Legislature(2015 - 2016)BUTROVICH 205
04/02/2015 09:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB91 | |
| SB1 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 74 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 1 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 58 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 91 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 91-CRIMINAL LAW/PROCEDURE; DRIV LIC; PUB AID
9:09:00 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE announced the consideration of SB 91.
SENATOR JOHN COGHILL, sponsor of SB 91, revealed that during the
previous year he had worked with the Senate to address
corrections reform. He explained that a commission was put
together to study Alaska's corrections system and sentencing
structures.
He noted that prior to working in the Legislature, he had served
as a pastoral worker and spent a third of his time either in a
halfway house or in a jail dealing with people. He detailed that
his pastoral work provided him with an interesting view to see
everything from people who made mistakes and were trying to find
a way to correct, to those who were really good conmen or were
just bad people.
He disclosed that he has paid close attention to corrections and
sentencing issues during his time on various committees in the
Legislature. He noted that he has served nearly all of his time
on judiciary committees and has been responsible for helping
create laws that hold people accountable at a high level;
however, he became aware of issues where felons were being put
into prison without expectations for change. He remarked that he
became a magnet for corrections and sentencing issues after SB
64 passed in 2014, a bill that addressed reform. He added that
he currently knows more about the process of enforcement, the
courts, and prison than he ever thought he would.
9:11:18 AM
He asserted that he wants the public to be safe through good
peacekeeping, protection and restitution for victims, offender
productivity, and rehabilitation for offenders. He remarked that
getting people who will change into programs with some degree of
accountability is his focus. He revealed that approximately 90
percent of prisoners currently in jail will be back in society
in one form or another. He said the question is whether released
prisoners will reform or recidivate as well as how to keep
individuals accountable.
He said the high cost of building Goose Creek Correctional
Center made it apparent to him that the state would not be able
to afford another $250 million prison for a good while, but
noted that the prison population continues to grow. He added
that the cost to annually operate Goose Creek costs $50 million.
He asserted that based on inmate population trends, the state
will not be able to hold people without building another prison,
a problem that is coming very fast. He asserted that the state
does not get to deal with how society changes where offenders
show up at the door because of enforcement issues, but the state
wants good enforcement.
SENATOR STOLTZE pointed out that Goose Creek is an operating
budget expense, specifically a lease-purchase that is similar to
the Seward-model.
SENATOR COGHILL stated that SB 91 is a work in progress and he
is very open to discussion. He summarized that the challenge is
trying to figure out how to keep people from returning to prison
while keeping the public safe.
9:14:47 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI joined the committee meeting.
SENATOR COGHILL explained that the nonviolent prison population
includes people in the pretrial and probation violation
categories. He noted that the length of stays has an impact on
the prison populations and the intent is to find ways to turn
that around.
CHAIR STOLTZE asked that Senator Coghill define and specify the
types of people identified as nonviolent so that the public can
weigh in on the proposed policies.
SENATOR COGHILL replied that he is initially addressing the
nonviolent population in different categories from a high
overview perspective.
SENATOR STOLTZE pointed out that legislators have to be
sensitive to a person who has been burglarized that might
consider a certain level of violence due to an invasion of one's
privacy. He noted that Alaska's Constitution addresses both
reform and victim's rights.
SENATOR COGHILL agreed that a balance has to exist for
nonviolent people who have violated someone. He said an
offender's payback must be considered if jail time is the best
and can restitution be considered. He explained that his
presentation will give the committee a high overview of the bill
polices and then get into some of the specifics.
9:16:50 AM
SENATOR COGHILL pointed out that electronic monitoring is going
to be one area where people may be held accountable without
costly jail time. He noted that electronic monitoring may
include nonviolent individuals who are in pretrial for domestic
violence that are not married or cohabitating, parolees with
good-time credit, or probationers.
SENATOR COGHILL explained that SB 91 addresses policies that
include: administrative sanctions, probation caps, technical
violations, good-time on parole, protective orders, police
training surcharge, community work service, increased judicial
discretion, and driver's licenses. He detailed that technical
violations are situations where a probationer does not get to
their meeting on time and good-time is a benefit earned by a
person who does their actions well in prison. He noted that the
police training surcharge was first put in in 1998 and the bill
looks at upping the charge. He explained that judicial
discretion was increased in some places. He admitted that there
is always tension between the legislative branch, the judicial
branch, and the Department of Law on allowing judges with more
discretion even after a sentence has been handed down or a
bargain has been agreed upon. He detailed that driver's licenses
addresses DMV revocations and other revocations.
9:19:47 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE added that administrative revocations are also
included.
SENATOR COGHILL answered yes. He detailed that administrative
revocations do not always line up authority-wise and SB 91 tries
to address that. He explained that limited licenses are for
individuals who have revoked licenses. He admitted that some
people are driving anyway without impunity, no accountability,
no insurance, and people can be hurt. He detailed that limited
license allows an individual to drive under certain conditions
with insurance and accountability.
He stated that earned-credit is for the nonviolent population
that addresses how to provide an opportunity for betterment. He
noted that the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission and
legislators have brought up people coming out of jail that are
forbidden in Alaska to get food stamps. He detailed that SB 91
addresses the policy question whether punishment should follow
an offender out of jail or should an individual be allowed to
receive food stamps during their reentry program to improve
their lot in life.
9:21:02 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS joined the committee meeting.
SENATOR MCGUIRE noted that Senator Coghill's presentation
addresses a complex area. She emphasized that the factors
driving prison growth include the nonviolent population, those
awaiting judgement in the pretrial population, increase in the
average length of stay, and probation violations. She revealed
that the Senate Judiciary Committee repeatedly hears the factors
for prison growth and cost increases. She asserted that the
dollars spent on increased prison costs could be used towards
education funding, infrastructure development in the Arctic, or
all kinds of things. She stated that holding people accountable
is important, but rethinking how corrections can be done more
efficiently must also be considered.
SENATOR COGHILL summarized that there are so many interlocking
pieces in SB 91. He reiterated that his intent is to review the
policy calls being looked at and then to review how the sections
interlink within the bill.
9:23:28 AM
JORDAN SHILLING, Staff, Senator John Coghill, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, explained that there are two big
pieces in the bill that deal with driving reforms:
administrative license revocations and limited licenses.
MR. SHILLING explained that administrative license revocation is
something that occurs pretty quickly after someone either
refuses a breath test or produces a breathalyzer test of 0.08
blood alcohol content or greater. He detailed that for public
safety reasons, revocation is done right away. He specified that
driving under the influence (DUI) is a 90 day revocation for the
first offense, 1 year for the second offense, and a lifetime
revocation for the third offense with a 10 year period. He
revealed that what can happen with administrative revocations is
a person does not get their driver's license back if their case
is dismissed or the person is found not guilty. He specified
that if a person is acquitted or their case has been dismissed
with prejudice, the administrative revocation is synched up with
the court revocation to allow the person to get their driver's
license back.
He explained that the limited license portion of the bill
addresses a felony DUI situation where a person has their
license revoked for life. He said there is a thought from people
in the criminal justice community that people do not simply quit
driving when their license has been taken away. He detailed that
in an effort to steer people with revocations towards a limited
license if their vehicle has mandatory interlock, a requirement
to have insurance, and participation in the Alcohol Safety
Action Program (ASAP) with 24/7 sobriety. He said an individual
would be extended a limited license if they jump through the
noted hoops and drive safely on the road.
9:26:04 AM
MR. SHILLING addressed the pretrial population and revealed that
40 percent of the state's prison population is pretrial. He
specified that the pretrial population consists of people that
have not been found guilty yet, but the group is one of DOC's
biggest cost drivers; some are going to be found not guilty,
some are going to have their cases dismissed, but those people
already cost the state money before decisions are reached. He
specified that the bill creates an ability for a judge to
determine if someone can be restricted to home confinement with
GPS monitoring with possible alcohol monitoring during pretrial.
He detailed that if a judge deems home confinement is a safe
approach, the individual will get credit for time served. He
revealed data from a recent survey that 340 nonviolent pretrial
offenders in prison for drug or property crimes were costing the
state $53,000 per day.
CHAIR STOLTZE asked if all drug crimes are nonviolent.
MR. SHILLING replied that the Alaska Department of Corrections
(DOC) classifies drug offenders as either nonviolent or violent.
He agreed that some of the crimes technically classified as
nonviolent are invasive and fall into some gray areas.
CHAIR STOLTZE commented that some drug crimes are pretty black
and white.
SENATOR MCGUIRE revealed that she had heard a claim in the
Senate Judiciary Committee that 90 percent of all crimes in all
categories includes some form of drug or alcohol use. She asked
him to verify that the pretrial population identified by Mr.
Shilling specifically involve drugs without a crime against a
person.
9:29:46 AM
MR. SHILLING answered correct. He specified that many of the
individuals are Class C felons for drug possession.
SENATOR COGHILL added that the judge's discretion for the
pretrial population has to be significant where bail is
immediately set and either the person is kept in jail or allowed
to be held accountable outside of jail.
CHAIR STOLTZE stated that he wants to be careful. He pointed out
that a drug bill from the previous year had falsely referenced
the disposition of an individual that fueled a lot of debate.
SENATOR MCGUIRE replied that she respects what Chairman Stoltze
said. She remarked that she has watched the state go in cycles
between incarceration and rehabilitative deterrent models. She
said Senator Coghill's model is a good one that takes into
account changing policies, but does not over react and let the
"pendulum" swing too far. She asserted that no one in the
committee would envision letting somebody in the pretrial
population out that is a violent offender with a propensity to
hurt somebody. She remarked that the bill addresses nonviolent
offenders who have been divided into a particular category. She
said the conversation is worth having whether or not to expand
the housing of nonviolent offenders on electronic monitoring
with a 24/7 sobriety program.
9:32:41 AM
MR. SHILLING said there are two other electronic monitoring
reforms. He revealed that offenders in prison currently get one
third off of their sentence for good behavior. He specified that
the bill would extend good-time when DOC deems an offender safe
enough to release on electronic monitoring. He said the second
aspect addresses domestic violence offenders. He explained that
a statutory prohibition exists that does not allow DOC to put
any domestic violence offender on electronic monitoring. He
specified that electronic monitoring would only be considered
for non-intimate partner domestic violence offenders and not for
intimate partner domestic violence offenders.
He revealed that one of the main drivers for the state's prison
population are the nonviolent offenders. He explained that
prisons used to be filled with a majority of violent offenders.
Just in the past decade, the majority are now nonviolent
offenders. He said the bill encourages nonviolent offenders to
seek and complete treatment while in prison with a goal for the
individual to not recidivate. He noted that Alaska has the third
highest recidivism rate in the U.S. where two thirds reoffend
within three years. He revealed that DOC has reported that
nonviolent offenders who complete treatment while in prison
reduce their likelihood to reoffend by 21 percent.
MR. SHILLING detailed that DOC has a range of treatment
programs, including: Life Success Substance Abuse Treatment
(LSSAT) and Residential Substance Abuse Treatment (RSAT). He
specified that LSSAT is an outpatient program that takes about
six months to complete, RSAT is a more intensive program that
takes about a year to complete. He revealed that according to
DOC, 80 percent of its prison population has a drug or alcohol
problem.
He concurred with Senator McGuire that drug and alcohol use is a
nexus to many crimes. He noted that public defenders have said
that 90 to 95 percent of their clients committed their crimes
while under the influence of some substance. He revealed that 32
states have some form of earned credit, either for probation or
in a facility, when an individual completes a treatment program.
He pointed out that prisoners are currently given good-time for
doing virtually nothing where two thirds of their sentence is
taken off in a block up front. He specified that the bill
proposes that credit will only be applied if an offender does
something of merit, like pass their General Educational
Development (GED) exam.
9:36:13 AM
He said the same logic of the earned credit would be applied to
probation and parole reforms where month to month compliance
would result in credit off of probation sentences. He explained
that probation officer (PO) caseloads are extremely high where
each PO averages 84 probationers. He added that caseloads have
increased 36 percent over the last 10 years. He asserted that
establishing earned credits would allow limited supervision
resources to be focused on high risk offenders while also
encouraging probationers to comply with their terms. He detailed
that eligibility for credit would include meeting obligations
such as victim restitution. He added that a cap for technical
violations on jail terms was also created. He revealed that 20
percent of DOC's prison population is due to probation
violations where new crimes are not committed, but terms of
conditions are violated.
CHAIR STOLTZE asked if the violations are for infractions
outside of incarceration.
MR. SHILLING answered yes.
CHAIR STOLTZE asked that the committee have discussions with DOC
employees as well.
9:38:18 AM
MR. SHILLING declared that the bill's proposes to put a cap on
the amount of time someone can spend in prison on a technical
violation. He noted that many states have placed caps on
technical violations, some with 90 days.
CHAIR STOLTZE asked if technical violation would apply to a sex
offender who does not stay away from a playground.
MR. SHILLING answered that not all technical violations are
equal, some are much worse than others.
CHAIR STOLTZE replied that his instincts were correct where he
should be concerned.
MR. SHILLING specified that a technical violation for missing an
appointment is one thing, but violating the terms for sex
offender treatment is obviously much worse.
CHAIR STOLTZE opined that skipping class and hanging around
grade schools would be worse.
MR. SHILLING explained that SB 91 proposes to do something
similar to technical violations were minimums and maximums are
placed on a number of crimes; example, burglary would be 3 to 7
years. He added that the bill also creates an alternative for
DOC's administrative sanctions where a PO would have more
discretion to swiftly punish an individual other than strictly
petitioning to revoke probation and remanding back to prison.
9:40:47 AM
SENATOR MCGUIRE asked if there is anything in the bill that
expands the 24/7 Sobriety Program to give judges the discretion
to use the program for probation violations that involve
alcohol. She revealed that approximately 6,000 Alaskans are
participating in the 24/7 Sobriety Program. She detailed that
participants blow into a breathalyzer twice a day and the
program has successfully turned people's lives around. She noted
that there have only been 3 violations in the last couple of
months out of 6,000 participants. She detailed that the 24/7
Sobriety Program is used in pretrial as a sentencing mitigator.
She agreed with Chairman Stoltze that a violation for a sex
offender is a totally separate issue; however, consideration
should be given for allowing judges to extend the 24/7 Sobriety
Program to those on probation with an underlying addiction. She
detailed that violators could be extended the opportunity to go
into the 24/7 Sobriety Program as opposed to going back to jail
for 90 day at $150 per day.
CHAIR STOLTZE opined that most second time offenders have used
treatment options as a ploy.
SENATOR MCGUIRE replied that her understanding is the 24/7
Sobriety Program has not been used in the probation violation
breaks.
MR. SHILLING explained that SB 64 created the successful 24/7
Sobriety Program. He disclosed that judges have the ability to
apply the program as a bail or probation condition. He said the
court system does not frequently use the 24/7 Sobriety Program
for probation. He surmised that Senator McGuire may be talking
about a diversion program that allows POs to send someone into
the 24/7 Sobriety Program for a violation. He said he is not
sure if POs have the authority to send someone into a 24/7
Sobriety Program and noted the probability for due process
considerations.
9:44:27 AM
He explained that due to comprehensive welfare reform in the
mid-90s, assistance was not allowed for individuals convicted of
felony drug charges. He added that prisoners are released
without identification and some individuals need to support a
family. He explained that SB 91 purposes to provide a bridge
while a released inmate finds a job by providing food to an
individual and their family rather than having the individual
fall back into criminal activity as a way to make money. He
added that a second component tasks DOC to establish a reentry
program that a prisoner would participate in 90 days preceding
their release. He detailed that prisoners would address:
community resources, reentry planning, probation overview, and
how to get a photo ID. He added that future consideration may be
given to requiring DOC to provide an ID when a prisoner is
released.
He summarized that SB 91 expands a mitigating factor for those
who complete treatment, reforms community work service where
conversion into jail time is not allowed if service is not
completed, makes a small change to the protective order
statutes, and increases the police training surcharge.
CHAIR STOLTZE noted that the sponsor has worked with a lot of
stakeholders that are trying to do some unprovoked good,
including national organizations like the Pew Charitable Trusts.
CHAIR STOLTZE revealed that the fastest growing website
originating in his and Senator Huggins' districts is Stop Valley
Thieves, a website with over 6,000 participants. He asserted
that an under represented point of view in the legislative
process is the person that stays away from the criminal system
and only encounters it on the victim end.
9:47:46 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if Mr. Shilling knew the statistical
gender breakdown for DOC inmates.
MR. SHILLING answered no. He said DOC keeps offender profile
data. He stated that the women's population is increasing at a
quicker pace and added that the Alaska native population is over
represented.
SENATOR HUGGINS opined that the young men and women that
ultimately end up in prison can be predicted with some degree of
confidence in middle school.
CHAIR STOLTZE pointed out that some of the young men and women
that Senator Huggins noted do straighten themselves out too,
some through good sports programs.
9:49:33 AM
RONALD TAYLOR, Commissioner, Alaska Department of Corrections,
Anchorage, Alaska, noted that he worked on SB 64 with Senator
Coghill and Senator Ellis, a complex bill that required everyone
to work through the bill's nuances to make sure the end result
was something that could be supported and could continue to be
supported. He said SB 91 was also a complex bill that has to be
delved into. He asserted that DOC is committed to working with
the senators and their staff. He said concerns raised by
Chairman Stoltze will be taken into account. He declared that
category definitions will be provided to accurately identify
which of those are nonviolent versus violent. He set forth that
DOC will work to make sure that the legislative goals are
accomplished, goals that the department believes are positive.
He stated that the department's goal is to do a better job to
ensure that those in DOC's custody or released on probation and
parole stay in their community rather than going back into
custody for minor technical violations. He asserted that he
wants to make sure that technical violations are distinguished
from those that are significant enough for jail; however, there
are some that DOC believes should not be in jail. He stated that
DOC can do some alternatives and do a better job tying to an
individual's risk and need.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR noted that Mr. Shilling said, "We want to
punish." He asserted that the wrong mindset is to have probation
officers in a mindset that DOC needs to punish. He said the
people who need to do the punishing or give the sentences are
the judges and parole boards. He declared that DOC's job is to
give a person a recommendation on a plan to be successful and
not a plan of punishment.
9:52:46 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE asked if Commissioner Taylor supports any
administrative changes while people are incarcerated, such as
the power to take away good-time.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR replied that DOC currently has the power to
take away good-time.
CHAIR STOLTZE asked if DOC should be limited in taking away
good-time or should good-time remain untouched by the
Legislature.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR replied that he does not think SB 91 targets
good-time.
CHAIR STOLTZE specified that he is asking a broad question if he
thinks that good-time is an important management tool for DOC,
especially when the department is undermanned.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR answered that the administrative tools that
DOC uses are important and the department does not want anything
that takes away from that. He stated that DOC wants to take full
advantage of any additional tools that can be utilized inside
its institutions. He pointed out that SB 91 focuses on the
administrative sanctions when persons are outside of the
institutions on probation and parole.
CHAIR STOLTZE said he would like to make sure that DOC employees
and their representatives address the committee. He stated that
DOC employees know the inmates better than anybody can imagine.
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR addressed Senator Huggins' question
regarding gender, he revealed that 88 percent of inmates are
male, 12 percent female.
He summarized that DOC looks forward to working with the
Legislature on SB 91 and taking care of the concerns that were
raised.
CHAIR STOLTZE admitted that the Legislature has taken a
piecemeal approach to corrections reform and noted that he had a
discussion on another piece of legislation that addressed
probation. He said the committee will have Commissioner Taylor
back for further discussions.
SENATOR HUGGINS remarked that prison is really like any other
society where somebody is in charge, sometimes it's the guards
and sometimes it's the prisoners. He said prisons have an ethnic
makeup with regional pieces, power-brokering, contraband, and
visitation issues. He asked how the variables that he described
affect the profile of inmates. He pointed out that DOC gets a
different look at inmates inside prison where an individual
shows their hand whether they may be more hardened or
victimized.
9:56:40 AM
COMMISSIONER TAYLOR responded that Senator Huggins described
prisons quite well. He said DOC deals with a range of issues
when a person is brought into the institution and the un-
sentenced population brings even greater challenges. He said DOC
sort of knows what to expect from the sentenced population, but
the un-sentenced population comes in with many unpredictable
variables. He detailed that DOC has to determine the right place
to house a person and to make sure not to place someone with the
wrong people where rehabilitation inside and out of prison
becomes more difficult.
CHAIR STOLTZE noted his skepticism, but conceded that the
Legislature will have to figure a way to do things differently.
He thanked Commissioner Taylor and invited correctional officers
to attend a future meeting. He reiterated that he does not think
there is anybody in the system that knows what the Legislature
is dealing with as well as the correctional officers.
10:00:18 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE announced that he would hold SB 91 in committee.