Legislature(1995 - 1996)
04/11/1995 10:05 AM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL NO. 135
"An Act relating to permanent fund dividend program
notice requirements, to the ineligibility for
dividends of individuals convicted of felonies
or incarcerated for misdemeanors, and to the
determination of the number and identity of certain
ineligible individuals; and providing for an effective
date."
Co-chair Frank explained that this is the same bill as last
year expanding the list of people to be denied eligibility
to include felons not serving jail time and third time
misdemeanant. The concept is to recoup State monies. Last
year the bill passed the Senate, but was not considered by
the House. There has been incorporated into the bill $2.7
million of expected savings in the FY 96 year, built into
the budget process. This bill is part of the Senate's
overall spending plan. Co-chair Frank explained that there
is no retroactive feature to the bill. This bill will
capture the dollars and put it into the budget opposed to
distributing them out to the dividend recipients.
Debra Vogt, Deputy Commissioner for the Dept. of Revenue
introduced Nancy Jones, Director, Permanent Fund Dividend
Division. Ms. Vogt spoke to the charts handed out at the
meeting (attached to the minutes). SB 135 changes, as the
sponsor has indicated, both the way the substantive
provisions of the legislation and the timing of the
legislation. The bill adds to the list of applicants who
are denied dividends for criminal activity. The list adds
misdemeanant, third time misdemeanant who are incarcerated,
and any felon. The purpose is to reimburse the state for
some of the costs associated with criminal activity. The
bill also adds to the list of agencies that receive funds
from the dividends denied the criminals. Currently, those
agencies that are permitted to receive funds include the
Crime Victim Compensation Fund, the Council on Domestic
Violence, and the Department of Corrections. The
legislation adds the Dept. of Revenue for child support, the
Dept. of Public Safety and the Dept. of Law. The reason for
the addition of the Dept. of Revenue for child support, is
that many of those being denied dividends are garnished by
the Child Support Enforcement Division for the support of
the criminal's children. By appropriating a portion of the
funds to the Dept. of Revenue for child support, it does not
give the money to the children, who would otherwise receive
it if the Child Support Enforcement Division were to
distribute to the children. The Department opposes changing
the eligibility requirements for dividends. There is
opposition to adding to the list of ineligible people and
adding to the list of eligible people. The timing and
fiscal issues are more important issues. Ms. Vogt referred
to her timeline under current law vs under SB 135. The
Department believes this is an appropriation to fund state
agencies out of the dividend fund. In the legislation, it
is prohibited from informing the dividend recipients that
this money has been taken out of their check. Section 7 of
the legislation says, "notwithstanding the amendments made
by the legislation, the notice requirements for 43.23.028 do
not apply to appropriations from the dividend fund made for
FY 96. The Department recognizes the sponsors desire to
close the gap between the criminal activity in one year and
the appropriation several years later. A felon in jail for
one year can only have one dividend taken away. This
legislation appropriates 2 dividends to state government,
which is why the Department is opposed to it.
Senator Phillips said that the legislation can be viewed as
a user fee. Ms. Vogt stated that the Department is not
opposed to the idea of denying criminals dividends. The
double-dipping aspect of this legislation takes two
dividends away, when there is really only one available.
Therefore the second dividend is coming from the rest of the
people of the state who are not criminals.
Loren Jones, Director, Division of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse
spoke to two issues in SB 135 that the department wanted to
bring to the committee's attention. Under this bill
extending it to third time misdemeanant offenders, the
majority of those offenders we believe will be referred to
the court system into the Alcohol Safety Action Program and
thus into alcohol treatment. Unlike felony probationers,
misdemeanant probationers, are not supervised by the
Department of Corrections. In most cases, if they are
alcohol related offenses, they are supervised through the
Alcohol Safety Action Program in the Dept. of Health &
Social Services. There are substantial costs that the
offender pays. Usually, access to, or receipt of the
dividend, provides those persons with money to pay for the
service. In the Alcohol Treatment System, it is estimated
that $300,000 of third party payments, or first party
payments from the clients, actually come from the their
dividends. There is concern that it would take away from the
local non-profit agencies, revenue available to them to
charge for their services. Senator Donley asked what else
the Dept. of Health & Social Services is doing to collect
funds from the criminals? Mr. Jones responded there are
several avenues. Providers can go off medicaid. Providers
can go after private insurance if the individuals have
private insurance. There is a requirement to collect fees
through small claims court. Most of the programs have a
sliding fee scale. The Department estimates that beyond the
dividends there is double that amount of money that is
collected from other fees. Many of the clients are also
coming out of a homeless situation, and more than 65% report
an income of less than $10,000 a year.
Mr. Robert Cole, Administrative Director for the Dept. of
Corrections, stated there is concern that the Administration
does not support the bill. Our most immediate concern is
that the FY 96 budget is contingent on this $2.7 million
revenue source. A second concern is that the $2.7 million
which would be realized if the funds are collected, is still
a one time shot and there is a concern of what position that
puts the Department in for the succeeding FY 97. Will the
Department then be $2.7 million out of the base in
succeeding years? There can be no assurances of revenue
from collection of permanent fund dividend checks from third
time misdemeanant. The Department of Corrections works with
the Department of Revenue and Public Safety to try to
correlate the information system with public safety's
information system and calculate the likely number of future
third time misdemeanant who would appear in the Department
of Correction's rolls, two and three years out, and in the
future. He stated that the payments are used to pay child
support payments, cost to treatment programs, debts owed and
other costs, fines, etc. He stated there would be a effect
on distribution in the future from those purposes to an
appropriation purpose. He stated that the Dept. of
Corrections does not know where they stand, and that it is
up to the appropriations process to decide, and not to be
locked in law.
Co-chair Frank MOVED to pass out of committee SB 137 with
individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes.
No objection having been heard SB 137 was REPORTED OUT of
committee with the following fiscal notes: Department of
Revenue $2.4; Department of Corrections, zero; Department of
Public Safety, $5.0; Department of Education, zero;
Department of Law, zero. Co-chairs Halford, Frank along
with Senators Rieger, Phillips, and Sharp recommended "do
pass". Senator Donley signed "no recommendations".
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|