Legislature(1995 - 1996)
04/17/1996 01:12 PM House JUD
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 289 - MINORS, ESP. RUNAWAYS, & THEIR FAMILIES Number 1184 ALLISON GORDON, Legislative Assistant, Senator Steve Frank testified on SB 289. She read the sponsor statement into the record. "This legislation was introduced to address the growing concern among parents for the safety of their runaway children. The runaway epidemic is a significant problem in our communities that needs serious consideration. "SB 289 will strengthen the language within AS 11.51.130 regarding contributing to the delinquency of a minor. By discouraging people from harboring runaways, it will compel these children to take advantage of available services that are necessary for assessing the individual's situation and beginning the process of reconciliation with the child's family. "This legislation will also make clear that a police officer's first course of action, after picking up a runaway, will be to take that child back to his or her parents unless the officer believes that there has been abuse to the minor. If that parent will not accept the child, then the second course of action will be to take the minor to a safe place agreed to by the parent. If this cannot be accomplished either, then the police officer must take the child to a semi-secure shelter for assessment of the child's situation and determination of the course of action that is in the best interest of the child. "SB 289 creates a second tier of consequences for those runaways who run from semi-secure shelters after they have been placed there by law enforcement and instructed to remain in that facility. This bill makes it a violation to run from a semi-secure placement, thereby giving discretion to law enforcement officials to pick up the minor and detain him or her in a secure environment pending a detention hearing within 48 hours under AS 47.10.140. If there are no other reasons for detaining the minor, such as a delinquency petition based on violating other laws, the minor would be released to the legal custodian at the detention hearing. If the judge finds probable cause to determine that the minor is a child in need of aid it should proceed under AS 47.10.142 (e). 'I feel this legislation is an important step in dealing with this continuing problem and I would appreciate your support." Number 1350 L. DIANE WORLEY, Director, Division of Family & Youth Services, Department of Health & Social Services testified on SB 289. She stated that the department is certainly concerned with the issue of runaways. They also recognize that this is a serious problem and they deal with these types of issues every day within the work that they do. The department did strongly support the Senate Judiciary version of this legislation. At this point with the current version they do have some concerns. MS. WORLEY stated that they strongly support the sections which increase penalties for those adults who harbor runaways. Many of the problems which they have with youth leaving the runaway facilities is because these youths have some place to go other than the facilities which are available to them. The department felt as if they could strengthen these laws and eliminate the ability for these kids to stay with these adults who in many cases are not always the most healthy role models for these children, they will go a long way to having kids remain in the runaway facilities which currently exist. MS. WORLEY noted the department does not have a problem with semi- secure facilities. Semi-secure means that there would be a system set up so that if a child left a runaway facility the staff would know this immediately and make contact with the parents, the department or law enforcement. They are concerned with a provision in this legislation which allows runaways to be detained in a lock up facility. Currently in the state there are no secure facilities for runaways other than the ones run by the state, which there are five of these run by the division. These facilities are for delinquent youth who have committed some type of offense which has made them delinquent and gotten them into the system to be detained in either detention or a treatment facility. These facilities are at maximum capacity and in most cases are at over capacity. She cited an example of this. MS. WORLEY stated that when keeping this in mind they are going to have to first of all development regulations on how to run these facilities. They would then have to have money available to grant dollars to make these facilities available, go through a Request for Proposal (RFP) process for granting and monitoring. This is a time consuming process. They have concern that if this bill went into effect and these facilities outside the state's jurisdiction are not available, then they would be forced to be housed in the state facilities which are already full. MR. WORLEY stated if these runaway children were housed in these state facilities, they would be housed in the same facilities to mingle with the detention population consisting of experienced street kids who have committed various crimes such as, assault, armed robbery, rape, etc. She also noted that there was a revolving door system with runaways where they go to these shelters and they go right back out the other side. This legislation would just slow this process down. A detention in many cases is only going to be up to 48 hours and these children are released back to their parents and it is still up to the parent to retain their child at home. Many of these children are not going to stay home. MS. WORLEY offered that the department is still concerned that there will still be a revolving door system, it will just be a more expensive and more elaborate one. One of her concerns particularly is that they are going to set up the impression that this bill will solve the problem and the reality is that the runaway problem is always going to exist. The problem of runaways will never be eliminated. MS. WORLEY brought up another concern and that was the on-going debate as to whether detaining kids deter them from running away. The department's fear is that there will be a handful of kids that this will deter, but this will be the handful of kids who have run away once, tested their limits and then gone back home. The other kids might stop using the facilities currently available and go further underground. Instead of avoiding running away, they will avoid getting caught, which will potentially put them in a more dangerous situation. MS. WORLEY presented their final concern which has been discussed in depth. The department currently receives federal dollars from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), which is around $700,000. She admitted that this wasn't a hugh amount of money, but by enacting this legislation the state will loose this money. Personally, it's not so much the dollars as the programs which are served by these dollars. This money funds over 30 local programs, in Fairbanks, Anchorage, Nome, etc. All of these programs are helping these kids they are trying to work with. If they eliminate these funds and programs then they have less resources to begin dealing with the problem with why kids are running away. She stated that the department would continue supporting this legislation in it's Senate Judiciary form. The department cannot support the lock up concept of the newest version and she responded to Chairman Porter's question that yes, this was the primary difference between that version and this present one. Number 1815 REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN asked if it was this provision which would lead to the loss of federal funds. MS. WORLEY stated that yes, this would be correct. The OJJDP funds are available to the state, but one of the conditions is that they cannot lock up (indisc.) offenses. Number 1886 BRUCE RUBLE testified by teleconference from Fairbanks on SB 289. Mr. Ruble stated that he was a student at West Valley with a 3.0 average, he also works and he's a runaway. He stated that this law won't do anything because people like him will hide more and they will try to be prevent being caught. He said he would not voluntarily join a semi-secure facility. Mr. Ruble ran away from an abusive family and said he would not go back. If this meant having to keep running away, he said he would. REPRESENTATIVE TOOHEY asked if he had reported the abuse mentioned to the authorities. MR. RUBLE said he reported it to the Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) and the police. They basically said there was nothing they could do. REPRESENTATIVE TOOHEY suggested he report it again. Number 1983 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said that if either of these agencies did respond, maybe their definition of abuse may not have been the same as Mr. Ruble's, but he stated that Mr. Ruble was obviously going to school which would make him more visible to these agencies. Representative Bunde asked if he had a choice between running away and going to jail, which would he choose. MR. RUBLE said he would run away. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE stated that if this bill passes then Mr. Ruble would go to a lock up. REPRESENTATIVE FINKELSTEIN said that Mr. Ruble would just make sure he wouldn't get caught. MR. RUBLE agreed. REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE said there are a lot of people in jail who thought the same thing. Number 2046 SAM HAYWOOD testified by teleconference from Anchorage on SB 289. He stated that he was somewhat active in state politics. He and his wife run a small Christian school. He said that he was mainly testifying as a parent with a runaway son. Mr. Haywood appreciated the strong language in the bill concerning reunification of families. He echoed some of the same concerns that Ms. Worley had. Mr. Haywood's son was at McLaughlin Youth Center and became more street wise and alienated once he came out. In regards to semi- secure facilities, he didn't know of one. Mr. Haywood's son walked away from quite a few places. MR. HAYWOOD said that facilities such as McLaughlin were bad places for these types of kids. They don't belong there. He also mentioned the overcrowding in these facilities and noted that the "slap on the wrist" mentality of placing them back in the home when these children don't get any re-direction or change in their purpose. This is something they need to address. If there was a good semi-secure facility to prevent this that would be a good thing. Secondly, as the legislature looks at this problem the idea of money comes to light. He suggested that the legislature look at the options of private industry to operate these types of facilities. Number 2320 AL NEAR testified by teleconference from Fairbanks on SB 289. Mr. Near said he completely supported this bill and he urged that they pass it out of committee. He said he liked how it upheld the authority of parents by directing law enforcement to return run always to their homes. In these instances when a shelter is a necessary choice, this bill would put to an end to the revolving door policy. He mentioned the specific situation with his daughter who was a run away. He was told that run always are a low priority because they will not stay at youth shelters. Mr. Near stated that this was true with his daughter. TAPE 96-55, SIDE A Number 053 DEIDRE PHAYER, Executive Director, Covenant House Alaska testified by teleconference from Anchorage on SB 289. She stated that in it's current form this piece of legislation would put Covenant House Alaska out of business. The definition of semi-secure is quite vague and might be in conflict with their philosophy that voluntary care is the best way to work with kids who are highly at risk. Alaska asked Covenant House to come here back in 1988 to work with run away and homeless youth. There was an obvious respect for their philosophy of voluntary care. MS. PHAYER continued to note that they have had just under 7,000 admissions to their program since 1988 and 72 percent of those admissions have been with kids between 13 and 17 years old. These kids stay at their facility an average of eight days at a time which gives them adequate time to intervene and work with family reunification. She believed that the key to their success is that they are a voluntary program. Kids chose to come in when they need assistance. By locking kids up they will dissuade them from disclosing many of the complex issues which lead them to run away in the first place. These are issues of emotional, sexual and physical abuse. MS. PHAYER stated that this will perpetuate the fear and mistrust that many of these kids have of adults. She added that they do not certainly want to go out of business. Ms. Phayer felt as though they were providing a service for this community. Number 226 CHAIRMAN PORTER noted for Ms. Phayer that while she was testifying the sponsor's staff gave a head nod that they didn't think she should be concerned and DYFS said that she should be concerned. He asked that the sponsor, DYFS and the Department of Law get together to come up with a solution to this before Friday when they could look at this issue again. Number 249 REPRESENTATIVE BUNDE asked Ms. Phayer about the 7,000 young persons they serve, he wondered how many out of this number were repeats. MS. PHAYER said that about 51 percent are recidivists. Very often kids come in, check them out for a night or two, look at staff to see if they can trust them. Very often they need to come back in again. Of this 7,000 this represents 3,329 individuals of un- duplicated use. Number 291 LORI BACKES testified by teleconference from Fairbanks on SB 289. In their efforts to make sure run always are not forced to return to an abusive situation or safe jail, they must not neglect the young people who run away simply to avoid the responsibilities and restrictions of family life. It's clear that children run away from abusive and unsafe homes. They must do everything they can to protect them. Ms. Backes mentioned her young, run away daughter. Under the current law she had no support from the Alaska State Troopers or the Fairbanks city police to protect her daughter. When her daughter was gone there was no method to bring her home. MS. BACKES said that no one wants to lock up kids that have been victimized, but when it comes to run always there are two choices. They can be taken into custody or they can be let go. This bill finally allows a safety officer to take these children into custody, not to prison like a criminal, but into protective custody where their situation will be evaluated. She doesn't ask the state to take care of her children for her, but she needs to protect her children and this must not be interfered with. Number 490 TOM BEGICH, Chairman, State Student Justice Legislative Committee and Chairman, National Coalition of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention testified by teleconference from Anchorage on HB 289. The Juvenile Justice Committee has a position paper which specifically addresses this bill and issue. They were supportive of the earlier version of this legislation. The mission paper reinforces the concern of dealing with those who harbor run always. Secondly, it recognizes that in some instances semi-secure facilities may be the answer and finally it absolutely opposes locking children up. MR. BEGICH stated that if the issue is one of appropriate consequences to use, this is an issue of law enforcement related to any kind of misdemeanor, criminal activity which may be taken. He understood that there have been a number of efforts in Anchorage and other places to provide specific consequences to any criminal activity. If it's a question of more parental involvement then absolutely, the provisions of the earlier version provide this. Finally, if it's an issue of law enforcement not following the law or going after those who perpetrate a crime on a fourteen year old of sexual molestation or sexual statutory rape, then this is an issue which has to be brought up with law enforcement and does not come under the purview of this legislation. MR. BEGICH referred to the cost issue noted by Ms. Worley. The federal $700,000 which would cease coming to the state. This would impact over 30 programs which rely on this money and keep 600 to 700 individuals out of the system. Number 674 LESLIE DRUMHILLER testified by teleconference from Fairbanks on SB 289. She and her husband strongly support SB 289. They are parents of a 16 year old run away. This legislation is strong and it needs to be. They are not the only parents who suffer from weak laws. Too long have their hands been tied. They support the section dealing with semi-security. Fairbanks run always have a very strong underground network since they know they are immune from the law, so they keep running. Number 789 JUDY SHIFFLER testified by teleconference from Fairbanks on SB 289. She was gratified to see the inclusion of the authorization of temporary, secure detention of a minor who has previously left the semi-secure program without permission. She felt as though this was the most viable provision in SB 289. Without it the run away would have no consequence and the revolving door syndrome stays intact. Ms. Shiffler said she too was concerned about the negative influences of places like the McLaughlin facility, but there must be a next consequence after leaving a semi-secure facility. She was pleased with the consistent focus of this bill of immediately informing and consulting with a parent or guardian. She was also pleased with trying to reunited the family unit through counseling. Number 898 CANDY CARROLL testified by teleconference from Fairbanks on SB 289. She stated that Bruce Ruble had been living in her home for the past two years. As a result she was charged under the law and summoned to court. The charges were dismissed once they realized the circumstances. Mr. Ruble continues to go to school, keeps his grades up and holds down a job. She has several run away children who live with her and are allowed to do so with the permission of their parents and that they work for re-unification. All of the run always which have stayed with her have returned to their homes and are currently living there, although these children needed a time out away from their parents. Her philosophy is that the run away problem is not a problem with teenagers, but with families. Usually there are family problems which need to be dealt with as a whole. MS. CARROLL said she didn't believe in locking up children. She didn't have a problem with semi-secure facilities. One of the things which could help these situations, if the bill was extended to allow for these matters to be entered into civil trial and if the judge was given the authority to mandate that there be family counseling. The run always are used as scape goats, although this is a family problem. Rather than semi-secure facilities, have DYFS license safe houses for these children where there is neutrality. Number 1060 ROBIN RANDALL testified by teleconference from Fairbanks on SB 289. She supports this legislation and feels as though it could remedy some of the heart breaking stories of run always. There have to be some concrete consequences to follow, especially to harborers. She thought it was imperative to notify authorities that harborer are accountable to the court and that especially the parents are informed about where their child is. A clause which does concern her regarding this issue is the use of the words, "reasonable efforts." She referred to an instance with her teenage son. She felt as though this legislation would decrease the amounts of run always and supports its passage. Number 1184 MS. GORDON, Legislative Assistant to Senator Frank asked to make one thing clear and that was when discussing the fiscal note from the DYFS with them and the monies provided in their fiscal note regarding the secure facilities. What was conveyed to her was the fact that they didn't want to put these run always in already over- crowded detention centers. These are not appropriate places for children who have not committed a crime. DYFS conveyed that they wanted to use this money as grants for residential treatment facilities who would upgrade some of their beds to a secure environment as opposed to a detention center, keeping in mind that there will have to be some money spent and federal funding might be lost. This legislation deals with those situations where if children are not in school, they're not being educated or receiving the proper care are going to end up being cared for by the state ultimately by welfare, Department of Corrections, or otherwise. This bill passed unanimously in the Senate. Number 1259 CHAIRMAN PORTER stated that they would hold this over until Friday, and it will be the first business on the agenda. He asked that the issues regarding the Covenant House be addressed and presented then.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|