cost alternative to incarceration.
Vice-Chair Gara asked that without SB 91 - he wondered
about helping individuals prior to release.
Mr. Haberger relayed that the coalition was volunteer-based
except for his position which was funded through the Alaska
Mental Health Trust Authority.
3:15:23 PM
Vice-Chair Gara understood the idea of providing treatment
in order to have people avoid reincarceration. He queried
the investment in housing, job training, and education.
Mr. Haberger indicated that the coalition worked in all of
the areas Vice-Chair Gara mentioned.
Co-Chair Seaton asked if Mr. Haberger had any estimated of
how many people the coalition dealt with related to those
incarcerated with opioid use disorders.
Mr. Haberger did not have concrete numbers. He stated that
there was a suggestion that up to 80 percent of people
incarcerated had an opioid substance use disorder.
Representative Tilton mentioned being in Anchorage and
hearing testimony that when an individual was incarcerated
did not have access to programs that they would after being
incarcerated.
Mr. Haberger replied that in his experience with the Lemon
Creek Facility was presently trying to find a substance use
counselor.
3:20:33 PM
PAMELA SAMASH, SELF, NENANA (via teleconference), mentioned
having made alternative suggestions. She believed in
thinking outside of the box.
3:24:20 PM
MARIA HASS, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), commented
that the public testimony was not properly noticed. She
argued that crime had risen to unacceptable levels. She
spoke against SB 91. She believed the state was in survival
mode. She suggested that since Alaskan only received half
of their PFDs and the rest was being spent on cameras.
Co-Chair Foster noted there would be another opportunity to
testify on the following Monday from 5:00 PM to 9:00 PM.
3:28:10 PM
NICOLE BORROMEO, ALASKA FEDERATION OF NATIVES, ANCHORAGE
read from a prepared statement.
3:30:18 PM
CHRISTINE FUREY, SELF, KETCHIKAN (via teleconference), felt
that advocate services were imperative for the success of
people coming out of imprisonment. She shared a little
about her personal background as a previous substance
abuser.
3:34:19 PM
Representative Ortiz commended Christine for her testimony.
3:34:41 PM
Representative Grenn noted she had been in long-term
recovery. He wondered how long it took her to get clean and
remain clean.
Ms. Furey responded that she had tried several times to get
sober without success. She stated that she spent 14 years
in active addiction. She stated that she was almost five
years clean.
Representative Grenn asked whether Ms. Furey was in
Southeast Alaska.
Ms. Furey responded that she was primarily in Southeast
Alaska.
3:36:18 PM
EARL LACKEY, SELF, MATSU (via teleconference), expressed
concerns with SB 91. He did not think it was working,
although he appreciated the legislatures efforts. He
provided an example of a dealership being burglarized. He
opined that there were several good parts of SB 91.
However, the petty thefts needed addressing, as there was a
significant amount of theft. He did not believe SB 54 would
provide the answers needed to address the problems. He
thought all of the thefts were atrocious.
3:39:10 PM
Vice-Chair Gara relayed that the thefts Mr. Lackey
mentioned were felony thefts.
Mr. Lackey responded that it would help, but it would not
reduce the number of people in jail. He was uncertain what
the answers should do.
Vice-Chair Gara did not believe Mr. Lackey needed to
apologize.
3:41:15 PM
CHRIS EICHENLAUB, SELF, EAGLE RIVER (via teleconference),
thought SB 91 should be repealed. He thought Alaska had
already been soft on crime prior to SB 91. He did not
believe SB 91 was working. He thought legislators should
return to the baseline. He understood that the idea was to
save money. However, he thought in the long run the state
had not saved any money. He thought SB 91 was meant for
criminal sympathizers. He thanked the committee for hearing
his testimony.
3:45:18 PM
PAUL HASS, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), indicated
there had been an increase in crime since the
implementation of SB 91. He mentioned that he was carrying
anytime he walked his dog. He expressed extreme frustration
and posed the questions.
3:47:17 PM
TOM TOMASI, SELF, BIG LAKE (via teleconference), spoke to
being robbed for about $2000. He reported never seeing
crime as bad as it was currently. He spoke in favor of
repealing SB 91 entirely. He noted feeling very vulnerable
and advocated stiffer penalties. He was unclear about the
answers to the problem but did not want to live in fear
walking down the street. He opined that t SB 91 needed to
be revamped. He thanked the committee for its time.
3:50:00 PM
Vice-Chair Gara stressed that burglaries were jail-able
offenses, and weapons brought a higher sentence. He queried
the solution.
Mr. Tomasi advocated standing together. He advocated making
a hard fence. He suggested modeling Alaska jails like jails
in Puerto Rico.
3:52:12 PM
CHRIS HODEL, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
advocated for a full repeal of SB 91. He suggested that the
legislature worked a second bill the 9discouraged certain
crimes. The crime in Anchorage had gotten ridiculous. He
wanted the punishment worthwhile. He did not fee
legislators were listening to the public. He has had enough
of the crime.
3:54:33 PM
MICHAEL JEFFREY, SELF, BARROW (via teleconference), lived
in Barrow for 40 years and had worked for the court system.
He provided information on his professional background. He
supported SB 54, an elements-based approach. He thought the
cause of the increase in crime was not due to SB 91. He
thought it was attributed to other factors.
Co-Chair Foster indicated that members of the public
wanting to testify needed to be signed up by 4:30 PM. The
committee would stand at ease until then.
3:57:55 PM
AT EASE
4:32:30 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Foster called the meeting back to order and
proceeded with public testimony.
4:32:59 PM
BARBARA GREENE, SELF, WASILLA (via teleconference), spoke
in favor of repealing SB 91. She shared personal beliefs
about crime. She advocated focusing on public safety. She
did not believe 5 days was enough to make minor changes to
SB 91.
4:37:05 PM
DIANE SCHENKER, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
supported a full repeal of SB 91. She asked if members knew
how long it took to analyze finger prints. She wondered if
there were concerns about the amount of money was being
spent. She encouraged members to ask themselves her
questions. She also asked about third-party custodians. She
asked about the failure rate of third party custodians. She
did not believe a bill that was 125 pages was a good bill.
4:42:49 PM
Representative Tilton thanked the public for taking the
time to provide their testimony. She expressed concerns
about the administration having left around noon,
especially since the governor called the special session.
She thanked the public and the other members of the
committee for being at the meeting.
Co-Chair Foster announced that amendments were due to the
legislative legal services no later than Tuesday, October
31, 2017 at 1:00 PM. Amendments were due to his office by
5:00 PM on Wednesday, November 1, 2017.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Coalition letter for SB54.pdf |
HFIN 10/28/2017 10:00:00 AM |
SB 54 |
| HFIN AK Criminal Justic Comm Presentation.pdf |
HFIN 10/28/2017 10:00:00 AM |
SB 54 |
| Letter from Leg Leaders re benchmarks 9 8 2015.pdf |
HFIN 10/28/2017 10:00:00 AM |
SB 54 |
| SB 54 - Presentation ver T 10.27.17.pdf |
HFIN 10/28/2017 10:00:00 AM |
SB 54 |
| SB 54 - Sectional Summary ver T 10.27.2017.pdf |
HFIN 10/28/2017 10:00:00 AM |
SB 54 |
| SB 54 - Sponsor Statement ver T 10.27.2017.pdf |
HFIN 10/28/2017 10:00:00 AM |
SB 54 |
| SB54 ver T Leg Legal Memo 10.27.17.pdf |
HFIN 10/28/2017 10:00:00 AM |
SB 54 |