Legislature(1995 - 1996)

02/22/1996 01:41 PM House FIN

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
txt
  HOUSE BILL 75                                                                
                                                                               
       An Act relating to criminal mischief.                                   
                                                                               
  Co-Chair Hanley provided members with a committee substitute                 
  for HB  75, Work Draft  #9-LS0369\O, dated 2/15/96  (copy on                 
  file).                                                                       
                                                                               
  ANNE CARPENETI,  ASSISTANT ATTORNEY  GENERAL, DEPARTMENT  OF                 
  LAW reviewed the  committee substitute.  She  noted that the                 
  Committee discussed the inclusion of  vehicles that would be                 
                                                                               
                                2                                              
                                                                               
                                                                               
  covered under the felony vehicle  theft provision during the                 
  2/13/95 meeting.  This information was added on page 1, line                 
  12  of the  work draft.    She added  that page  2,  line 30                 
  provides  for vehicle  theft  in  the  second degree.    She                 
  observed that vehicles not specified  under vehicle theft in                 
  the first degree would be covered under vehicle theft in the                 
  second degree.  She  clarified that snow machines  fit under                 
  vehicle theft in the second degree.   Second degree theft is                 
  an A misdemeanor with  a maximum sentence of up  to a $5,000                 
  thousand dollar fine and one year in jail.                                   
                                                                               
  Representative Mulder MOVED to adopt Work Draft #9-LS0369\O,                 
  dated 2/15/96.  There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.                 
                                                                               
  Representative  Mulder prepared  a  House Finance  Committee                 
  fiscal  note for the  Department of  Corrections (Attachment                 
  1).   He explained that  the House Finance  Committee fiscal                 
  note  was based  on assumptions  used  in the  Department of                 
  Corrections' fiscal  note for  SB 14.   Senate  Bill 14  was                 
  introduced in 1995  by Senator Leman.   Senate Bill 14  also                 
  addressed criminal mischief.                                                 
                                                                               
  Ms. Carpeneti characterized HB  75 as a "tougher" bill  than                 
  SB  14.   She  observed that  HB  75 raises  the offense  of                 
  vehicle  theft  from a  class  A  misdemeanor to  a  class C                 
  felony.   She  estimated  that this  change  will result  in                 
  additional costs.  Representative Mulder maintained that the                 
  costs would not be greater.  He provided members with copies                 
  of  the Department  of Corrections'  fiscal note  for SB  14                 
  (Attachment 2).                                                              
                                                                               
  Discussion ensued regarding the provisions of SB 14.                         
                                                                               
  JERRY  LUCKHAUPT,  LEGISLATIVE  LEGAL  COUNSEL,  LEGISLATIVE                 
  AFFAIRS  AGENCY clarified that CSSB 14  (JUD), vetoed by the                 
  Governor,  retained  the   existing  penalty  structure  for                 
  juveniles.  He  observed that  the original draft  of SB  14                 
  would  have  revised the  penalty  structure.   The original                 
  draft more closely resembled HB 75.                                          
                                                                               
  Representative  Mulder  pointed out  that  Attachment 2  was                 
  drafted  based  on  the  original  version  of SB  14.    He                 
  maintained that the provisions of SB  14 can be compared for                 
  fiscal impact.                                                               
                                                                               
  JERRY SHRINER, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,                 
  DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS discussed Attachments 1 and 2.  He                 
  explained that the calculations used in the  fiscal note for                 
  SB 14 did not  take into account the  number of second  time                 
  felons that would be presumptively sentenced to a minimum of                 
  four years.   Thirty-two of one hundred  and sixty offenders                 
  prosecuted under felony car theft in  HB 75 are estimated to                 
                                                                               
                                3                                              
                                                                               
                                                                               
  be second time offenders.                                                    
                                                                               
  Representative Mulder provided members with assumptions used                 
  in preparations of  the House Finance Committee  fiscal note                 
  for the Department of Corrections, HB 75 (Attachment 3).  He                 
  maintained that the  assumptions used  by the Department  of                 
  Corrections were excessive.  He observed that the Department                 
  estimated that  it will  cost $107  dollars a  day to  house                 
  these offenders.  He reviewed assumptions used in Attachment                 
  3.  He  estimated that  it will  cost $57 dollars  a day  to                 
  house second time offenders.  The fiscal note authorizes 1.4                 
  new  positions.    He  clarified   that  the  House  Finance                 
  Committee fiscal  note was based on assumptions  used in the                 
  fiscal note prepared by the Department of Corrections for SB
  14, regarding the number of offenders and days served.                       
                                                                               
  Mr. Shriner noted that the Department estimated that  32 out                 
  of  160 offenders would be second time offenders which would                 
  be incarcerated for a minimum of 90 days.  He  stressed that                 
  $107 dollars a day is  the Department's best guess regarding                 
  what  it  costs  to  operate.    He stated  that  CRC's  and                 
  probation costs would be more than $1.0 million dollars even                 
  if the prison time was eliminated.  The fiscal note prepared                 
  by  Representative Mulder  for the  House Finance  Committee                 
  estimates  a  cost  of  $801.0   thousand  dollars  for  the                 
  Department  of Corrections.   The  Department's fiscal  note                 
  estimates a cost of $1.306.7 million dollars.                                
                                                                               
  Representative  Brown   noted  that  state  prisons  are  at                 
  capacity.    She questioned  how  the cost  of incarceration                 
  could  be  zero.   Representative  Mulder stated  that every                 
  institution is not at full capacity.  He maintained that the                 
  32 offenders can be absorbed into existing institutions.  He                 
  asserted  that  there  is elasticity  in  the  Department in                 
  regards to cost.  He maintained  that 32 extra offenders are                 
  not  going  to  increase  the  Department's  cost  of  doing                 
  business.   Representative  Brown expressed  doubt that  the                 
  Department could  absorb  32  prisoners  without  additional                 
  cost.                                                                        
                                                                               
  In   response  to   a  question  by   Representative  Kelly,                 
  Representative  Mulder   reiterated  factors  used   in  the                 
  calculations of the fiscal note.                                             
                                                                               
  Representative Mulder MOVED  to report CSHB 75 (FIN)  out of                 
  Committee  with  individual  recommendations  and  with  the                 
  accompanying fiscal notes, with the  exception of the fiscal                 
  note for  the  Department of  Corrections.   There being  NO                 
  OBJECTION, it was so ordered.                                                
                                                                               
  Representative Mulder  MOVED  to adopt  the $801.0  thousand                 
  dollar  House   Finance  Committee   fiscal  note   for  the                 
                                                                               
                                4                                              
                                                                               
                                                                               
  Department of Corrections.   Representative Brown  OBJECTED.                 
  A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION.                                    
                                                                               
  IN FAVOR: Kelly, Kohring, Martin, Mulder,  Navarre, Parnell,                 
            Therriault, Hanley                                                 
  OPPOSED:  Brown                                                              
                                                                               
  Co-Chair Foster  and Representative Grussendorf  were absent                 
  from the vote.                                                               
                                                                               
  The MOTION PASSED (8-1).                                                     
                                                                               
  CSHB 75 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a "do pass"                 
  recommendation and with  nine fiscal impact notes;  three by                 
  the Department of  Health & Social Services,  dated 1/30/96;                 
  one by  the Department  of Law,  dated 1/30/96;  one by  the                 
  Alaska Court System, dated 1/30/96; two by the Department of                 
  Public  Safety,  dated  1/30/96; one  by  the  House Finance                 
  Committee for the  Department of Corrections; and one by the                 
  Department of Administration.                                                
  HOUSE BILL 75                                                                
                                                                               
       An Act relating to criminal mischief.                                   
                                                                               
  Representative Mulder clarified  that CSHB 75 (FIN)  and the                 
  original version of  SB 14  were both tougher  than CSSB  14                 
  (JUD)  which  was  vetoed by  the  Governor  after  the last                 
  session.                                                                     

Document Name Date/Time Subjects