Legislature(1995 - 1996)
05/02/1996 02:00 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE BILL 289
"An Act relating to runaway minors and their families
or legal custodians."
ALLISON GORDON, STAFF, SENATOR STEVE FRANK, provided the
Committee with a work draft for SB 289, 9-LS1635\J,
Lauterbach, 5/2/96. [Copy on file]. She pointed out that
the version before the Committee was a compromise with
Senator Frank, the Department of Law and the Department of
Health and Social Services. Ms. Gordon provided a sectional
analysis of the proposed legislation.
Page 2, Subsection (4) contains new language recommended by
the Department of Law in regard to contributing to the
delinquency of a minor. Changes would be to Page 3,
Subsection (1) resulting from concerns within the Department
of Public Safety in returning a minor run-away home and the
distance necessary to drive in order to return that person.
Language has been added to address that concern.
Ms. Gordon noted the change to Page 3, Line 19 and 20. The
new language would give officers permission to take the
child to the Division of Family and Youth Services (DFYS) if
they had reasonable cause to believe that the child had been
abused. Representative Brown inquired if the parent
referenced in that section could be the legal custodian.
DIANE WORLEY, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF FAMILY AND YOUTH
SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES, replied,
the referenced section deals with the parent or legal
guardian. Previous language would give the parent or legal
guardian the decision power to decide where the child would
be returned to. The change made indicates that if there was
a suspicion of abuse or neglect, a report to the Department
would be made and the Department would then decide (not the
parent), the location of placement of the child.
Ms. Gordon continued, the most substantial change in the
work draft would be to Page 5, Line 24, giving back the
determination whether or not to file a petition, if the
child was in need of aid. The language of the bill would
require the Department to provide a finding if they did not
file a petition. That information would then become
available to the parents.
Representative Kelly asked if the Department would be
required to file a petition within 24 hours of taking
custody of a child. Ms. Worley responded, at this point the
Department is not required to file a petition on any case.
The Department is required to file a "determination" based
3
on the findings. She emphasized that discretion is needed.
ANNE CARPENETI, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF
LAW, spoke to Page 5, Line 31, recommending that language
"including the factual findings on which the determination
was based" be deleted. She stated that there would be
determinations based on information other than factual
findings. To require factual findings for a determination
does not reflect what happened. Ms. Gordon stated that the
sponsor would not object to that deletion. Representative
Therriault asked a circumstance in which a decision would be
made on evidence not supported by factual findings.
Ms. Worley suggested that concern would be addressed more
through the verbiage of an agreement or determination. She
suggested that there could be a negotiated compromise
between a child and a parent giving the Division the
discretion to not file a petition.
Following discussion with Committee members, Ms. Carpeneti
suggested replacing the language with "reasons".
Representative Parnell MOVED deletion of "factual findings"
and inserting "reasons". There being NO OBJECTION, it was
adopted.
Ms. Carpeneti discussed changes to Page 6, beginning on Line
6, which would mirror the provision previously passed on the
House floor to "delinquent minors". The language would
require that parents attend the delinquency hearings of
their children. It would also allow the Court to order that
parents participate and pay for treatment.
Representative Parnell asked what would happen if the parent
did not attend. Ms. Carpeneti noted that was addressed in
Subsection (J); the proceeding would continue. If they were
not present, they could be charged with contempt and then
fined.
Ms. Gordon noted that Section 7 would deal with the time
when the minor was brought before the court. Representative
Parnell asked what would happen if the parents did not
follow the established conditions. Ms. Carpeneti explained
the same standard would be enforced.
Ms. Gordon continued, Section 8 would deal with the program
for run-away minors; the same language as contained in
version (D). Subsection (6) requires State facilities to
maintain semi-secure areas. She urged the Committee's
support in passage of the legislation.
Representative Parnell questioned that if subjecting the
4
juvenile's parents to contempt of court violations would
cause an increase to the Department of Public Safety fiscal
note.
DEL SMITH, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY,
replied, the Department does not anticipate more than a few
additional warrants or summons to be served, which would not
increase the fiscal note.
Representative Kelly MOVED to report HCS CS SB 289 (FIN) out
of Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
HCS CS SB 289 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with fiscal notes by the Department
of Administration, (3) by the Department of Health and
Social Services, the Department of Law, and the Alaska Court
System.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|