Legislature(2017 - 2018)HOUSE FINANCE 519
10/30/2017 05:00 PM 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 | |
| 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."
5:03:05 PM
^PUBLIC TESTIMONY: STATEWIDE
5:05:01 PM
ROBERT COGHILL, ADVISORY BOARD ON ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE,
JUNEAU, testified in support of the legislation. He shared
information about his professional background. He detailed
that the advisory board was an enthusiastic supporter of SB
91 [criminal justice reform legislation that passed in
2016]. He underscored that treatment worked and there were
opportunities for treatment with criminal justice reform.
He highlighted that 40 percent of individuals incarcerated
in Alaska were beneficiaries of the Alaska Mental Health
Trust Authority (AMHTA). He stated the individuals needed
treatment and there were things in place to help get better
and more treatment. He discussed that the decision to
offend was not like buying a car or a home; it was a matter
of impulse and of conditions people were in. He explained
that if the state could provide treatment to the
individuals, offences would be less likely. He did not
believe it was wise to dismantle the criminal justice
reform legislation [SB 91] before giving it a chance to
work.
DARRYL ANDERS, SELF, JUNEAU, testified in support of the
legislation. He shared a story about his past personal
experience as a felon and drug addict. He provided detail
about his life and past incarceration. He stated that the
war on drugs had been a failure. He stressed that
incarceration for addicts was the wrong approach. He shared
that when someone was incarcerated for a long time, the
ripple effect went far and wide. The individuals lost any
stability they may have had and were separated from friends
and family, with no ability to contribute to society. He
underscored that the cost was incredible. He had been
sentenced to 10 years on his third drug offence. He relayed
that help had not been available. He emphasized the
importance of giving SB 91 a chance to work. He believed it
was necessary to look at treatment options, classes, and
mental health. He communicated that addicts were not always
capable of making rational and futurist decisions. He spoke
to the devastating impacts of drug addiction on lives and
families. He stated that until a person walked in the shoes
of an addict, the situation was difficult to understand. He
shared that he had ultimately received treatment and help
and had been sober for 4.5 years. He underscored the
astronomical cost of incarceration and that incarceration
only made the problem worse. He suggested the idea of
setting up a fund that petty thieves could pay into to
reimburse the community, rather than incarcerating
individuals for petty crimes. He reasoned that
incarceration was inevitable if a person committed a crime
more than two or three times.
Representative Guttenberg thanked Mr. Anders for
testifying.
Representative Tilton thanked Mr. Anders and referred to
his testimony about being sober for 4.5 years. She asked
for detail about the turning point for him.
Mr. Anders replied that he had struggled with addiction his
entire life. He shared that his turning point was taking a
2.5-year theology course while incarcerated. He had also
received treatment and had participated in a support group.
Prior to that the war on drugs had been a revolving door
resulting in getting in and out of prison. He stressed the
importance of addressing the situation, especially for
young users. He believed putting young users through
courses and teaching them morals, basic life skills, and
how to feel good about themselves, would be beneficial. He
detailed that many individuals he had encountered in prison
had been psychologically or mentally abused. He noted that
under SB 91 when an individual went to jail they were
assessed and evaluated to determine what they needed and
what they were lacking in terms of education or other. He
thought more individual attention was needed in prison -
typically people were treated as a group.
5:14:43 PM
Co-Chair Foster noted that Representative Pruitt had joined
the meeting.
Representative Wilson asked if Mr. Anders had received
treatment in prison.
Mr. Anders replied in the affirmative. He had received two
treatment programs. One had been by choice and the other
had been part of his federal management plan. He detailed
that the program laid out a format of things the individual
should accomplish depending on their crime and history. The
items could include anger management, criminal aptitude
tests, and other. He had graduated from an Akeela House
program that had been offered in the prison; however, he
did not believe the organization had a contract with the
prison any longer. He stressed that there was currently no
treatment in prison. There was a small 12-step program at
Wildwood and he was uncertain there was anything at Lemon
Creek. When he had been at Lemon Creek there had been a 12-
week class that was not intense enough. He thought current
plans were to offer more treatment programs in communities.
He believed having programs in prisons was not a bad idea.
He thought aptitude tests were necessary for each
individual. He emphasized that prisoners were manipulative.
He had thought about the best way to use funds on programs
to reduce recidivism and failure. He stressed that someone
had to want to change.
5:18:31 PM
KARA NELSON, SELF, JUNEAU, spoke in support of the bill.
She thanked the committee for the opportunity to testify.
She thanked the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission and the
governor for their work on the subject. She was a
recovering substance user and she had been incarcerated.
She was currently the director of the Haven House in Juneau
and had been sober since 2011. She detailed that Haven
House was a peer-led, faith-based recovery residence for
women coming home after incarceration. She shared her
personal story. She shared that she had three children who
also had to walk her path. She detailed that substance use
and mental health disorders had been criminalized and
homelessness and poverty went together. She opined that
instead of elevating the supports in communities, the state
was expecting the Department of Corrections to take care of
all the community supports that should be offered
elsewhere. She pointed out that she had seen a shift in the
discussions regarding criminal justice reform. She
referenced the current addiction epidemic and noted there
were more treatment beds and reentry services, although
they were not financed as they should be. She had seen
institutions across the state and was working to be a
solution. She was not the exception, she had been given
exceptional opportunities. She currently worked to walk
hundreds of Alaskans through the process. She emphasized
the importance of being vigilant.
Ms. Nelson spoke to the public condemnation, which had been
heavy recently. She explained that individuals with
addiction or criminal backgrounds felt the condemnation
daily. She had seen comments by the public on legislators'
social media outlets that it was acceptable to kill people
with criminal backgrounds. She expounded that there was no
recourse to tell people that it was not right to make those
statements. She shared that as a leader in the community
she did not make decisions based on fear. She detailed the
importance of considering evidence and being open minded.
She asked the committee to stay the course and relayed
there were many people who were supportive of SB 91 and SB
54 who were afraid to speak out. She stressed that mass
incarceration did not make communities safer. She asked if
people felt safer. She emphatically answered no. She
encouraged smart justice. She suggested putting a formerly
incarcerated person on the commission.
Vice-Chair Gara apologized for over-the-top comments that
had been made by many individuals, perhaps on many sides.
Ms. Nelson answered, "we've walked through a lot, we're not
going to stop with that," but it was something to keep in
mind.
5:24:54 PM
CARL BERGER, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), shared
information about his life in Alaska. He noted there had
been a federal declaration regarding the opioid epidemic;
there had also been a declaration by the state for some
time. He was not very optimistic - there was much talk
about doing things to help people in need, yet services had
been cut back severely. It appeared that many legislators
were satisfied with cutting the budget in a general way and
capping the Permanent Fund. He stated that it was time to
consider having a fiscal plan and to introduce new state
revenues. He relayed that he was happy to pay a tax. He
spoke to issues not included in the bill. He hoped the
legislature would come up with a plan.
Co-Chair Foster appreciated the remarks.
5:29:19 PM
ROBIN SMITH, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
supported passage of the bill. She was concerned about the
effort to repeal SB 91. She stated that property crime had
begun increasing in 2011, long before the passage of SB 91.
She thought part of the frustration was likely due to the
drop in the police force; the problem was being rectified
under the current mayor. She pointed to a 25 percent
reduction in prosecutors, resulting in delayed trials. She
spoke to problems that were being rectified under the
current mayor. She stressed that the opioid epidemic was
making the crime problem worse. She stated that addicts
were willing to be arrested, jailed, or worse, to gain
access to drugs. She emphasized the need for increased
access to mental health and drug treatment. She believed it
was unfortunate that people were connecting the passage of
SB 91 with increased crime. She believed it was like
connecting vaccinations with autism. She believed SB 54
would help correct some of the problems with SB 91.
5:31:57 PM
LAURA BONNER, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), spoke
in support of SB 54. She stated that SB 91 had not caused
the state's crime problem and should not be repealed. She
stated that SB 54 could fix the unintended consequences of
SB 91. She supported fixes regarding sexual assault and
murder. She wanted to reinstitute felony jail time for
felony shoplifting and theft. She believed judicial
discretion should be restored. She knew that much of SB 91
had yet to be implemented. She emphasized that communities
were having trouble funding law enforcement due to cuts.
She believed new revenue would be required to keep Alaskans
safe.
5:34:20 PM
DONALD MCLEAN, SELF, MAT-SU (via teleconference), shared
that he was a practicing dentist in Mat-Su. He had seen
numerous changes in the community including an increase in
crime. He was not claiming that the passage of SB 91 had
increased crime; however, the community rated the highest
in crime. He stated that many people were found to be
committing crimes who were minimally punished, which he did
not believe was acceptable. He shared a story about an
employee being physically accosted the previous week
outside the dental office. He believed the reason the
crimes were being committed was related to the procurement
of drugs - but that was not a reason to not punish people
for crimes. He believed that minimally the state should
look at drug testing people on welfare. He understood that
did not sound right, but he thought people were getting a
vacation at the state's expense. He emphasized the
seriousness of the issues. He stated that Alaska had become
a haven for criminals.
5:37:45 PM
STEVE ST. CLAIR, SELF, MAT-SU (via teleconference),
testified against SB 54. He believed the bill was opposed
at a three to one ratio. He observed that most individuals
in support of the bill had a financial interest in its
passage. He opined that SB 54 and SB 91 had nothing to do
with public safety and everything to do with saving money.
He stressed that public safety needed to be the number one
priority. He stated that the bill's intent was contrary to
the goal of SB 91. He did not believe the two bills could
coexist. He spoke about the goal of emptying prisons to
reduce costs. He stated that testimony by the Juneau
Reentry Coalition there were no success stories or
graduates. He stated that the bill was a miniscule step in
fixing problems with SB 91. He wanted to see SB 91
repealed.
5:40:21 PM
ABBY ST. CLAIR, SELF, MAT-SU (via teleconference), spoke
against SB 54. She stressed that something had to be done
to improve public safety. She underscored that many
Alaskans feared for their lives when gardening and grocery
shopping. She stated it should not be the norm to carry [a
gun], but it had become the reality for many. She
understood that an increase in crime was not caused by SB
91. She believed SB 91 had been created to reduce costs and
prison populations, not to increase public safety. She
stated that SB 91 had addressed some important issues
(community programs, treatment, and victim services), but
it had taken punishment away and let criminals walk. She
believed much of the problem stemmed from budget cuts,
resulting in a lack in law enforcement. She recommended
putting more money into law enforcement. She urged the
committee to put residents' safety number one and to repeal
SB 91.
5:42:35 PM
TROY JARVIS, ALASKA AUTO DEALERS ASSOCIATION, LITHIA
AUTOMOTIVE, ALASKA, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
supported the legislation. He stressed that dealership
break ins and auto thefts had quadrupled in the past year.
He stressed that his stores had been broken into 10 to 15
times in the past two years. He shared that police officers
were not taking action because they did not feel empowered
to make a difference. Officers took time to arrest people
who ended up back on the streets the next day, committing
the same crimes. Police needed the resource of jail time to
get people off the streets. He stressed the costs he had
put into the dealerships related to security. He supported
using jail time as a resource to get people off the streets
who were committing crimes. He agreed the individuals
addicted to drugs needed treatment. He supported adding
more detectives to investigate crimes - the current
detectives were consumed with looking into murders and
other more severe crimes. He agreed with the bill.
5:47:53 PM
LYNETTE CLARK, SELF, FOX (via teleconference), supported
the repeal of SB 91. She believed SB 54 and the bones of SB
91 should be taken back to other committees. She supported
adjourning special session and holding hearings in
communities on the bill. She believed that the community
needed to speak face-to-face with law enforcement. She
thought the two bills could be incorporated. She believed
some of the things in SB 54 could be done away with. She
was tired of giving testimony and being ignored.
5:49:44 PM
RAINA COSTELLO, SELF, JUNEAU (via teleconference),
testified in support of SB 54 and SB 91. She shared that
five years earlier she had been labeled as an addict who
could not be rehabilitated. She had now been clean and
sober for close to five years. Her success was due to
treatment and support through treatment. She underscored
that she was a productive member of the community and
represented a success story. She believed people would be
lost if something was not done - they needed to get the
help they needed. She did not believe the bill was perfect,
but nothing began perfect. She believed it needed time to
work. She understood that crime was on the rise, but she
stressed the importance of addressing the drug epidemic.
She had been to jail and shared that going to jail had
never done anything for her but introduce her to drug
dealers and other negative aspects. She shared information
about her personal success story after getting clean. She
believed SB 91 needed more time and some adjustments.
5:53:28 PM
CHRISTINE FUREY, SELF, KETCHIKAN, testified in support of
the bill. She was a recovering addict and had been an
addict from the age of 13 to 27. She shared that she had
been homeless with two small children. She shared her
personal story about addiction. She had realized she had to
make a change. She had not had the support some others had,
but she had learned to be strong. She stressed that
addiction was ugly, but recovery was possible. She
underscored the strength of individuals who had succeeded
over addiction. She did not support doing away with SB 91.
She supported making the fixes in SB 54.
Representative Guttenberg thanked the testifier.
5:57:37 PM
DENNI R. STARR, SELF, JUNEAU, spoke in favor of the bill.
She shared her personal story about her time in jail. She
had done education and treatment. She did treatment on her
own and one treatment that had been required. She had
gained confidence from the program and had gained support
from others. She stated that drugs would always be
available. She had been full of despair at the start of her
prison time. She had allowed herself to change and to
discover who she was. SB 91 had granted her parole. She
stated that positivity made her want to do better. She
spoke to her support at Haven House. She saw herself as a
success story. She worked for the Department of
Corrections. She stressed that SB 91 worked. She stated
that encouraging others went a long way. She underscored
that it was possible to be a success.
6:01:47 PM
Co-Chair Foster recognized Representative Ivy Sponholz in
the room.
6:02:03 PM
CHARLES HIGH, SELF, JUNEAU, testified in support of the
bill. He shared his personal story about abuse, time in
prison, and drug abuse. He stressed that SB 91 had helped
him seek treatment and for the first time in his life he
had worked to be a part of the community. He shared
information about suicide attempts in the past year. He did
not support people not receiving consequences for their
behavior. He was now a father. He stated that the prison
system was punitive and had been for a long time. He
supported SB 54 and maintaining money for treatment
programs. He stated that crime rates and problems with
addiction would continue to rise if treatment was not
provided. He provided more detail about his personal life.
6:05:23 PM
Representative Grenn thanked Mr. High for his testimony. He
asked if Mr. High had been incarcerated in Alaska. Mr. High
answered in the affirmative.
Representative Grenn asked if Mr. High believed the prison
system was too soft in Alaska. Mr. High replied a couple of
his best friends were correctional officers. He stressed
the prison system was an environment where people were not
learning and were feeding on negativity. He asked for
clarity on the question.
Representative Grenn rephrased his question and asked if it
was too comfortable.
Mr. High answered in the negative. He stated that it had
been comfortable in the early 1990s, but it was not any
longer. He stressed that prison was not a fun environment.
He stated there was no positive influence. People were
miserable. Some of the happiest people he had seen in
prison were there for life with no opportunity for parole.
6:07:37 PM
CHARLES MCKEE, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified against SB 54 and SB 91. He referenced past
events in Washington, D.C. dating back to 1933. He stated
that all crimes were commercial and there were people in
the system who were blaming the system. He shared his
personal story with a property claim against him. He had
feared for his life; therefore, he had plead no contest. He
stressed that people were dying in incarceration. He
discussed the definition of person in Alaska. He spoke of
white collar crime.
6:11:33 PM
DOUG WHITE, SELF/ACCESS ALASKA, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), spoke in strong support of SB 54. He had
spent 10 years as a social worker in Alaska. He had
provided mental health and substance abuse treatment for
over 10 years on contract. He provided additional
background information. He indicated addiction was an
illness rather than a crime. He did not believe enough time
had passed since the passage of SB 91. He urged the
legislature to do further research on justice reform. He
thanked the committee for its time.
6:14:36 PM
TARA RICH, ACLU OF ALASKA, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
spoke in support of SB 54. She stressed that criminal
justice reform had passed at a time when an opioid crisis
was exploding in the state. Additionally, the state was
experiencing the worst economic recession in many decades.
She believed the combined issues had driven increases or
the perception of increases in theft crimes. She argued
adequate public safety funding, law enforcement for rural
areas, and fully funding treatment systems. She stated that
SB 91 had been designed to reduce crime and increase public
safety, while safely making overdue changes to the broken
criminal justice system. She underscored that building more
prisons did not reduce crime. She encouraged the swift
passage of SB 54 and appropriate funding levels for public
safety.
Co-Chair Foster supplied the call-in number.
6:18:38 PM
JOE SCHLANGER, SELF, MAT-SU (via teleconference), discussed
the lack of troopers in the Mat-Su Valley. He wondered when
the region would get more troopers to handle the crime
problem. He wondered if anyone had contemplated a boot camp
for 18 to 25-year-olds. He believed it would teach
discipline and could include a work program and addiction
treatment. He suggested instead of doing a year or two in
prison a person could do six months in a boot camp. He
supported a transitional program for individuals leaving
prison.
Co-Chair Foster relayed that the question would be passed
along to the commissioner of Department of Public Safety
(DPS) and he asked the testifier to contact his office.
Vice-Chair Gara relayed that DPS Commissioner Walt Monegan
had testified about the importance of providing a more
competitive salary for troopers. There was currently a
legislative debate on whether to reinstate the pension
system to keep troopers.
Co-Chair Foster pointed to the existence of the Alaska
Military Youth Academy in Southcentral Alaska.
6:21:42 PM
SAMANTHA ABERNATHY, SELF, JUNEAU (via teleconference),
testified in support of the bill. She had been a substance
addiction treatment provider for many years. She spoke in
support of treatment programs. She spoke to benefits of SB
91, including the option of a vehicle ignition device and
treatment for individuals with felony DUIs who were now
working and contributing to the community. She believed
that SB 91 had come out and services had not been
available. She stated that things were moving in that
direction now. She relayed that Juneau was lacking in
emergency services; the services were needed to help people
get help with addiction. She believed it would dramatically
help with property crimes, which she thought were a result
of addiction.
6:24:46 PM
Co-Chair Foster provided the House Finance Committee email
address for testifiers. He provided the call-in number.
JOHNNY MURDOCK, SELF, WASILLA (via teleconference),
believed SB 91 had been formed with good intent, but he
believed law enforcement, victims rights, and prosecutors
had been excluded from the process. He referenced a letter
to Senator John Coghill from a Juneau law office stating
that SB 91 was the most liberal, pro-criminal bill in all
50 states. He remarked there was currently a disaster as a
result of the bill. He stressed that treatment services
(rehabilitation and mental health services) had been
underfunded in Alaska for 25 years. He hoped they would be
funded and implemented. He did not support the
reclassifying of felonies and misdemeanors. He thought it
was ludicrous. He agreed with providing treatment, rehab,
and mental health services; however, he did not support
discounting criminals. He stated that thousands of victims
were being shafted by the state. He specified that troopers
in Anchorage were faced with picking and choosing the
crimes to respond to. He gave the legislature an "F" grade.
6:29:42 PM
BILLY CHARLES, SELF, EMMONAK (via teleconference),
testified in support of SB 54 and SB 91. He shared
information about his professional background. He believed
a reform was needed that had not occurred for a long time.
He saw prisoners transported from his community to the hub
community. He spoke to the high cost of transporting
prisoners. He stated there was an opportunity to build a
support system inside communities for people coming out of
jail. He explained that research showed treatment worked.
He believed reform had been a long time coming.
6:32:35 PM
CASEY DENADELL, SELF, JUNEAU (via teleconference),
testified in support of SB 54 and SB 91. She shared that
she is a wife, mother of four, and a property owner. She
agreed there was an opioid crisis, which was also a public
health crisis. She believed there was a certain amount of
jail time people should be doing, but it was not something
the state should be throwing people in prison for. She
reiterated that it was a public health crisis. She detailed
that she was a person in long-term recovery. She stressed
that without SB 91 there would be many more people dying.
She spoke to the need for more money for treatment programs
and support systems for individuals leaving prison. She
stated that treatment services had unfortunately been cut
from SB 91. She thanked the committee for its time. She
stated that property owners appreciated it.
6:35:30 PM
TALIA EAMES, COORDINATOR, CENTRAL COUNCIL TLINGIT AND HAIDA
INDIAN TRIBES OF ALASKA, JUNEAU, testified as a 10-year Air
Force veteran. She mentioned success stories she had
collected over the years. She supported SB 91. She stressed
that for too long the state had tried to use incarceration
as a solution. She shared that the reentry program in
Juneau had been forced to close its doors recently due to a
lack in grant funding. She stressed that the measures of SB
91 were backed by research. She challenged the committee -
she had heard much misinformation during testimony - to
explain the bills to their constituents. She stressed that
it was unfair to blame the bills for crime that had begun
long before the passage of SB 91. She underscored the need
for expanded treatment options. She did not have a monetary
interest in the bill. She stated that the individuals
supporting the bills did it because they cared about the
people in the community. She asked the legislature to stay
true to the intent of SB 91 and to refrain from making
changes that were not based on evidence.
6:39:23 PM
Vice-Chair Gara agreed that she had a right to be offended
by the comment and based on her background she could be
making more money.
6:39:57 PM
LINDSAY TERRY, SELF, JUNEAU, shared personal information.
He shared that he had been raised by an abusive person who
had taught him that being a man included being violent. He
was a success story. He had been in and out of prison since
the age of 14. During his last stint in prison he had been
given an option of treatment and early parole. He had
participated in a long and intensive treatment program. He
had learned much about himself and had come out of prison
to a supportive family. He was now a foreman of the company
he worked for and was a father. He was taking his daughter
to Disney World in a week. He was extremely grateful he had
the opportunity to participate in a treatment program.
6:42:46 PM
HALEY HIGH, SELF, JUNEAU, spoke in support of the bill. She
shared her personal story with drug use and incarceration.
She had been provided an opportunity for treatment. She
knew that many people had not been so fortunate due to a
lack in state programs for treatment. She had tried to get
into inpatient treatment for at least five months. She was
a face of why recovery worked. There were many ways that
people would say their lives were screwed up by SB 91. She
encouraged the committee to give the bill the time it
needed to work. She encouraged promoting positive change.
6:45:10 PM
JEANNE GERHARDT-CYRUS, SELF, KIANA (via teleconference),
supported SB 91 and did not want to throw it out. She
stated that change was not easy or quick. She considered
what the goal should be. She believed the bill was a step
to making progress. She thanked the individuals who had
achieved sobriety and freedom from addiction. She discussed
that jails housed many people who were mental health
beneficiaries - people with FAS, individuals who
experienced trauma, brain injuries, and other disabilities.
She emphasized that punishing people for having a
disability did not help. She spoke for the need for
treatment services, employment, food, and other. She
believed that providing benefits would help people to be
successful and would help the next generation become
productive members of society. She shared a personal story
of a person who had been in and out of jail for 10 years.
She stressed the need for access to treatment and support.
She worked with a youth group and saw youth at a young age
who were excluded from opportunities. She wanted people to
have opportunity.
6:50:27 PM
JANET MCCABE, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified in support of the bill. She detailed that when SB
91 had passed in 2016, the legislature had committed to a
bill to correct problems that had been identified. She
spoke to evidence-based information SB 91 had been based
on. She supported amending the bill with SB 54. She did not
want the state to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
She believed the bill would help fix issues with the SB 91
and would save costs. She believed the fixes in SB 54 would
mean Alaska could continue to hold people accountable for
their crimes, reduce unnecessary incarceration, and save
costs. She acknowledged that future amendments may be
needed, which was not uncommon. She shared that the bill
had a way to go to see its impact. She specified that Texas
had adopted the same approach and had seen reduction in
crime and cost. She stated it was best to be smart on
crime, not merely tough on crime.
6:52:56 PM
NELLY PEREZ, SELF/ALASKA NATIVE JUSTICE CENTER, ANCHORAGE
(via teleconference), testified in support of SB 91. She
was evidence that it was possible to change. She was a
successful citizen in the community. She worked with
individuals leaving the criminal justice system who had
nothing to return to. She believed solutions to the problem
were needed. She discussed a lack of housing for
individuals leaving prison. She wanted to see the community
working together. She wanted to ensure the community became
one. She did not want the community to be divided. She
believed that treatment worked and giving people a chance
to succeed and change worked. She agreed that incarceration
worked to some extent, but long sentences did not.
6:55:30 PM
MARY GEDDES, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified in support of the legislation. She remarked that
crime rates fluctuated, but the recidivism rate was
extremely high at two-thirds. She stressed it was about
time for Alaskans to look at what had worked elsewhere to
reduce crime. She stated that the legislature had given
corrections and law enforcement direction. She stressed the
importance of giving time for the agencies to do their job
and to allow the bill to work. She emphasized the need for
treatment and law enforcement funding. She implored the
committee to fix SB 91 with SB 54 and to provide funding.
She stated that public safety required programs as well as
police and prosecution. She had provided written testimony
as well.
6:58:50 PM
DEVON URQUHART, ANCHORAGE REENTRY COALITION, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), spoke in support of the bill. She was a
program coordinator. She explained that when there was a
problem - she connected community partners. She discussed
the challenge. She did not support discussion about the
repeal of SB 91. She stressed the reform efforts needed to
connect individuals with their families, increasing
partnerships, connecting returning citizens to jobs, with
housing, and to become productive members of society. She
stressed the importance of increased access to treatment
services. She supported pretrial services funding. She
wanted to continue to help returning citizens find housing
and be connected.
7:01:29 PM
MICHAEL POWELL, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified in support of the bill. He found the
misinformation about the bills upsetting. He was doing his
best to figure out what was going on with Alaska's current
crime rates. He spoke about the state's current recession.
He pointed out that North Dakota had been experiencing a
similar crime rate. He shared that Texas had experienced
the opposite. He believed there was too much evidence that
SB 91 had nothing to do with the increased crime rate and
could in fact reduce crime if allowed to work over time. He
noted that law enforcement and prosecutors were too few in
the state.
7:04:53 PM
MICHAEL ALBERTSON, SELF, NORTH POLE (via teleconference),
spoke in strong support of SB 91. He supported SB 54 that
fixed some items he believed needed to be fixed; he
believed it also pertained to conditions of release and
alcoholism. He did not believe in adding jail time on for
an alcoholic having a drink was counterproductive. He
believed the state's biggest problem had always been
alcoholism. He elaborated that companies benefit from the
sale of alcohol. He thought there should be much more
oversight on the amount of alcohol being served. He
believed it was necessary to redefine what was considered
criminal. He was not claiming there should be no
repercussions for behavior. He pointed out that Wells Fargo
had defrauded millions of customers, but he did not believe
the company had served any jail time. He remarked there had
been a couple of legislators who had done illegal things
and had not served time. He suggested involving some
criminals when considering like legislation. He testified
in support of funding for treatment.
7:09:41 PM
Co-Chair Foster acknowledged Representative Justin Parish
in the room. He provided the email address and call in
numbers.
7:10:50 PM
VICKI WALLNER, STOP VALLEY THIEVES, PALMER (via
teleconference), spoke against the bill. She shared that
she had been in recovery for 27 years and had been a victim
advocate since 2013 when she had started Stop Valley
Thieves. She provided detail about her personal experience.
She believed the system had been and was broken. She
thought SB 91 had worsened the problem due to the way it
had been implemented and many of the changes it made. She
stressed that she had studied SB 91 thoroughly and had
testified at almost every opportunity. She referred to
studies from the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission and
stressed there was a huge disconnect between the studies
and the state's reality. She discussed that Alaska had a
unified prison system. She did not believe it was possible
to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse. She stated that lack
of incarceration had emboldened prisoners. She remarked
that other states had done criminal reform, but they had
put treatment first. She stressed that Alaska had not done
that. She was not against treatment, but she believed SB 91
was far too broken to fix with SB 54.
7:17:02 PM
Co-Chair Foster shared the House Finance Committee email
address.
7:17:29 PM
MICHAEL STARR, SELF, JUNEAU, spoke in support of the bill.
He was against the repeal of SB 91. He stressed the time it
took for law to go into effect; it had only been a little
over a year. He was evidence of SB 91 helping people. He
was about to plead guilty to his fifth felony and he was 26
years of age. He discussed the doors SB 91 had opened with
probation officers. Avenues had opened to him that had not
been available in the past. He would be behind bars without
another option if it were not for SB 91. He was a part of
the therapeutic court program. He did not want the bill to
go away without being allowed to go into effect.
7:20:01 PM
KAREN JENKINS, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), shared
that she is a property owner and worked for DOC Hiland
Mountain Correctional Center as an education coordinator.
She was speaking on behalf of herself. Since the passage of
SB 91 she had experienced lower DED completion rates and
the inability to fulfill vocational education classes due
to the length of stay. There was currently no treatment at
the facility, but if there was, there would still be an
issue of women unable to complete a six-month or 30-day
program due to their length of stay. She had witnessed
vocational programs being cut. She mentioned that an
Anchorage needles/syringe program went through 50,000 to
60,000 needles per month. She stressed that heroin and gang
issues were on the rise. She underscored the need to
increase safety in communities and provide programs in and
outside correctional facilities.
7:22:24 PM
Co-Chair Foster provided the call-in number to testify. He
recognized Representative David Eastman in the audience.
7:22:59 PM
NICHOLE GILLER, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
believed SB 91 could be a good thing, but she believed it
needed to be adjusted. She shared her personal
incarceration story and her success. She had been sentenced
to 15 years for armed robbery. She had felt her life had
been over, but individuals had supported her at Hiland
Correctional Center. She was not in support of mass
incarceration; however, she believed there should be a
consequence to pay if a crime was committed. She shared
that her home had recently been broken into, but there was
nothing the police could do. She believed whoever had
broken in was struggling with addiction and were unable to
get help. She stressed that the catch and release jail
system did not give enough time to help anyone. She had
taken advantage of the education program while in prison.
She was successful in the construction field at present.
She was a recovering addict. She stressed the importance of
treatment. She thought the intent of SB 91 had been to
focus on rehabilitation versus mass incarceration, but she
did not see that actually happening. She stressed that the
good programs responsible for helping people were being
cut.
7:26:27 PM
Vice-Chair Gara recommended contacting law enforcement
about someone breaking into her house. He stated it was a
jailable offence for a first time offender.
7:27:11 PM
SARAH JO THEIS, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified in support of the bill. She shared her personal
story with incarceration in Texas. She had never been
confronted by staff and her peers about her actions until
she was incarcerated in Hiland Mountain Correctional Center
and entered the Residential Substance Abuse Treatment
program. She noted the transformation she had experienced
in the program had been intense. She had gained tools she
needed and had gone to a treatment program when released
from jail. She had been able to become a person she never
imagined herself to be. She reminded everyone that the
women were daughters, mothers, and sisters. She had
recently been invited to Hiland for the second year in a
row and had observed large gaps in the health needed in the
facility. She shared that she would love to continue being
a voice for women at the facility.
7:30:17 PM
LEE BREINIG, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), spoke in
favor of the bill. He shared his personal story with
recovery. He had made mistakes in his past and had to pay
the price for them. He had to fight hard every day to move
forward. He pointed to Portugal that in the past had the
highest rate of overdose. The country had changed things
around and had provided treatment. He knew that treatment
worked. He had graduated from college and was now serving
on the statewide council for drug abuse. He stated the
issue was multifaceted; crime rates had been rising in
Alaska for decades. He worked at a nonprofit serving mental
health beneficiaries. He stressed that addiction was not a
crime, it was a mental health disorder. He did not support
to continue locking people up for having a brain disorder.
7:33:47 PM
BRUCE SCHULTE, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), stated
that SB 91 intended to direct tax revenue from the legal
marijuana industry to treatment programs. He thought it was
a part of the bill that was not well known. He urged the
legislature to track the money coming in and ensure it was
put to good use. He believed it was a suitable use for the
funds. He stated that SB 91 was not all bad; however,
Anchorage was currently under siege. He had previously
lived in Los Angeles and had never had as many friends
armed as he did in Anchorage. He continued that the average
citizen was feeling beleaguered - some of the problem was
due to drug addiction and part of it was due to people
looking to make easy money. He asked the legislature not to
forget the average citizen who would like there to be some
applicable laws when they were victimized.
7:36:57 PM
MATT STEELE, SELF, WASILLA (via teleconference), spoke
against SB 91. He spoke about theft in the area. He
believed most of the testimony had been from offenders or
individuals involved with the employment of rehabilitating
offenders. He spoke about theft in the area. He shared
personal experiences related to theft from his mailbox. He
had empathy for individuals addicted to drugs, but things
were getting worse and he was just a law-abiding citizen
trying to live his life. He stated that the legislature was
not looking out for law abiding citizens. He supported
repealing the legislation.
7:38:42 PM
DAVID NEES, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), was
unsupportive of SB 54 due to a number of flaws. He believed
pretrial diversions for first-time offenders needed to be
included. Statistics showed that first time offenders
generally had a first and last contact with the justice
system and it was their record afterwards that put up
barriers if the person was convicted. He stated that being
entered into the system prevented convicted felons from
entering a number of occupations in Alaska. The bill had no
lowering of the barriers. He stated that the bill did not
deal with people with substance and alcohol problems - he
believed there needed to be a diversion for the issue
related to mental health. He believed Alaska's correctional
facilities operated as the biggest mental hospitals in the
state. He highlighted that Anchorage had half of the
population but did not have half of the state's
prosecutors. He spoke about the resulting bottle neck in
cases. He stated that the people of Anchorage were begging
the legislature to do something.
7:42:12 PM
NICOLE MCCABE, SELF, JUNEAU (via teleconference), spoke in
support of SB 91. She relayed she had been in recovery for
10 years. She was a parent, a grandparent, and foster
parent. When she had been an active addict there had not
been resources to get the help she needed. She had left the
state to find better resources and treatment to get better.
She had been speaking to her children about the current
crisis. She stated that a lack of resources was putting
people where they were. She provided a comparison and
discussed the need to have time to work out the glitches in
the bill. She believed it was currently the information
gathering stage to determine what was working and what was
not. She believed taking SB 91 away would hurt the
community and the state. She supported treatment and
counseling services.
7:45:39 PM
CATHY BERBANSKE, SELF, HAINES (via teleconference),
supported SB 91 and believed time needed to be provided for
the bill to work. She shared that she is the mother of
several addicts. She spoke to the need for accessible
treatment. She supported treatment services in urban and
rural areas. She did not believe putting addicts back in
jail did anyone any good. She realized more work was needed
on SB 91, but she would hate to see it eliminated.
7:48:08 PM
STEVEN WRIGHT, SELF, WASILLA (via teleconference), spoke
against the bill. He relayed he was running for lieutenant
governor. He was concerned about the crime rate that had
increased significantly. He stated that the bill caused
significant concern for individuals throughout the state.
He believed legislators were not listening to their
constituents. He believed there was a mismanagement problem
when it came to providing the services. He stated that
allowing the things to happen restricted the rights of the
people. He stated that a full repeal of SB 91 would be a
start. He remarked that people had felt much safer a few
years back. He believed SB 54 was a watered-down version of
SB 91.
7:51:52 PM
SHERRY MILLER, SELF, EAGLE RIVER (via teleconference),
testified against SB 91 and SB 54. She spoke on behalf of
her daughter Linda Bauer who had been murdered prior to the
passage of SB 91. She stated that her daughter's murderer
fell into the SB 91 and SB 54 structure. She referred to
Section 27 related to new parole provisions - she explained
the provision was confusing. She believed there needed to
be a clearer definition. She shared that the murderer had
been convicted in a previous state for assaulting a police
officer responding to a domestic violence call. She did not
support Section 34 related to being denied parole the first
time - the individual could consider parole every two
years. She believed the length of time needed to be longer;
victim's families should be able to rest. She stressed that
the individual was not interested in being rehabilitated
and was a master manipulator. Section 37 pertained to
parole and parolees not being able to consume alcohol or
have a deadly weapon. She thought a stronger definition was
needed because her daughter's killer had strangled her with
his bare hands. She wondered how he would be kept from his
own hands. She believed the legislature was allowing
violent criminals to walk the streets.
Vice-Chair Gara expressed his sorrow for Ms. Miller's loss.
He shared that he had lost his father when he was young. He
did not want to try to change her mind about the provisions
she had listed. He relayed that SB 91 had increased the
mandatory minimum sentence for murder. He spoke to the
parole provision. He explained that an individual would not
be eligible for parole for at least the length of the
mandatory minimum sentence, which was 20 or 30 years under
SB 91. The first time a person could ask for parole was 20
to 30 years if they were sentenced under SB 91. He hoped
Ms. Miller did not have to face the individual for a very
long time.
Ms. Miller answered that her family had been told that
because the person was serving time waiting for his
sentence - the family had been told the individual could
face parole in as early as 14 years if convicted under the
second degree [murder] charge. She stressed that it was
ridiculous. She specified that her daughter had been 19,
which did not even add up to how many years she had been
alive.
7:57:40 PM
Co-Chair Foster provided the call-in number and email
address for House Finance.
DAMITA DUPLANTIS, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified against the bill. She supported the repeal of SB
91 and believed SB 54 was merely a band aid. She stated
that until treatment facilities were in place she believed
the best place for criminals to be was in jail. She shared
that she had family members who were addicts and those in
recovery. She stated that her uncle's treatment had not
been funded by the state. She believed there were ways for
people to get help if they wanted it. She stated that many
drug addicts were living in uninhabitable conditions so she
believed it was not an excuse to say that prisons were
overcrowded and could not take more people. She thought
four to ten people could be put in a room in prison. She
had spoken with police officers at community events and
believed most of the officers were in opposition to SB 91.
8:02:35 PM
DEANA CRESAP, SELF, CHUGIAK (via teleconference), spoke in
support of a repeal of SB 91. She did not support SB 54.
She wanted to see people held accountable for their crimes.
She shared that she had been robbed. She referred to an
individual who had continued to commit crimes and had 34
arrests. She stressed the need to get the individuals off
the street and for consequences for action.
8:04:49 PM
STEPHEN DUPLANTIS, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
spoke against the bill. He shared that he is a pastor. The
church had found syringes in its parking lot and vehicle
tires had been slit. He felt it was sad to need to install
more security cameras. He stressed that an addict had to
want to get help. He emphasized that it was not possible to
force help on someone. He stated that the church paid back
into the community and had to rely solely on people giving.
He stated that many people supporting SB 54 viewed it as a
fix to SB 91, which to him meant that the original bill was
broken. He spoke to his personal experience. He believed
something was wrong.
8:08:50 PM
RON CROWL, SELF, EAGLE RIVER (via teleconference), spoke
against SB 91. He believed it had allowed crime to increase
in Alaska. He wanted criminals to do time for their crimes
and did not want them to be given a free pass. He wanted to
see SB 91 repealed. He wanted to see SB 54 provide more
resources for incarcerated individuals to receive treatment
prior to release. He supported getting security under
control.
8:10:51 PM
RICHARD BUSK, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), stated
that SB 91 limited actions that could be taken by the
security agency he worked for. He agreed with the need to
guarantee treatment in prison. He reasoned that most of
treatment outside prison was by choice. He relayed it was
common in his work to see repeat offenders. He reported
that thefts had doubled in the past year. He understood
that a justice system aimed to reduce recidivism by
shifting towards probation and treatment, but everyone had
to be on board to make decisions together. He noted that
cost was the largest concern for everyone at the state. He
communicated that there were thefts and shootings in
Anchorage almost daily. He shared that many of the crimes
were crimes of opportunity where the public left their
doors unlocked. He spoke for the need for services.
Additionally, citizens deserved protection from individuals
who could not control their decisions.
8:14:40 PM
CHRIS MCLAIN, SELF, FAIRBANKS (via teleconference),
testified in support of the bill. He shared that worked as
an entry coalition coordinator and had been a magistrate
judge for close to nine years. He reported that Fairbanks
was beginning to see a positive change concerning reentry.
He served on multiple coalitions including the Housing and
Homeless Coalition. He considered SB 54 and SB 91 to be the
largest steps the state was taking to rehabilitate and
change the system for the better. He contemplated how to
make reentry into society successful. He highlighted
components involved in reentry including housing,
transportation, employment, and other. He believed it was
necessary to give the bills more time for change to occur.
8:18:00 PM
Co-Chair Foster shared the call-in number for individuals
in Fairbanks.
CHRIS EICHENLAUB, SELF, EAGLE RIVER (via teleconference),
testified against SB 54 and SB 91. He believed the
legislature had failed the state. He believed SB 91 was
horrendous and supported its repeal. He stressed that the
current emergency situation required immediate action, not
band aids. He thought DOC needed to do a better job. He
underscored the need to get drugs out of jails.
Co-Chair Foster asked testifiers to refrain from calling
individuals names.
8:20:51 PM
DEBORAH MCINTYRE, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified strongly against the bills. She shared her
personal experience with addiction. She stressed that
Alcoholics Anonymous had saved her life. She underscored
that drug treatment should be available for individuals
serving time. She lived in a crime infested area and wanted
crime to be addressed. She stated that the victims had
become the losers. She provided a story. She had hopes for
everyone, but she did not support enabling bad behavior.
She spoke about the difficulty of reintegration after
serving jail time. She asked the committee to tighten up
state laws. She needed a safer home for her elderly
parents. She understood the opioid problem, but she
believed an individual had to want help to get it.
8:26:24 PM
NORIA CLARK, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified against the bill. She stated there was data
behind how SB 91 would not work. She addressed the number
of people who had died at the hands of drug abusers or
felons. She asked where the data was. She wanted to know
why those innocent lives were not accounted for. She
believed the legislature's failures Alaska was in a state
of emergency. She stated it was an epidemic that was not
just drug induced. She was offended that legislators were
being paid a certain amount in per diem, while the public
had to wait online for lengthy periods to testify. She
shared that she would be very upset if an income tax was
implemented. She addressed sex offender probation. She
expressed strong distaste for law that she believed failed
to protect children from sexual abuse. She disagreed with a
statement made by a committee member that breaking into a
home was a jailable offence. She stated the crime was not
currently a Class C felony.
8:31:18 PM
MARY ALICE MCKEEN, SELF, JUNEAU (via teleconference),
testified in support of the bill. She shared that she had
been an Alaskan since 1978. She thanked the committee for
its time. She urged the committee not to repeal SB 91 that
was the result of significant careful work. She believed
the increase in crime was due to the opioid epidemic and it
was unfair to blame the increase in crime on SB 91. She
reasoned that other states were experiencing the same type
of increase in crime and they did not have SB 91. She
believed the bill needed to be given time to work. She
supported the increase in funds for treatment. She was in
support of SB 54 that provided fixes. She detailed that SB
54 would give judges more discretion in sentencing first
time Class C felony offenders and Class A misdemeanors and
it made up to the fourth degree a jailable offence. She
thought the changes should help alleviate some of the
problems people had talked about. She shared that she is on
the board of Haven House, but she was speaking for herself.
She shared that Haven House provided treatment to
individuals leaving prison. She stressed the importance of
structured support of housing to keep people out of prison.
She explained that peer supported recovery residences
helped people to learn a new life away from crime.
8:34:39 PM
MICHAEL SHELDON, SELF, PETERSBURG (via teleconference),
spoke against SB 54 and was supportive of repealing SB 91.
He wondered how officers could protect citizens if the law
did not protect citizens. He believed individuals who
commit crimes should serve the sentence fitting their
crime. He supported investing in state troopers and local
police. He believed police should have the ability to
arrest people and put them in jail to serve time as needed.
He stated that under current law a person could shoot at a
house and be back on the street again. He opined that
repealing SB 91 was essential. He thought SB 54 was only a
band aid.
8:38:07 PM
TYSON BUNDY, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
testified against SB 91. He believed it was a catch and
release program. He agreed that criminals needed to be
treated with dignity, but they needed to have
accountability. He believed the state should be doing
things to protect the rights of its citizens. He believed
SB 91 needed to be repealed. He did not believe SB 54 went
far enough to fix the problems.
8:40:00 PM
GEORGIA KUSTURA, SELF, CHUGIAK (via teleconference),
testified against the bill. She shared that she had worked
for the Department of Law for over 20 years. She believed
people needed to be held accountable for their behavior.
She did not support enabling people. She believed many
people would opt for using drugs again. She detailed that
in the past year every house on her block had been the
target of attempted burglary. Many individuals in the
neighborhood had paid to install security systems. She
stressed that property crime was a gateway crime. She
underscored that the laws were depriving citizens of their
safety. She stressed that people had to be accountable and
the bill was only enabling criminals. She asked for a
repeal of SB 91.
8:42:33 PM
KIT ROBERTS, SELF, PALMER (via teleconference), spoke
against SB 91 and 54. He shared that he had been robbed
three times recently (out of his vehicle and from a
construction site). He believed the bills were only funding
post crime issues. He had yet to hear anything about
precrime education, which was where the solution would come
from. He had been taught how to behave through 4-H and
church programs. He believed the bills only helped post
crime issues after damage had been done. He worked hard for
his belongings and items had been stolen by individuals who
had not been taught that stealing was wrong. He believed SB
54 was a hinderance to troopers and prosecution.
8:46:20 PM
CHLOE ABBOTT, SELF, JUNEAU, shared that she worked with
Haven House. She shared her story of how SB 91 had impacted
her life. She had been charged with a DUI in 2015 and had
struggled with alcoholism for 30 years. She detailed that
it was not something she wanted to do. She stressed that
individuals wanted an opportunity in life to change. She
stated that she would have been in jail for 230 days and
would have had no opportunity for treatment. She had
received treatment and was a mother of a nine-year-old boy.
She shared that she now had a good job as an accountant and
was productive. She was an active member of her church and
had received treatment she needed. She had been given the
option of treatment and she had to take it. She implored
the committee to maintain the bills and to increase funding
for treatment. She thanked the committee.
Vice-Chair Gara thanked Ms. Abbott for testifying. He
relayed that there would be a battle about whether to
provide more funding for treatment later in the session. He
encouraged Ms. Abbott to follow the process and testify.
Ms. Abbott replied that she would follow the issue. She
relayed that even though she had a criminal background, she
had a voice. She thanked the committee for listening.
Representative Wilson congratulated Ms. Abbott and thanked
her for her courage to testify.
8:51:12 PM
ANTONIO PRESCOTT, SELF, JUNEAU, shared his personal story.
He had gone to jail and had served his time. He believed
the bill helped many people who had been incarcerated and
were looking to change. He had served eight years in prison
and now had an excellent job. He had taken the opportunity
to change his life. He had done around 60 programs while in
jail and had seized the opportunity. He was making his mark
in the community by stepping up and doing the right thing.
He believed the bill could allow people to step up and help
themselves.
Representative Grenn asked for examples of programs Mr.
Prescott had accessed in prison.
Mr. Prescott answered that he had done a construction
program and he had been at Pt. McKenzie Correctional Farm
where he had run the farming equipment, planted potatoes
and had worked 17 to 18 hours per day in the summer. He had
been rejuvenated due to the programs.
8:54:30 PM
NICK TURENNE, SELF, FAIRBANKS (via teleconference),
supported SB 54. He was sorry for all of the Alaskans
impacted by crime, but he stressed that drugs and alcohol
were causing the problems. He did not believe individuals
who had experienced problems with drugs and alcohol should
be given sentences as rigid as someone who planned to
commit harm to their neighbor. He stated that the
individuals could be rehabilitated in treatment and could
receive education to integrate into society. He stressed
that individuals were victims of substance abuse. He
supported taking care of individuals with substance abuse
problems. He underscored the necessity of winning the war
on addiction. He did not support incarcerating people for
long periods of time. He believed SB 91 needed to be
improved for the better of Alaskans.
8:57:08 PM
BOB BARNDT, SELF, EAGLE RIVER (via teleconference),
testified in opposition to SB 91 and SB 54. He believed it
was the committee's responsibility to listen to its
constituents. He had heard much testimony in opposition to
the bill and to repeal SB 91. He stated that law
enforcement had vocalized that the bill was not a good
idea. He asked the committee to take those things into
consideration when deciding on SB 54.
8:59:06 PM
MICHELLE OVERSTREET, SELF, WASILLA (via teleconference),
testified in support of SB 54 and SB 91. She shared that
she was the executive director of a drop-in center for
homeless kids. She noted that numerous provisions in SB 91
would not take effect until 2018. She relayed that it had
not been given time to work. She shared that the increase
in drug problems had increased dramatically. She shared
that 11 young people had completed treatment in her center
- she believed the opportunity was due to SB 91. She spoke
to an increase in peer support. She urged support for
individuals to have lives. She stressed that the state
could not continue to use the correctional system as the
long-term solution. She provided further details about the
center treatment. There had only been four kids who had
completed treatment the year prior to the passage of SB 91.
She stressed the importance for patience with allowing the
bill to have time to work.
9:03:53 PM
STACEY KORSMO, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), spoke
against SB 54 and urged the legislature to repeal SB 91.
She shared that she had been a victim of the increase in
crime. Her vehicle had been stolen and when it was
recovered she had been told she had to clean the drug
paraphernalia and stolen goods out of her car. She detailed
there had been 25 to 30 sets of car keys from other stolen
vehicles in her car. She had been told by the police that
their hands were tied and even if they found out who had
stolen the car, likely nothing would happen to the person.
She emphasized that it was a disservice to people who paid
taxes for public safety. She stressed that public safety
was one of the essential functions of government. She felt
violated as a result of the experience. She had empathy for
individuals suffering from addiction. She stated that
sometimes it took consequences of individuals facing prison
to turn their lives around.
9:06:22 PM
Representative Wilson asked if it was the state troopers or
the Anchorage police who had Ms. Korsmo clean her car out
herself.
Ms. Korsmo replied that it had been the Anchorage police.
Representative Wilson apologized and stated that no one
should have to deal with that.
9:06:53 PM
BARBARA PETEK, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), shared
that she worked at a liquor store near the Dimond Center.
She shared that in 2015 two employees had an armed robber
in the store for over two hours. She detailed the
individual had been on drugs and once he left the liquor
store he had gone into a nearby restaurant. She stressed
that the crime was a felony. Due to the passage of SB 91
the individual had not gone to jail and had instead been
put at a half-way house. He had then gone missing from the
half-way house for three days, but the half-way house had
not reported it. The individual was stalking another clerk
at the liquor store - it had been two years they had been
dealing with the individual. Under SB 91 the individual had
not been guilty and had never been to court. She stated
that SB 91 had numerous problems; she did not know if it
needed to be repealed. She was very upset and was afraid to
go to work and ride the bus. Her life had been dramatically
impacted. She stressed that the individual was not getting
treatment.
9:10:18 PM
ILLODOR MERCULIEFF, SELF, SAINT PAUL ISLAND (via
teleconference), supported SB 91 and SB 54. He thanked the
committee for its time. He shared that he had been in and
out of the criminal justice system since the age of 18. He
had been involved in a vehicle crime and had used it as a
life changing event to get sober. He was grateful to the
Department of Corrections and Department of Law. He spoke
to the importance of accountability. He addressed the
importance of culture and language. He was happy to see
youth in his district embracing the items. He spoke to
people wanting to change. He shared that he had really
wanted to change. He remarked that the bill needed to be
given more time.
9:13:51 PM
SARAH EVANS, SELF, DILLINGHAM (via teleconference),
testified in support of SB 91 and SB 54. She stated that
the crime rates had been on the rise for many years prior
to the passage of SB 91. She stated that 66 percent of
individuals left in prison returned after six months to one
year. She stated that the bill was a work in progress. She
spoke to the importance of funding SB 91. She heard
numerous people who were scared and threatened by SB 91.
She relayed that SB 54 had many improvements. She hoped the
committee would consider the bills as a whole. She asked
the committee to look at the actual facts.
Co-Chair Foster CLOSED public testimony. He thanked the
public for its testimony. He reminded committee members of
the amendment deadlines.
SB 54 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Foster addressed the schedule for the following
day.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|