Legislature(2015 - 2016)GRUENBERG 120
04/13/2016 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
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 | |
| SB174 | |
| HB347 | |
| SB121 | |
| SB123 | |
| SJR2 | |
| SB91 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 347 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 123 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SJR 2 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 121 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 91 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 174 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 91-OMNIBUS CRIM LAW & PROCEDURE; CORRECTIONS
2:32:40 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX announced that the final order of business would be
CS FOR SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 91(FIN) am, "An
Act relating to criminal law and procedure; relating to
controlled substances; relating to immunity from prosecution for
the crime of prostitution; relating to probation; relating to
sentencing; establishing a pretrial services program with
pretrial services officers in the Department of Corrections;
relating to the publication of suspended entries of judgment on
a publicly available Internet website; relating to permanent
fund dividends; relating to electronic monitoring; relating to
penalties for violations of municipal ordinances; relating to
parole; relating to correctional restitution centers; relating
to community work service; relating to revocation, termination,
suspension, cancellation, or restoration of a driver's license;
relating to the excise tax on marijuana; establishing the
recidivism reduction fund; relating to the Alaska Criminal
Justice Commission; relating to the disqualification of persons
convicted of specified drug offenses from participation in the
food stamp and temporary assistance programs; relating to the
duties of the commissioner of corrections; amending Rules 32,
32.1, 38, 41, and 43, Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure, and
repealing Rules 41(d) and (e), Alaska Rules of Criminal
Procedure; and providing for an effective date."
2:33:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt House CS for CS for SS for
SB 91, Version 29-LS0541\X, Martin, 4/12/16, as the working
document. There being no objection, Version X was before the
House Judiciary Standing Committee.
2:33:46 PM
The committee took an at-ease from to 2:33 p.m. to 2:38 p.m.
2:38:19 PM
KALYSSA MAILE, Staff, Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Alaska
State Legislature, referred to House CS for CS for SS for Senate
Bill 91, Version X and explained that the drafters removed all
language within HB 205, Version H, including amendments the
House Judiciary Standing Committee had adopted, and inserted the
language under the title of SB 91. Therefore, she said, SB 91
is the vehicle for the omnibus crime bill.
CHAIR LEDOUX surmised that as far as the House Judiciary
Standing Committee is concerned there is nothing new [in SB 91].
MS. MAILE advised there are technical changes because the Senate
iteration went through more versions and is a better version
structurally, but substantively it is everything this committee
worked on.
2:39:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER surmised that this committee is ignoring
the language in SB 91, [Version 29-LS0541\Y.A].
MS. MAILE explained that where there were differences, the House
version was taken, and differences will be taken up when
amendments are considered.
CHAIR LEDOUX opened public testimony, and restricted public
testimony to three minutes per speaker because, currently, there
are 32 speakers.
2:40:14 PM
NIKKI HINES, Coordinator, Fairbanks Reentry Coalition, referred
to the provision regarding authorization to restore a driver's
license, and advised that when a person is released from
incarceration many conditions are expected to be met by the
inmate. For example, substance abuse counseling and treatment,
mental health, community service acts, probation appointments,
group meetings such as NA or AA to stay sober. She expressed
that these expectations are in place at the same time the inmate
is trying to obtain stable employment and a stable housing
environment which, she pointed out, is almost impossible to do
without a means of transportation. When a person is released
from prison they are faced with the choice of going to their
probation appointment or to the job interview, and many times
the choice is to drive and risk it because they have to take all
of these steps at once. She said she is encouraging the
committee to keep that provision and, at the bare minimum, a
limited license for day-time driving hours so the people can
become successful in the community.
2:41:43 PM
TERRIA WALTERS, Founder, Fallen Up Ministries, said she is a
recovery advocate, and supports SB 91. She pointed to the
language discussing assessments that results in appropriate
intervention services for people incarcerated, and it also
expands substance abuse treatment programs for people with
shorter sentences. She suggested the importance of also
considering pretrial services because there are many individuals
sitting in jail and are not able to receive the treatment they
need, and desperately want. Through her program people
constantly contact her wanting to get treatment, and she noted
that sometimes people are released with no treatment
[opportunities] whatsoever. She suggested that individuals in
pretrial being able to bail out and utilized outside resources,
such as the Alaska Pretrial Services. She said she is a fan of
that program because many individuals in her program have used
that program, and it is important to keep that in place. Mr.
Johnson operates the program with great integrity, she said, and
he works with the individuals, and has personal investment in
his program. She said, "I don't think it's just about money, I
also believe that it's about helping the individual get back on
track and getting their lives together." She has partnerships
and delegates, and she stressed the importance that the
Department of Corrections (DOC) and the judicial system consider
partnering because DOC "can't just take on everything."
Rehabilitation is her personal focus, and as a person formerly
incarcerated, in long-term recovery, and clean and sober for 11
years, she remarked that it is important the state focus on
treatment, because the state need individuals to get their lives
back on track. She related that it was not DOC that helped her,
it was outside resources, such as the Alaska Correctional
Ministries. The DOC needs to be more invested in people's lives
so people can receive the recovery necessary, rather than people
just sitting in jail doing nothing with their time, she
stressed.
2:44:52 PM
ANTHONY BIELER said he works for the Cook Inlet Tribal Council
and is testifying on his own behalf regarding his experience
with the Alaska Pretrial Services 24/7 program. He advised he
recently completed one full year on the program, and it had a
positive impact on his recovery. He explained that the 23/7
program made him accountable to himself, he had to show up twice
a day to take a breathalyzer test, he had three UAs a week, and
he was always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Johnson
runs the 24/7 program and he always made himself available to
speak, whether a person was doing good or bad, because the door
was always open to address issues. He described it as an
absolutely positive experience - he was able to drive so that
meant he was able to keep his job, able to attend meetings, and
it was a great experience. He said he absolutely, 100 percent,
supports SB 91.
2:46:31 PM
BERT COTTLE, Mayor, said that Chief of Police Gene Beldon was
sitting next to him. He explained that ankle monitoring is
performed by a private enterprise, and the person goes to that
private enterprise location to be tested. In the event the
person fails the test, they are to be remanded back into custody
and arrested. The private enterprise then calls local law
enforcement to perform the arrest, law enforcement responds
through the city services, they pick the person up, and
transports them to Palmer. He stressed that on a good day
that's a two hour round-trip, on a bad day, because that person
may have been drinking or have some other substance on board,
law enforcement must take them to the hospital to be checked out
to be sure they don't have any further complications once they
are incarcerated. In that case, it could be a four- to six-hour
roundtrip with the possibility that law enforcement may have to
take them to Anchorage, depending on the office. He advised
that an ankle monitoring business moved into Wasilla this year,
and on a low number there will be at least 50-100 arrests. He
said, "That's a pass on cost that we're having to pick up,
they're not our arrest," and he would like the committee to
consider what is happening when going that route. As a result,
he suggested that possibly the person should go back to the
correctional facility or a place with arresting authority, such
that if the person fails the test, they go right back into a
lock-up, and the police don't have to chase the person around
town trying to catch them.
2:48:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT asked for clarification, if the person is
on private electronic monitoring, the entity calls the police to
come and arrest that person, and the person doesn't turn
themselves in. She asked that when a person is under DOC ankle
monitoring, they have the ability to arrest at the facility.
She questioned whether there is still the transportation issue,
or is that absorbed by the state because the state is doing the
transporting. She quiered whether there is an opportunity, when
that arrest happens, to call the Alaska State Troopers to manage
the situation better rather than calling the local police
officers. She asked whether he had talked to the troopers about
working through this issue.
2:49:18 PM
MR. COTTLE explained the Wasilla Police Department (WPD) is the
direct and fastest response, because there are only five to six
Department of Public Safety (DPS) officers on duty at any one
time in the borough. The troopers could be 30-60 minutes away,
and that is not a high level response. He remarked that WPD
could just ignore the call and tell the entity that they will
get there when they can, but the police department would be the
fastest and closest pick up point. Therefore, the unintended
consequence is that the police department has to pick the people
up and haul them to Palmer, because that is their closest lock-
up. He pointed out that the private contractor doesn't have the
authority to arrest the people and transport.
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT asked how many calls have come in since
the private contractor moved into its location.
MR. COTTLE estimated 15 times since January when it opened, but
he estimates it will be at least at 50 by the end of the year.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked whether these are municipal
offenders being prosecuted by the borough, or whether they are
state offenders pretrial released to an electronic monitoring
program.
MR. COTTLE stressed that they are all state charges, there are
no city charges or borough, because the second-class borough
doesn't have the authority to arrest. He pointed out that they
could be on ankle monitoring for a number of reasons, such as
pretrial, post-trial, conditions of release, and a number of
reasons. He said the people go to the local entity with the
contract for ankle monitoring.
2:51:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked whether this is happening in other
places, or just in Wasilla.
MR. COTTLE acknowledged that they may be unique because many
places have their own jails, although, he believes other places
will have the same experience. He noted that if his reading of
the crime bill is correct, there is the possibly of releasing
more people on bracelets.
2:52:32 PM
GENE BELDON, Chief of Police, offered that when there is a small
police department taking one person out of the line-up for
anywhere from 2-4 hours, it creates a problem within the city
for response times, and creates extensive paperwork which takes
time. He explained that when a police officer has a prisoner,
they can't just kick the prisoner out and respond to a more
serious call, because the police officer has to continue through
the whole process.
2:53:52 PM
DEAN WILLIAMS, Commissioner Designee, Department of Corrections
(DOC), acknowledged that he has received a good education, the
past couple of days, about this entire issue with local
municipalities and factors associated with Mayor Cottle's
concerns. He offered that he understands and supports the
effort of moving the bulk of electronic monitoring to the
Department of Corrections (DOC), and that the concerns are not
lost on him as to what is happening in the local communities.
He reiterated that the DOC supports efforts to move the bulk of
electronic monitoring over to the department on pretrial issues.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked Mr. Williams to take into account
the need for oversight to cover [electronic monitoring], but
that there is also the issue of allowing this to be a free
enterprise function. He suggested there has to be something in
between.
MR. WILLIAMS responded that Representative Keller is exactly
correct, the struggles the municipalities have gone through are
real in that it does take officers off the street, and the
department has to recognize that. He said he understands why it
makes more sense for the efficiency point of time to have one
entity doing that. He wants options in front of him, but
understands why there is a strong feeling that the state should
control the oversight and do the electronic monitoring, and he
agrees, he stated.
2:56:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT asked whether there was any way, through
the private enterprise, the state could make them self-report to
jail so the transportation costs are not burdened. She further
asked whether there is a creative solution to get the person
testing at the private entity, to have some type of self-report
for that person who has violated a condition of their release.
2:56:46 PM
MAYOR COTTLE responded that they have had calls from the ankle
monitoring company stating, "Would you please hurry and send the
officer, because the person who failed the test is now running
down the street." He said, probably not.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked whether there is any chance they are
running to jail.
2:57:56 PM
MAUDE BLAIR, Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN), said the Alaska
Federation of Natives (AFN) wholeheartedly supports this bill.
She offered that, as members of this committee have noted, there
is a delicate balance between punishment, reentry support, and
victims' rights. She said the Alaska Federation of Natives
(AFN) believes this bill will do a lot to help that balance.
Alaska Natives make up a disproportionate number of the state
prison population, and also are disproportionally victims of
crimes, she advised. Anything that the state can do to reduce
recidivism rates will help both sides of that equation, and AFN
urges the committee to pass this bill, she related.
2:59:09 PM
DENNIS JOHNSON, Owner and Director, Alaska Pretrial Services,
Inc., said that that his corporation is one of the private
electronic monitoring companies discussed over the last few
days. He explained that Alaska Pretrial Services has provided
services in the Anchorage and Matanuska-Susitna areas for the
last seven years, and it is one of three private vendors that
have provided testing services to the Department of Health and
Social Services (DHSS) for the Alaska 24/7 Sobriety Program.
The Anchorage and Matanuska-Susitna areas are two areas that
have five testing sites provided by vendors around the state.
He opined there is a distinct difference between pretrial
electronic monitoring and post-trial electronic monitoring, and
as the committee moves forward it is his hope that will be
considered. He explained that a few bad apples have operated in
a manner to cast a bad light on private electronic monitoring.
He said he has worked with another company in being pro-active
in working with the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee on SB
91, and were successful in getting an amendment added before it
moved to the House of Representatives. He explained that the
amendment adds, as to the duties of the commissioner, "Establish
oversight, regulations, and minimum standards for electronic GPS
monitoring." He described that as key, because up until this
point this industry has operated in the pretrial phase, in the
private sector, without any oversight. Alaska Pretrial Services
invested hundreds of thousands of dollars to its technology to
be sure the technology is up-to-date, and it works in
conjunction with the state prosecutors office, and municipal
attorneys. He remarked that as a victim of a violent crime
where a family member was shot and killed and he survived, he
has worked directly with Director Winston, Office of Victims'
Rights, and developed several victims' rights programs that he
offers free of charge. He expressed concern that the committee
is considering eliminating private industry, because the
established protocols and programs he operated for years can
work in conjunction with the Department of Corrections (DOC)
with oversight, regulations, and minimum standards. He said
that as the committee moves forward that it review the cost to
taxpayers in the state, and to consider that with a little
refinement and oversight, the industry can operate as a tool for
the Department of Corrections [DOC], and judicial services.
3:03:15 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX asked Mr. Johnson how he responds to Mayor Cottle's
concerns when someone fails their test and needs to be hauled
somewhere.
MR. JOHNSON responded that the current procedure under the
Alaska Alcohol Safety Action Program (ASAP), Department of
Health and Social Services, dictated under the 24/7 program,
swift and immediate consequences. The offender is instructed to
take a seat, and there is a secondary test depending on whether
it is alcohol positive or a urine positive test, and whether it
is a probation violation, parole violation, or if it is an
actual violation of conditions of release. Under the current SB
64 with 24/7, law enforcement is required for the remand, and is
addressed in SB 91, under the pretrial program, duties of the
commissioner. He pointed out that Mayor Cottle is correct, it
was a portion not addressed in the actual regulations and
protocols set forth under the Department of Health and Social
Services.
3:04:43 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX asked if SB 91 were passed in the same form it came
over from the Senate, for example.
MR. JOHNSON agreed.
CHAIR LEDOUX asked how he would deal with someone who had failed
the test, would he still call the local authorities.
MR. JOHNSON opined that the pretrial service officers,
[established under SB 91], as an officer of the court would have
jurisdiction for the swift and immediate consequence, which
would be the remand for the violation.
CHAIR LEDOUX restated her question and asked whether the
pretrial service officer remands the person to state custody.
MR. JOHNSON said that is his understanding.
3:06:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN commented that in the pretrial context
there have been discussions regarding individuals bailing out
and hire a private electronic monitoring vendor. There have
also been discussions about the department having some pretrial
release electronic monitoring duties as well.
He surmised that when the alarm goes off at a private electronic
monitoring company, that company would contact the pretrial
services officer, and not the police department. He said, "Just
as if it was a person on pretrial services electronic monitoring
when the alarm goes off, they would at least aware of the
violation." In both instances, the party responsible for
tracking down the person on pretrial release would fall on the
Department of Corrections (DOC) to get them in either instance.
MR. JOHNSON deferred to Commissioner Williams, and opined that
if SB 91 is passed, the pretrial jurisdiction for offenders out
on release, no matter the program, would fall on the pretrial
services office for jurisdiction of remand.
3:08:12 PM
SHERRIE DAIGLE, Staff, Commissioner Dean Williams, Department of
Corrections, said that Mr. Johnson is correct, the pretrial
services officers would have jurisdiction.
3:08:48 PM
DEBORAH SWEET advised that she is a recent victim of a violent
crime, and offered testimony as follows:
I would like to share my story with you in order to
provide you with a point of view from a victim and
detail the severity of the crime that I experienced
that would no longer be punishable by jail time if
this legislation passes.
My journey begins with my husband's recent surgery and
subsequent abuse of prescription pain relievers and
muscle relaxers, combined with alcohol. I'm in the
condominium where I live, by back is against the wall
in a closet of a small back bedroom that I use as my
office on the third floor of our home. I watched my
husband lay down on the floor in the prone position
and how he positions the butt of the 223 caliber AR
15, with a 30-round banana clip solidly against his
chest. I watch how he tilts his head slightly to the
right as he adjusts the scope to his eye with his
finger on the trigger. I'll never forget the sound of
his voice screaming at me, or the sound of my own
voice crying and begging for my life, begging him to
let me go. Wondering if this is where, and how my
life will end. And in a moment of eerie and utter
silence in our home before he pulls the trigger. The
bullet hits the sheetrock 15 inches from the left side
of my head, the following struggle for the gun results
me in being bitten, beaten with his fists, the AR 10
and two more shots are then fired while we struggled
for the weapon. Subsequently, I'm rescued from my
home by the Anchorage Police Department and I'm
transported to Providence Medical Center for treatment
for human bite marks, concussion, multiple
lacerations, multiple contusions to the head, face,
torso, hands, arms, and legs.
Due to this crime legislation bill that is currently
being considered, I reluctantly agreed with the
District Attorney regarding the plea bargain terms
that were accepted by the defendant. The defendant
pled to one C felony assault with 24 months and 21
months suspended and three years' probation. This is
a harsher sentence than he would have received if this
legislation is passed. This is why I reluctantly
agreed to the terms of this plea bargain. After
presenting my victim impact statement to the court,
the judge expressed concern for public safety and
spoke at length regarding the leniency of the plea
agreement in relation to the crime. The judge stated
this was the worst class C felony case he had seen and
had serious misgivings about accepting the plea
bargain agreement. Yet, under the proposed
legislation, this case would not even receive the
sentence the judge stated was far too lenient.
I respectfully request that you please read my full
written statement submitted to multiple legislators
and ask yourself, if this happened to you or if this
happened to a loved one, would you want the attacker
to only receive probation and no jail time. Because
under this proposed legislation that's exactly what
will happen. On behalf of all victims who are too
terrified to speak and for those who can no longer
speak for themselves, and for all of those who will be
a victim in the future, we didn't deserve to be
victimized by our attackers and we don't deserve to be
victimized by legislation that protects the offenders.
You have the power to enable victims to be survivors,
please use that power wisely and thank you for
listening to my story.
3:12:29 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX responded that the committee does have her written
testimony, and that she appreciates her testifying.
CHAIR LEDOUX advised that committee members have other meetings
to attend, and she recessed the meeting to a call of the chair.
She apologized to members of the public waiting to testify.
3:13:06 PM
The House Judiciary Standing Committee was recessed to a call of
the chair at 3:13 p.m., until possibly later this afternoon.
5:10:32 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting back to order at 5:10 p.m. Present at the call back to
order were Representatives Lynn, Claman, and LeDoux.
Representatives Millett and Kreiss-Tomkins arrived as the
meeting was in progress.
CHAIR LEDOUX returned the committee to SB 91, and advised it
would continue with public testimony. She asked the members to
note the Summary of Sectional Changes to SB 91.
5:11:50 PM
DARREL JONES said he is a victim, an ex-correctional officer, an
attorney of 28 years, and he is corporate council for Pioneer
Peak Electronic Monitoring. He explained the system works as
follows: a person wants to get out of jail on bail, there is a
hearing, at that hearing the judge invariably makes the
electronic monitoring company put on paper the ordered
conditions of release that they have the right to remand. The
problems occurs when someone violates, and rarely do they make a
run for it where an electronic monitoring company has to attempt
to chase them down, because most of the time they calmly take
people into custody. Those that attempt to run are immediately
caught. The resolution is simple, the order and conditions of
release specify that the company has the right to remand. He
explained that where the problem comes in, is that when they try
to remand to the Department of Corrections, the department
refuses them. Therefore, they make the police officers pick
them up and remand them to the Department of Corrections. To
remedy the problem, he suggested mandating the correctional
facilities accept the remand from the electronic monitoring
companies. Problem solved. He noted that pretrial monitoring
[technical difficulties] will not be able to successfully
monitor pretrial release electronic monitoring, because they do
not do it 24/7. As it sits now, he said, even post-sentence
monitoring is performed by the Department of Corrections [DOC],
and when someone violates, the department gets a warrant, or if
the person comes into the office, the department remands them.
He stressed that the department does not, unlike the electronic
monitoring companies, send someone out at 2:00 a.m. or 3:00
a.m., to pick someone up right away when they violate. He said
"They do not successfully protect the public 24/7." Whereas,
private companies do this, it is exactly what they are trained
to do, and they monitor these things 24/7. He stressed that
cutting out the private sector sets the system up for continued
DOC financing, and in reality, correctional pretrial service
officers will not be out there remanding people late at night,
if at all. He related that the current system is flawed. He
said to fix the problem by allowing the certified companies to
monitor these people correctly 24/7, remand them directly to the
Department of Corrections (DOC) if they violate a court's order,
and that will eliminate a tremendous amount of this.
5:15:21 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX surmised that Mr. Jones was saying that when
someone breaks their condition of release, the electronic
monitoring company will transport them to the Department of
Corrections (DOC), to the jail.
MR. JONES responded that he is a corporate council, but the
electronic monitoring company will either be Pioneer Peak, or
any other certified, credible monitoring company. The
Department of Corrections (DOC) can have a viable part in
determining which company is credible. He said, at this point,
[in the] 24/7 [program], they send someone out to get these
people.
MR. JONES, in response to Chair LeDoux as to who they send out,
said that, currently, employees with the company actually go get
these people, handcuff them, and bring them back to the office
to wait for the police because DOC will not accept them.
CHAIR LEDOUX asked how a private citizen has the authority to
handcuff someone.
MR. JONES answered that an attorney, like himself, will present
the electronic monitoring company as a third-party electronic
monitoring, and they are immediately answerable to the court.
He reiterated that the electronic monitoring company is the
third party and, "right on the paperwork" the judge gives them
the authority to remand the defendant for any reason. In other
words, he explained, if they violate the law, violate conditions
of the agreement between the electronic monitoring company and
the defendant ...
5:17:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN interjected and asked whether the
committee should have something in the statute specifically
allowing the court to give some authority to a private
electronic monitoring company to handcuff someone, or whether he
believes the court can do that as part of its court order.
MR. JONES responded that his argument would be when the court
orders them to ...
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked whether it can be part of the bail
conditions ordered by the court, or was he saying the
legislature need to have a statute specifically giving the court
that power, or do they have it already.
MR. JONES said he is not an expert on constitutional law, but he
believes the mere fact courts issue that order, the court has
that authority.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN surmised that when the court has given
them that authority they can handcuff someone, and if the court
gives them authority to take the person back to the jail, as
opposed to back to the police station, then they can take the
person to the jail.
MR. JONES answered, absolutely. Except, he pointed out, the
Department of Corrections (DOC) must accept them, which is where
the legislature may have to give guidance to DOC to accept these
people. He reiterated that DOC is turning the people away at
the door.
5:18:36 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX surmised that Mr. Jones was saying the electronic
monitoring companies return people to DOC, and for example, the
Anchorage jail refuses to take the people and they then go to
the police station.
MR. JONES responded, correct, or they wait for a police officer
to show up and then DOC will remand them through the police
officer. That's exactly what they do.
CHAIR LEDOUX said she found that interesting.
5:19:37 PM
VINCE HOLTON, Owner, Alaska Monitoring, said that his company is
a pretrial electronic monitoring company and it operates within
the Kenai and Fairbanks court systems. He stated that Mr. Jones
is absolutely correct, because unless his bail orders strictly
state that he may remand a person at any time, and that the
Fairbanks Correctional Center (FCC) must take them, he cannot
return them to FCC. The orders must state that FCC must take
them.
MR. HOLTON responded to Chair LeDoux that FCC is the Fairbanks
Correctional Center. He said he has been directed, by the DOC,
that any person coming in the back door must be brought in by a
police officer. Fortunately, he stated, he has never had to use
his handcuffs on any of his clients. He referred to Mr.
Johnson's testimony regarding a few bad apples, and explained
that his company, Pioneer Peak, and Alaska Pretrial have all
worked together with a good relationship and they monitor each
other's clients. He said they report to the DOC, the District
Attorney's Office, the Alaska State Troopers, and the Alaska
Court System with a significant savings to the state. They
monitor clients anywhere from "$15 to $28, up to maybe $35 a
day" depending upon the amount of equipment the court orders.
He explained that a difference between a private company and the
Department of Corrections (DOC) is that correctional officers go
home at 4:30 p.m.
MR. HOLTON continued his testimony, and said his company works
24-hours a day, and he or his staff are literally on the street
with a State Trooper when necessary, they are in their office
actively monitoring people, and guiding law enforcement in on a
person that is out of area at various hours of the day and
night. They do everything they can to meet the Department of
Corrections (DOC) standards and, he noted, normally have greater
conditions for their clients to abide by ...
5:23:38 PM
MATHEW BASKETT, General Manager, Pioneer Peak Monitoring, said
his testimony mirrors the testimonies of Mr. Jones and Mr.
Holton. He explained, his company monitors approximately 55
people, at any given time, with the cost directly to the
individual. These people do not have access to a third-party,
and cannot meet their bail requirement. This equates to a
savings to the state of approximately $9,000 per day just for
Pioneer Peak Monitoring, he said. He pointed out that the state
contracts for certain amounts of equipment they can use, and a
problem is that DOC is stuck with a certain type of equipment
due to the contract. Whereas, given that technology advances
and [software] is outdated, private companies are allowed to
advance and operate the best technology available to make sure
their clients are effectively monitored, and that the public is
as safe as possible, he said.
5:25:37 PM
EVA HARVEY testified that a family member has been incarcerated,
and the bottom line is that he needs help with substance abuse
and recovery. Ms. Harvey said she supports SB. 91.
5:27:02 PM
KARA NELSON, Director, Haven House Juneau, said she supports the
bill and explained that Haven House is a faith based recovery
residence for women returning home after incarceration. She
stressed that it is crucial the state have the reinvestment
pieces [in SB 91], to give everyone a chance to succeed and have
options open when they are ready. Many people would be in
prison today if they didn't have extra reentry resources, both
pretrial and after [release]. She opined that the bill will not
only change those incarcerated, but all directly affected,
including the children. She has three children, she is a two-
time drug related felon, and her children have to hold that
felony status. She related that she feels the state is relying
on incarceration as a solution for the state's complex social
problems, and the reinvestment piece will not only help with
public safety and the safety of our community, but also down the
line for generations."
5:30:03 PM
KIT WEITMEIER, Executive Director, ANCSA Regional Association,
explained that the ANCSA Regional Association represents the
chief executive officers of the 12 land based Regional Alaska
Native Corporations, as well as the president of the Alaska
Federation of Natives. Its corporations are owned by over
117,000 Alaska Native people, formed under the Alaska Native
Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), and she expressed that the ANCSA
Regional Association supports and encourages the committee to
pass SB 91.
5:31:10 PM
MELANIE BAHNKE, Chairperson, Council for Advancement of Alaska
Natives, KAWERAK Nonprofit Organization, explained that KAWERAK
is a regional tribal consortium in the Bering Strait Region.
Similar to ANCSA CEOs, the regional nonprofits have the Council
for Advancement of Alaska Natives. She offered support for SB
91, and noted that the prior commissioner of the Department of
Corrections (DOC) came to her region and declared that the
Department of Corrections (DOC) is the state's largest mental
health facility without the resources to provide the actual
corrective services needed. He described it as primarily a
warehousing of people, she said. The bill will help end the
vicious cycle of social ills contributing to the high rates of
incarceration, and Alaska Natives are disproportionately
represented within the criminal justice system. She pointed out
that by the time many people in her region finally receive a
court date, they decide to plead guilty because the sentence
they are looking at is "time served." They have exceeded the
time they would have been sentenced to while waiting to get
their court date, and these are the folks who cannot afford to
bail out of jail. She remarked that the current bail system
favors people with financial resources to bail out, and it is
not necessarily based on who is more likely to reoffend. The
weekly Nome Nugget lists crimes committed in Nome, and she said
she sees scores of probation violations, arrests for people
breaking their conditions of release by drinking and, yet, the
region does not have a regional treatment center. This bill
offers people the opportunity to become productive citizens as
opposed to wards of the state, with a cost to the state. She
continued that it saves money and is consistent with many of the
recommendations from the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission,
which the legislature authorized. It would be great to see this
bill pass this session, she expressed.
5:34:13 PM
DON HABEGER, Community Coordinator, Juneau Reentry Coalition,
advised that he is contracted with the Juneau Reentry Coalition
as a community coordinator. Mr. Habeger read his testimony as
follows:
The Juneau Reentry Coalition began their work in 2013
with the mission of promoting public safety by
identifying and implementing strategies that increase
a former prisoner's wellbeing within the community,
and reduces the likelihood of their return to prison
through recidivating. In 2015, the coalition
partnered with the Alaska Department of Corrections
and the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority to
further the community and the state's work on justice
reform, and obtain reduction to our high rate of
recidivism. The Juneau Reentry Coalition is using the
Alaska Department of Correction's prisoner reentry
initiative and its framework to plan for, and
implement, a comprehensive community plan to connect
returning citizens to evidence based support and
treatment services. Local reentry coalitions are a
significant piece to an effective state effort, and
the current version of SB 91, especially Sections 155
and 157, recognize their important contribution.
Madam Chair and members of the committee, I appreciate
your work on this important issue. I thank you for
listening to my comments. I urge you to support SB 91
and pass it out of committee. Thank you.
5:35:56 PM
VICKI WALLNER, Founder, Stop Valley Thieves, said that the Stop
Valley Thieves has a membership of 11, 000, Ms. Wallner then
read her testimony as follows:
The majority of our members are in opposition to a
major part of this bill. This bill reduces sentences
for most offenses, reduces some offenses to simple
violations, reduces bail requirements, reduces drug
offenses, probation/parolee time, and raises the
felony theft level. And many thefts now, under this
bill, will be class A misdemeanors which carry little
to no time. There's no question offenders will be
back on the street sooner and more offenders will have
little to no oversight. As this is happening, the
same time Alaska State Troopers who provide a majority
of our law enforcement throughout the state, are
closing trooper posts, cutting numbers, and reducing
calls they will respond to. Alaska State Trooper
Detachment B in the valley is looking to consolidate
Palmer and Mat-Su West Detachments into one. This
will further increase response times for valley
residents. Currently, the valley has grown to nearly
over 100,000 citizens, we're in the middle of a heroin
epidemic which is increasing crimes throughout the
valley. There is approximately one trooper for every
12,000-15,000 residents, for some shifts there are
only three to four troopers on duty, which leaves one
trooper for every 25,000 to 30,000 residents. Alaska
courts have recently reduced their bail schedules,
troopers are now reducing the number of misdemeanor
arrests they are willing to do, and the D.A.'s office
is no longer prosecuting many misdemeanors even before
this bill has passed. DOC has already done some early
releases and plans to release a total of 1,300 inmates
by May of this year according to the meetings that
were held in October 2015, that is before this bill.
Yet, those numbers and savings are included in the
presentations given to legislators as if they are part
of this bill. Federal prisons have also released
another 80 inmates into Alaska. Due to the increase
of crimes, such as shootings, robberies in Anchorage,
Anchorage is increasing their police force by 12
percent. Simple possession of heroin, meth, will be
reduced to class A misdemeanors, sentences for
possession, simple possession, would be no active
imprisonment and no greater than 30 days suspended.
Subsequent offenses are no more than 180 days, if a
defendant is required to complete court ordered
treatment and fails to do so, they'll be sentenced for
probation violation - three days in jail, second
offense - five days in jail, third offense - ten days
in jail. This provides little to no incentive for
those addicted to complete treatment, which is a --
which in theory was one of the purposes of this bill.
In California, their treatment centers are empty after
passing Prop. 47, because there is no incentive to
complete treatment. Fourth degree theft, concealment
of merchandise, unlawful possession, issuing a bad
check, removal of identification marks, result in no
more than five days ...
Well, there are many people out here that are already
seeing the results of the increase in crime. We're
going to pass this bill, let more offenders out on the
street, quicker - at the same time you're taking away
our troopers. You know, I don't even -- you know,
people feel like they're begin left to fend for
themselves, they really do. And -- And you folks need
to think about what the consequences that you're
lowering here.
MS. WALLNER, in response to Representative Lynn, advised the
name of the group is "Stop Valley Thieves," located in the
Matanuska-Susitna Valley.
5:40:49 PM
BUTCH MOORE said he spent a lot of time working with Mr.
Shilling and Senator Coghill drafting amendments, and he did
send out a request for additional amendments. A crucial part of
this bill, recommended by the PEW Charitable Trust and the
Alaska Criminal Justice Commission, was to become tougher on
unclassified felonies, murderers, rapists and those type of
offenses. He referred to [AS 33.16.090(a)(2)], Version X, page
79, [lines 18-21], which read:
(2) is at least 55 years of age and has
served at least 10 years of a sentence for one or more
crimes, notwithstanding a presumptive, mandatory, or
mandatory minimum term or sentence the prisoner may be
serving or any restriction on parole eligibility under
AS 12.55.
MR. MOORE stated that Joshua Almeda murdered his daughter, is
being sentenced next week, and he will be subject to these new
laws. Senator Coghill included an exception, such that if a
person has been convicted of an unclassified felony, or a sexual
felony, as defined under Alaska statutes, the person would not
qualify for early parole. He noted that Version X, allows that
if someone is 45 years old and murders someone, they are
sentenced to 99 years, and eligible for parole in 33 years.
However, the new language reads that the person could be
released from jail after 10 years. Under current law, minimum
mandatory time to be served for second degree murder is 10
years, and 20 years for first degree murder. Yet, the minimum
mandatory time for rape is 25 years and 35 years; therefore,
someone convicted of rape will serve more time than someone
convicted of murder. Mr. Shilling performed research and found
that the minimum mandatory for murder being sentenced by judges
was 47-57 years. The signal being sent is that if a man rapes a
woman he is better off murdering her because he cannot,
potentially, be found guilty of rape. He acknowledged he has
not had a chance to read through Version X, but was concerned
about the amendments made to the prior version. It is necessary
that the committee attend the best interests of Alaska, he said.
5:44:29 PM
TRISHA HARVEY, Stop Valley Thieves, said she is in the retail
business, and minimum sentencing is already low enough for
repeat criminals, whether murder, rape, theft, and the committee
is discussing raising the threshold for felonies up to $2,000.
She described this as an open book for those committing repeated
thefts in valley to just keep robbing the retailers, which
affects everyone in the community because retailers have to
raise their prices. She remarked that she does not think the
legislature has vetted this bill enough, it is not taking into
consideration the impact this bill will have on the law abiding
community. She asked that the committee set it aside and re-
evaluate next session.
5:46:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN advised he submitted an amendment to change
the amount to $1,000, because he agrees with her thoughts.
MS. HARVEY acknowledged she had not had a chance to read Version
X, or she would have been aware of the change.
5:46:41 PM
KEN RAY read his testimony as follows:
My name is Ken Ray. I want to draw particular
attention to Vicki Wallner and the Stop Valley
Thieves. I think every one of you has a duty to look
at the Facebook site and see what a citizen's group
has done in the Mat-Su. You will see more criminal,
you will see more pictures of burglars, lots of
details.
I'm talking tonight about the prison farm at Point
Mackenzie. I was lucky enough to have an insider tour
by the previous administration. 128 beds sit out
there unused for years. Do something about it. There
has been a proposal, I stumbled into the Mat-Su Opiate
Task Force, a local organization "My House," was
proposing a detox center. I would like to see the
state get out of the detox business. The recent
tragedy and front-page news of the state being sued
for an inmate death in detox, in custody. Let them
sue the nonprofits. They got no money. Let's see if
we can't help, but I heard Department of Corrections
give a list of reasons why we can't do it. You're the
body that can change regulation and law. Please give
them the tools, and let's let nonprofits, which are
sometimes not accredited, take on some of the duties
for some of the detox and drug related. This drug
epidemic in Alaska, in the world, is out of control.
I've heard people describe it as a pandemic. I'm
going to quote Charlie Huggins, who said to me that
'the drugs in our neighborhoods, it is ISIS in our
neighborhoods.' We need to address addiction,
addiction drives crime, and treatment. I think the
crime bill is a start, I think it's very complicated.
I have a novel solution for you, presumptive
sentencing and harsh sentencing has got us to
overfilled prisons, let's give people tools they can
work with. Let's give the district attorney and the
judges the ability to use their discretion in 10
percent of their workload cases. We have elected
judges and appointed judges, let's trust their
judgment. Let's take and keep the presumptive
sentencing, but let's give these people tools and let
the third branch of government, the judiciary,
contribute to helping this prison over-population. I
want to thank everybody, you have done a lot of work.
I call the bill a little bit clunky, it breaks my
heart to hear people talk of being victims. Victims
for Justice has done an absolutely wonderful job.
Department of Law I don't hear any increased funding
in all of this. I have heard terms that less than 4
percent of people arrested actually go through the
criminal system to serve. Filling our prisons is not
the solution. Thank you very much everybody, I
represent myself. Just somebody ... By the way, one
more thing. The biggest, biggest thing for recidivism
is driving. The judge can reinstitute the driver's
license without DMV's approval. Rap the gavel, it's
done, with a limited license and lots of restrictions.
Consider something.
5:50:40 PM
STEVE ALEXANDER, Institutional Chaplain, Mat-Su Pretrial
Facility, said he has been working with prisoners and addicts
for the last 25 years, and he offers a narrow focus with respect
to driving privileges. He pointed out that the crafters of the
legislation missed one of the safest group of folks to hand a
driver's license back to, the number of folks who particularly
self-admit to year-long residential recovery places, and truly
manage to fight their way through to freedom from addiction.
These folks willingly go through one year of recovery in
residential recovery places, have great rates of staying sober,
with low recidivism rates, and they were missed here. He said
he would like to see these folks with a five year limit, and a
privilege to come back to that driving, because it helps them
stay out [of trouble]. Living in Alaska, the ability to return
to driving privileges is huge in becoming functional in Alaska's
communities. He asked that someone make an amendment [in this
regard], and opined that it could be placed somewhere on pages
51-52, Version S. Many of the year-long residential places are
faith based, some are secular, but both do good work. He
stressed helping these folks who pose the least risk of all of
the people he has worked with in addiction recovery coming out
of prison.
5:53:08 PM
MICHAEL SHAFFER, Prosecutor, Municipality of Anchorage, pointed
out that he is speaking solely on his own behalf from his
prosecutor experience spanning over 10 years in Alaska. Plainly
speaking, he opined, this legislation will make Alaska one of
the un-safest, if not the un-safest state in the country. He
said he read the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission's report,
and the finding of the PEW Charitable Trust research which are
highly flawed. He said it is notable that the committee
included almost no one from the frontlines of law enforcement,
and no one from the Anchorage Police Department. Only one
person very belatedly [technical difficulties] highly
unrepresented. This bill will, essentially, make most crimes
virtually [technical difficulties] unenforceable. For example,
the vast majority of crimes are misdemeanor crimes, but they are
serious crimes, and the bill reduces everything that is a class
A to 20 days actual time, or six days for class B crimes
reducing them to six days, or no time at all. There is a
provision that, essentially, reads: under $250, and the first
offense, there are no penal consequences; the second time, no
penal consequences at all; and the third time, five days
suspended with six month incarceration and six-month probation.
Therefore, people get the word out that all they have to do is
steal under $250, which will have a huge impact on that
particular crime around the state. He related that it will
reduce a whole category of crimes of child abuse, child neglect,
harassment, use of fire arms. He noted he was talking about
issues within a municipality. He referred to the discussions of
electronic monitoring and said it doesn't really matter because
if violating conditions, which is what is in here as a
violation, people will violate judge's orders and people will
not show up for court. This will strain the court system
dramatically, he related, and the bottom line is that there is
no real assessment to any cost savings, but there will be an
enormous social cost to the entire state. He opined that every
legislator voting for this bill is willing to make Alaska go
from one of the safest, highest quality of life states, to one
of the least, based on something being rammed through here.
5:58:15 PM
MAXINE DOOGAN, Community United for Safety and Protection,
offered appreciation to the committee for its hard work, and
urged the committee to support the bill.
5:58:53 PM
CARMEN LOWRY, Executive Director, Alaska Network on Domestic
Violence and Sexual Assault (ANDVSA), explained that the Alaska
Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault (ANDVSA) is a
coalition of 19 member programs providing domestic violence, and
sexual assault services across the state. She advised that
ANDVSA supports SB 91, Version Y, and offered appreciation for
the hard work put into the bill. She noted, in particular, the
manner in which domestic violence and sexual assault crimes are
treated differently than other violent and non-violent crimes.
CHAIR LEDOUX noted Ms. Lowry reference to Version Y, and asked
whether that means she prefers the Senate's version.
MS. LOWRY advised that ANDVSA had just received the summary of
changes to Version X, and has not had time to go through this
version. She expressed that ANDVSA supports the reinvestment
piece where investment goes into prevention and intervention
services.
6:00:48 PM
ROBYN LANGLIE, Executive Director, Victims for Justice, said she
has not seen the latest [version], but previously reviewed
reinvestment at $13 million. She pointed to the other states
implementing similar programs and succeeding with criminal
justice reinvestment and reform. She noted that the investments
are as follows: Texas reinvested $241 million; Oregon $58
million; and Georgia approximately $80 million. She pointed out
that $13 million will not work for what is necessary in Alaska.
The biggest problem is mental health and the Department of
Corrections (DOC) is the biggest server of mental health. In
order to fix that problem [there is a need for] mental health
treatment, substance abuse treatment, and drug abuse treatment
centers both in and out of prison. She said she has victim
clients, actively ready to get into treatment, who have turned
to drugs and alcohol waiting for a treatment bed. Victims for
Justice cannot find space for their clients because the waiting
lists are long. She reiterated that $13 million will not going
to make a big enough dent, because only $2.5 million was put
toward drug and alcohol substance abuse treatment. The state
will be releasing more people, yet, it does not have the
services to back it up. She acknowledged that this is a time of
fiscal conservativism, but this is not the place to cut the
budget when it could impact public safety. She urged the
committee not to support it and find more money to put [into
treatment] before this bill goes into place.
6:03:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN asked whether her organization was asking
the committee to not support the bill totally, or not support a
portion.
MS. LANGLIE expressed that the majority of her concerns regard
the reinvestment piece, because the problems can't be stopped in
Alaska, or fixed, without having those services in place.
6:03:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked Ms. Langlie to offer the
reinvestment amount for Texas again.
MS. LANGLIE opined that Texas originally saved $586 million
because it did not have to build a new prison to accommodate
what the growing population would have been, and in addition, it
reinvested $241 million into mental health, substance abuse,
drug abuse, prisoner reentry, victims' services, restitution,
and the list goes on.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN related that Texas has a population of
roughly 27.5 million people and Alaska has approximately
700,000. On a per capita basis, Texas invested approximately
$8.50-$9.00 per person, whereas Alaska's investment of $13
million is $18-$19 per person. Although, the actual pure
dollars being invested in Texas was certainly much more, he said
he was struck that for a small state, population-wise, Alaska's
investment on a per capita basis seems like it is investing more
than Texas. He acknowledged that her concern is reinvestment
and asked whether looking at the per capita investment changes
her thoughts.
6:05:41 PM
MS. LANGLIE replied it did not change her thoughts when
considering the fact that Alaska is so spread out. When looking
at mental health, substance abuse, and drug abuse treatment,
"You're looking at putting it in every single village and city
in Alaska," and that will cost more than having hubs and centers
that are more easily accessible in Texas. Not to mention, she
said, Alaska's centers will have to be more culturally
appropriate; therefore, there is no one set way to institute
mental health and drug and alcohol abuse treatment.
6:06:23 PM
AMBER SCHLESINGER offered support for SB 91, and noted that a
large number of alcohol offenders, currently incarcerated in the
system, is not helping Alaska's communities or the budget. She
said she is hopeful the state can invest in reducing the
recidivism rate for non-violent offenders.
6:07:22 PM
BILL COMER, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Public Safety,
offered that the Department of Public Safety supports SB 91, and
specifically supports control of electronic monitoring by the
Department of Corrections (DOC) within the pretrial and post-
conviction provisions.
6:08:07 PM
CINDY MOORE advised the listening public, Version X is quite
different from Version Y, and noted that a lot has been changed.
She urged everyone to read Version X, because there have been
numerous changes and opined that many of the changes make this
bill worse than it was within Version Y.
6:09:45 PM
PAT VENTGEN, Owner, Recovery and Reentry Solutions of Alaska,
said he is the owner of Recovery and Reentry Solutions of
Alaska, he is a behavioral health provider and consultant, and
he is in support of the bill.
He related that he works in the area of chemical dependency and
mental health, and stressed that these changes are sorely needed
to focus on treatment, and to help providers, the DOC, and the
judiciary system to put more emphasis on badly needed treatment
throughout the system. He supports SB 91 because it puts the
state in the direction of focusing more on treatment,
particularly, with the McDowell report, the PEW Charitable Trust
report, and the recommendations of the [Criminal Justice
Commission], the crime reform bill is moving the state in the
correct direction, he said.
6:11:08 PM
REECE BURKE said he is in favor of SB 91, and offered testimony,
as follows:
For myself, getting my driver's license back so I can
return to work. (Indisc.) contractors here in the
Interior can't hire me because I don't have a valid
Alaska driver's license. When I first came to Alaska,
I had an Idaho driver's license and I had to get an
Alaska driver's license to gain employment. And now,
since I lost my license due to a DUI, I can't get
work. And I haven't worked since October 2013, so
that portion of the bill is extremely important to me.
So, I'm hoping that the House members can see their
way fit to pass this legislation so I can return to
work. Thank you.
6:13:20 PM
The committee took a brief at ease.
6:13:46 PM
CHAIR LEDOUX, after ascertaining no one further wished to
testify, closed public testimony.
[SB 91 was held over.]