Legislature(1997 - 1998)
02/27/1998 08:15 AM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL NO. 325
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government, for certain
programs, and to capitalize funds; making
appropriations under art. IX, sec. 17(c), Constitution
of the State of Alaska, from the constitutional budget
reserve fund; and providing for an effective date."
ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL BOARD
Co-Chair Hanley provided members with a proposed mission
statement and performance measures for the Alcohol Beverage
Control Board, Attachment 1 (copy on file).
DOUG GRIFFIN, ALCOHOL BEVERAGE CONTROL BOARD (ABC),
testified via teleconference from Anchorage. He spoke in
support of the proposed mission statement and performance
measures for the Alcohol Beverage Control Board.
Representative Davies noted that there was no mention of
keeping dry areas dry.
Mr. Griffin observed that the mission statement is broad.
He stressed that keeping dry areas dry would be included if
the statement was broken down into activities. The ABC
Board keeps a list of dry areas and the option each
community has adopted. This information is made available
to any package store engaged in filling written orders. A
register is kept on stores that engage in written orders.
This information is passed on to the appropriate law
enforcement branches.
In response to a question by Co-Chair Hanley, Mr. Griffin
clarified that Title 4 governs alcoholic beverages. Co-
Chair Hanley suggested that the reference to Title 4 be
replaced with specific language. He emphasized that the
intent is to make the mission statement and performance
measures easy to understand. The adoption of the mission
statement and performance measures is meant to give a broad
idea of the basic intent. Further backup will eventually be
available on all of the activities.
Mr. Griffin noted that "Title 4" could be replaced with
"notices of violations of alcoholic beverage laws."
Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT the mission statement and
performance measures for the Alcohol Beverage Control Board
as contained in Attachment 1. There being NO OBJECTION, it
was so ordered.
VILLAGE PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS
Members were provided with a copy of the proposed mission
statement and performance measures for the Village Public
Safety Officers Program, Attachment 2 (copy on file).
GLENN FLOTHE, CAPTAIN, COMMANDER, VILLAGE PUBLIC SAFETY
OFFICERS PROGRAM (VPSO), DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
reviewed Attachment 2. He observed that the mission to
provide first response and basic public safety in rural
communities is accurate. He observed that village public
safety officers have broad responsibilities. He stated that
the mission statement broadly address the activities of
village public safety officers in the villages.
Captain Flothe reviewed the proposed performance measures.
He observed that Alaska State Troopers (AST) criminal
responses should be reduced, over time, when a VPSO officer
is placed in a community. He expressed concern with the
performance measure: "Average VPSO time to respond, in a
community over time". He questioned if this performance
measure would demonstrate a significant change with the
addition of a VPSO in a village. A VPSO's response time
could be affected by an increase in criminal activity.
Captain Flothe anticipated that the need for repeat calls in
domestic violence cases would be reduced, over time, through
VPSO intervention. He also observed that VPSO's are trained
emergency trauma technicians (ETT). They are one of the
first responders in an emergency medical situation. The
presence of a VPSO should reduce injuries in a community.
Captain Flothe referred to the performance measure: "Lives
saved compared to lives lost in search and rescue, in a
community over time". He noted that VPSO have a significant
role in responding to search and rescues. He added that the
presence of a VPSO should result in a reduction in the
amount of stolen or damaged property.
Representative Davies expressed concern that the performance
measures should be normalized by population. He suggested
that "over time" should be identified by a specific amount
of time. Co-Chair Hanley agreed that the performance
measures should be normalized for population. He explained
that "over time" is included to acknowledge that there may
be an increase in reported activity during the first year a
VPSO is placed in a community.
JULIE TAURIAINEN, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS explained that
"over time" was added to clarify that villages would not be
compared with each other. Each village would be measured
against itself over a number of years. Co-Chair Hanley
noted that an increase in criminal responses could be the
result of an increase in a village's population.
Representative Davies acknowledged that the intent is not to
compare one village to another village. He added that it
might be good to discuss discrepancies between villages.
Representative Foster noted the difficulty in measuring the
effectiveness of a VPSO. He pointed out that a good VPSO
can prevent crime through village involvement.
Co-Chair Hanley agreed that the goal is to reduce the number
of AST responses through VPSO action.
In response to a question by Representative Kelly, Captain
Flothe explained that VPSO officers are trained ETT agents.
They can reduce injuries through first response care. He
noted that it is difficult to measure a reduction of
injuries.
Co-Chair Hanley acknowledged that it would be difficult to
gauge many of the performance measures. He expressed the
hope that the Department of Public Safety would make
suggestions for improvement.
Representative Davies suggested that one measure could track
another measure to be more efficient.
ROBIN LOWN, COORDINATOR, VILLAGE PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS
PROGRAM, TLINGIT AND HAIDA NATIVE CORPORATION stressed that
performance measures are good things to know if they are
possible to measure. He maintained that many would be
difficult if not impossible to measure. He agreed that VPSO
coordinators and the Department of Public Safety should be
considering better measures for the future.
Co-Chair Hanley noted that it is a fluid process. He
indicated that the Legislature would welcome suggestions.
Representative Foster noted that some VPSO officers are more
active then others in pursuing prevention.
Co-Chair Hanley acknowledged that communities that have high
crime or search and rescue cases would probably be given
priority. He observed that VPSO's might be put in
communities that are less willing to take care of
themselves.
Representative Davies stressed that the number of searches
should be included. He agreed that all of the performance
measures are indicators.
Co-Chair Hanley noted that Attachment 2 would be amended to
include normalization for population.
Representative Foster MOVED to ADOPT the mission statement
and performance measures in Attachment 2 as amended to
normalize for population. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
Mr. Flothe expressed his appreciation for the process of
creating a mission statement and performance measures.
CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
Members were provided with a proposed mission statement and
performance measures for the Child Support Enforcement
Division, Attachment 3 (copy on file).
BARBARA MIKLOS, DIRECTOR, CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES reviewed
the mission statement: "To assure that parents equitably
support their children monetarily and medically." She
referred to the performance measures. The Division
recommends that performance measures 3 and 6 be deleted.
She provided members with information demonstrating how the
Division would gauge the performance measures using existing
data (copy on file).
Ms. Miklos also provided members with a memorandum relating
to the number of arrearages that CSED carries and how they
would be handled (copy on file). She proposed to replace,
"arrearage cases in collections compared to total arrearage
cases" with the number of cases with arrearages that are
collected on compared to the total number of cases with
arrearages. Arrearages continue to grow geometrically every
month by $4 million dollars. The Division will attempt to
close cases and remove cases that do not belong. There is a
program to reduce orders that have been established
arbitrarily. She stressed that a performance measure
comparing the number of cases with arrearages that are
collected on with the total number of cases with arrearages
will show that cases are being closed and that collections
are being made.
In response to a question by Representative Foster, Ms.
Miklos noted that the total in arrearage is $351 million
dollars. This amount includes Alaska Families with
Dependent Children (AFDC) collections and money that is owed
from one parent to another parent. The amount is growing.
The federal government is considering a rule change that
would allow cases to be closed. The Division is allowed to
close a case after three years if the absent parent cannot
be found. The new computer system will automatically track
these cases. Some of the arrearage cases are old.
Representative Martin noted that there was a jump in
arrearage cases between 1987 and 1997 due to a change in
federal requirements. He emphasized the need to evaluate
the success of removing mothers from welfare.
Ms. Miklos noted that there has been a significant drop in
welfare cases in the last year. The federal government
estimated that CSED reduced welfare cases by approximately
2,800.
In response to a question by Representative Foster, Ms.
Miklos noted that the Division does not have a "ten most
wanted list". There is an investigative unit with three
positions.
Representative Davies clarified that "current" should be
before "total" in performance measure number four. In
response to a question by Representative Davies, Ms. Miklos
clarified that current cases could be compared to total
cases in the Division's database.
Representative Davies asserted that current cases compared
to total cases would be the best overall measurement. Total
cases would include total current obligation and total
arrearage cases. Total cases would be compared to current
cases. Ideally all cases would be current.
Co-Chair Hanley MOVED to ADOPT a new performance measure to
compare total cases to current cases. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Co-Chair Hanley MOVED to delete performance measures three
and six. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Martin observed that the Department of Law
has not prosecuted cases that were identified by CSED. He
spoke in support of a new performance measure to identify
the number of cases prosecuted by the Department of Law.
Ms. Miklos noted that a new prosecutor position is currently
working on some CSED cases.
Representative Martin noted that it is frustrating for CSED
to locate individuals in arrears and not have them
prosecuted by the Department of Law.
Representative Davies suggested that a performance measure
be included in the Department of Law.
Co-Chair Therriault MOVED to ADOPT the mission statement and
performance measures included in Attachment 3 as amended.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Martin asked the Division to provide a list
of the top 100 cases in arrears.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|