Legislature(2017 - 2018)HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/31/2017 01:30 PM House FINANCE
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 | |
| HB31 | |
| HB141 | |
| HB49 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 31 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 49 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 141 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 31
"An Act requiring the Department of Public Safety to
develop a tracking system and collection and
processing protocol for sexual assault examination
kits; requiring law enforcement agencies to send
sexual assault examination kits for testing within 18
months after collection; requiring an inventory and
reports on untested sexual assault examination kits;
and providing for an effective date."
1:37:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GERAN TARR, SPONSOR, explained the purpose
of the bill. She summarized that HB 31 addressed the
problems regarding sexual assault examination kits and
implemented a better system to process them. She cited
victim reporting data from 2015 that indicated 7,662 rapes
occurred annually in Alaska. She estimated that roughly 100
sexual assaults occurred in the state since the bill was
referred to the House Finance Committee 52 days ago. She
provided background on the bill to assist understanding the
current committee substitute (CS). She learned that in 2014
a national effort began to address the backlog of many
thousands of sexual assault examination kits left untested
across the country. The federal government had made funding
available to test the backlog of kits it states that met
the requirement to produce a completed audit of untested
kits. Simultaneously, the governor initiated a leadership
role, undertook the audit, and received a multimillion-
dollar grant from the federal Department of Justice.
Consequently, the original version of HB 31 addressed the
subsequent procedures for handling the kits to prevent
backlogs in the future that included a standard processing
protocol and a timeline for processing the kits within 18
months of collection. The audit discovered that "the
situation in Alaska was dismal," more problematic than
anticipated, and required more information to properly
address the backlog. She explained that the new CS included
provisions for more assessment and information to establish
the scope of the current problem along with training and
reporting protocols. She referred to the "Explanation of
Changes" document (copy on file) that explained the changes
to HB 31 from the original version A to the CS. She read
the summary of provisions in version A:
1. Requires a tracking system for all sexual assault
examination kits
2. Requires a standard protocol for collection and
processing of kits
3. Requires all kits be tested within 18 months
4. Requires law enforcement agencies to conduct an
inventory of untested kits and required DPS to prepare
a report on untested kits
Representative Tarr turned to the new version J CS and
pointed out that it did not include the 18-month time limit
on testing. She detailed that the information requested in
the CS would determine what was required to meet the 18-
month testing standard. In the intervening time, the
provisions that required additional training, improved
victim reporting, and completing the inventory would help
"reform the broken system." She communicated that Section 1
and Section 2 required law enforcement training in sexual
assault that further defined existing statute. One
conclusion stemming from the process to date was the
inconsistencies in response among the law enforcement
entities when inquiring about the number of backlogged
kits. The goal of section 1 and section 2 created a
standard protocol for training of all law enforcement
officers in the state. She mentioned that section 3
provided definitions. She noted that Section 4 required
protocol development for three different types of reports
associated with sexual assault and the examination kits.
She revealed that the federal Office of Violence Against
Women, released a white paper regarding the types of
reports a victim of sexual assault should have the right to
choose to file. The reporting recognized that the victims
should be allowed to choose how they wanted to engage with
law enforcement after an assault. She exemplified that one
of the reasons for multiple types of reporting helped
protect the victims of sexual assault related to domestic
violence. She described the three types of allowable victim
reports and read the following:
a. Law Enforcement Report
A victim chooses to obtain a medical forensic exam and
chooses to participate in the criminal justice system.
b. Medical Report
A victim chooses to obtain a medical forensic exam but
at the time chooses to not participate in the criminal
justice system. Evidence and information to law
enforcement is released with victim identifying
information. A medical reporting victim can choose to
have evidence tested.
c. Anonymous Report
A victim chooses to obtain a medical forensic exam but
at that time chooses to not participate in the
criminal justice system. Evidence and information to
law enforcement is released without victim identifying
information. An anonymous reporting victim is
consenting to evidence storage only.
Representative Tarr informed the committee that the
evidence for the kit must be collected within 72 hours. The
three types of reporting mechanisms recognized that not all
assault victims wanted to press charges or press charges at
the time of the assault but allowed for the timely
collection of evidence in the event the victim wanted to
move forward in the future. She continued with the third
item in the bill:
3. Requires law enforcement agencies to conduct an
inventory of untested kits and required DPS to prepare
a report on untested kits
Representative Tarr conveyed that the initial governor's
audit took a voluntary approach and not all law enforcement
entities participated. She referenced page 4, lines 6
through 10 of the CS and read the reporting requirements:
(1) the number of untested sexual assault examination
kits stored by each law enforcement agency or
department;
(2) the date each untested sexual assault examination
kit was collected; and
(3) a plan for addressing the backlog and prevention
of a backlog of untested sexual assault examination
kits.
1:46:37 PM
Representative Tarr commented that the next step would be
to figure out how to test the backlog. She pointed to an
article in the Anchorage Daily News titled "Anchorage
Serial Rapist Sentenced to 70 Years in Prison" (copy on
file). She relayed that the perpetrator named, Clifford Lee
engaged in numerous sexual assaults in 2014. One victim
managed to escape, which lead to his arrest. The DNA
evidence connected him to assaults in 2004 and 2001. The
conviction emphasized the "power" and "value" of the type
of evidence collected in the kits. Historically, the belief
was that there was one perpetrator and one victim. However,
the view was found not to be true; the truth pointed to a
"staggering number" of serial perpetrators for both child
sexual abuse and adult sexual assault, and the news story
highlighted the behavior. Previously, in cases where a
perpetrator was known to the victim, DNA evidence was not
collected. She noted that DNA evidence was a "powerful way
to link the offenders to other crimes."
1:49:49 PM
Representative Tarr spoke of a group of businesswomen in
Detroit who fundraised thousands of dollars to address the
backlog of untested kits and reiterated that the effort was
a national movement. Many other states were addressing the
problem in the similar manner as Alaska. She reported that
1 in 5 women and 1 in 59 men will be sexually assaulted in
their lifetime and alluded to the high rate of sexual
assault in Alaska. She believed that the evidence from the
backlog will lead to the arrest of many other serial
perpetrators making communities safer.
Representative Tarr noted that there was no cost associated
with the CS. She explained that the fiscal note (FN1 (DPS)
attached to the original bill appropriated funding for the
18-month testing requirement and the cost of the database
for tracking. She commented that both provisions were
removed in the CS and an updated fiscal note would be zero.
The Public Safety Training Academy currently performed
sexual assault training and the provision in the CS added
more specific requirements and standardized the approach.
She continued that the Department of Public Safety (DPS)
would not incur costs to carry out the reporting and would
prepare the report inhouse with existing staff. The three
reporting options did not warrant additional funding nor
the costs to test the kits. Existing statute provided
payment for victims not able to pay for the sexual assault
kit.
1:53:48 PM
Representative Wilson asked whether the information from
the kits were currently tracked and if the municipalities
kept records and interfaced with the state. Representative
Tarr answered that the state currently kept track of the
number of kits tested and untested at the state crime lab.
She indicated that the passage of the bill would compel
municipalities to respond to the information request. She
indicated that basic reporting would be required but would
not be a significant burden to local law enforcement. The
department would compile the information and include the
data in the report to the legislature.
1:55:14 PM
Representative Wilson asked what the local municipalities
did with the kits and wondered who tested the kits.
Representative Tarr guessed that the municipal kits were
sent to the state crime lab, but it was unknown how many
kits were untested. Some of the kits were sitting untested
in an evidence room because of factors related to
particular cases or the perpetrator was known to the victim
and the kit was deemed irrelevant. However, due to the
current knowledge concerning serial offenders, it was
important to test as many kits as possible with the
victims' consent. She emphasized the importance for the
state to know the number of untested kits sitting in
evidence rooms. Representative Wilson asked whether law
enforcement had to get permission from the victim to ever
test the kit or utilize the evidence and if it was related
to the three choices of victims' reports. Representative
Tarr answered in the affirmative and relayed that the
victim had the right to decline testing for evidence. She
shared that the choice was difficult for her to accept. The
white paper persuaded her that the choice of leaving the
kit untested was a best practice for the victim.
1:57:29 PM
Vice-Chair Gara inquired whether the fiscal note reflected
one component of the legislation. Representative Tarr
responded that the fiscal note reflected two eliminated
components from the original bill. She expounded that after
additional data becomes available the 18-month requirement,
when addressed in the future, could be extended due to
costs. The cost for testing each kit was roughly $1
thousand to $1.5 thousand or more depending on whether
further testing was warranted. She pointed to the database
provision in the legislation and shared that discussions
were in progress to determine whether the database and
tracking could be accomplished in-house. She indicated that
several databases were currently in use such as the Alaska
Public Safety Information Network. The idea under
discussion was whether a tracking system could be
incorporated into the existing Public Safety data bases.
She was also contracted by a vendor who implemented a
tracking system for other states. She surmised that
"holding back" on the tracking component allowed for a
continued comprehensive examination of the right option for
the state.
1:59:52 PM
Vice-Chair Gara relayed that the fiscal note in front of
him was not zero and wondered whether a new fiscal note was
forthcoming. Representative Tarr replied in the
affirmative.
2:00:21 PM
Representative Grenn cited public testimony from Lisa Hurst
(copy on file) who reported that a federal grant called the
Sexual Assault Forensic Exam - Inventory, Tracking,
Reporting (SAFE-ITR) was available and could be used to
establish rape kit tracking systems. He asked if the grant
had been considered. Representative Tarr responded that the
state had received funds from the grant. She conveyed that
the grant use was complex. Grant funds were currently in
use for a portion of testing kits from the Alaska State
Troopers and the Anchorage Police Department (APD). The
grant also supplied some funding for training individuals
to assist in kit testing at the crime lab. However, the
funds were insufficient to test the entire backlog.
Consequently, she included the new provision to finish the
statewide audit to determine how to prioritize the backlog,
the associated costs, and the appropriate time limit for
untested kits moving forward.
2:02:00 PM
Co-Chair Foster OPENED Public Testimony for HB 31.
2:02:07 PM
MAJOR JEFF LAUGHLIN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, ALASKA STATE
TROOPERS, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY (via teleconference),
spoke in support of the bill. He confirmed the change to a
zero fiscal note that would be forthcoming. He related that
DPS had sufficient staff and support to manage the
reporting requirements and the crime lab efforts. He wanted
to thank the committee for its support.
2:04:13 PM
JAYNE ANDREEN, INTERIM DIRECTOR, COUNCIL ON DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY,
supported HB 31. She explained how the bill would impact
victims of sexual assault. She communicated that sexual
assault was about "power" and in the immediate aftermath of
the crime it was essential to return the victims power.
Therefore, victims were encouraged to do 2 things: to
obtain a physical examination and let law enforcement
gather any forensic evidence as quickly as possible. She
declared that the bill provided "three levels of power
back" to the victim so they could take their time to decide
the level of participation with the criminal justice
system. Victims could always choose to process a kit later.
2:06:06 PM
Representative Tilton asked whether there was a statute of
limitations for testing the kits or pressing charges. Ms.
Andreen responded that a statute of limitations existed but
that most victims only need a matter of weeks or months to
decide.
2:07:02 PM
Co-Chair Foster CLOSED public testimony for HB 31.
He indicated he would set HB 31 aside. He asked members to
submit any amendments to the bill to his staff, Jane
Pierson by Monday, April 3, 2017.
HB 31 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB049 CBPL Follow up 3.28.17 to House Finance Hearing on 3.6.2017.pdf |
HFIN 3/31/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 49 |
| HB 49 Amendment 1 Kawasaki-Wilson.pdf |
HFIN 3/31/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 49 |
| HB 31 - Support Documents - Public Testimony 3.30.17.pdf |
HFIN 3/31/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| HB 141 - Support Documents letters 3.29.17.pdf |
HFIN 3/31/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 141 |
| HB 141 HFIN questions memo _Fansler.pdf |
HFIN 3/31/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 141 |
| HB 141 Supporting Documents Ilisagvik 3.16.17.pdf |
HFIN 3/31/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 141 |
| HB31- Explaination of Changes.pdf |
HFIN 3/31/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| HB 141 ATC letter of support March 2017.pdf |
HFIN 3/31/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 141 |