Legislature(2017 - 2018)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/03/2017 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
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 | |
| SB54 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 54 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 54-CRIME AND SENTENCING
1:33:59 PM
CHAIR COGHILL announced the consideration of SB 54. [This is the
third hearing and the committee substitute, version O, is before
the committee.] He said Commissioner Monegan was invited to
testify during the previous hearing, but time ran out, so he is
first on the schedule today.
1:34:52 PM
WALT MONEGAN, Commissioner, Department of Public Safety, stated
support for amendments to Senate Bill 91 that take public safety
into consideration and provide the broadest discretion for
judges to look at cases on an individual basis.
CHAIR COGHILL said that was part of the discussion during the
previous hearing.
1:36:46 PM
CHAIR COGHILL opened public testimony on SB 54.
1:37:40 PM
RON FLINT, President and General Manager, NAO, and representing
the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB),
testified in support of SB 54. He has had a retail store in
Juneau for over 30 years and has seen that business decline over
the last year. It's a concern that the rate of the decline seems
to be getting steeper, he said. Last year he began hearing about
Senate Bill 91 and NFIB's efforts to keep the felony limit from
going to $2,000. He felt just slightly better when it settled at
$1,000 but he still hates to think about someone stealing $800-
$900 worth of merchandise and only being guilty of a
misdemeanor. What he didn't realize immediately was that Senate
Bill 91 relaxed penalties for small thefts or that these crimes
could be committed repeatedly without consequence. Small-time
criminals did pick up on that and his store had the first grab
and run last summer. Similar incidents followed. It's also been
a new experience to find destroyed sensor tags that have been
forcibly removed from merchandise. The thief then conceals the
merchandise before exiting the store.
He said looking at the total shrinkage for the year is a gut
check, but last year it was a gut punch because the shrinkage
jumped 40 percent. The local police have been responsive when
he's asked for help, but they need tools to get their job done.
He can only imagine the frustration law enforcement experiences
when they watch the revolving door. In addition to the fiscal
plan, the fixes embodied in SB 54 are crucial this year, he
concluded.
CHAIR COGHILL thanked Mr. Flint and committed to work on the
structural changes.
SENATOR MEYER advised that police officers need to keep
arresting low-level because they will be held accountable after
the third arrest.
1:43:16 PM
KARA NELSON, representing herself, testified in opposition to SB
54. She related that she is in long-term recovery, has been
through the criminal justice system for 20 plus years, is a
mother, and a community leader who is continuing to emphasize
the importance of data-driven decision making. Senate Bill 91
has had little time to work and the public is condemning it
without recognizing the part that the opioid epidemic is
playing. Rolling back the smart justice provisions will
drastically affect many of the people that are caught in the
epidemic. She maintained that public safety is increased when
people are given opportunities. She provided examples and
relayed her personal experience. She urged the committee to
reevaluate rolling back provisions of the original bill and to
stick to smart on crime measures.
1:49:21 PM
MIA BERZANSKE, representing herself, said she has been an addict
for 10 years and her first conviction was a class B felony in
2014. She went to jail for a year and has three years of
probation. When she relapsed, her probation was transferred to
Juneau and she was placed in the PACE program. She was given a
couple of chances and is now a leader in the recovery community.
CHAIR COGHILL asked her to explain how the PACE program worked
when she relapsed.
MS. BERZANSKE credited the PACE program with giving her chances
when she relapsed instead of putting her in jail.
CHAIR COGHILL asked if the treatment has been effective.
MS. BERZANSKE replied it made a huge difference. When she
relapsed in December, she was given treatment at Rainforest
Recovery. Now she lives at Haven House and has found the peer
support crucial in her recovery.
CHAIR COGHILL thanked Ms. Berzanske and commented that she is a
good example of the value of accountability and services.
1:53:26 PM
JORDAN ODAM, representing himself, told the committee he has
felony convictions for robbery and assault. He said that since
Senate Bill 91 passed he has seen people thrive when there was
little hope before. Previously, young people who had light
probation violations were sent to jail for up to a year. He
related that he was in jail for nine days after his last parole
violation and the day he got out he landed a construction job.
He is motivated and feels that he is doing better than he has
since he first entered the system at age 18. He voiced support
for smart on crime measures because they give people an
opportunity to spend less time in jail, a place that is not a
recovery situation. He reiterated that people who need treatment
are getting chances now.
CHAIR COGHILL said the committee is looking for ways people can
be held accountable and remain productive.
1:58:28 PM
STEPHANIE STAVELAN, Director of Provider Care, Priceless Alaska,
said this nonprofit works with individuals who have been sex
trafficked. She has been working in this area since 2013 and
previously served as a mental health clinician working with
victims of sex trafficking. She thanked Senator Coghill and the
committee for amending the part of Senate Bill 91 that
unintentionally created a loophole for sex traffickers. She
emphasized that sex trafficking and prostitution are two very
different issues, but passing stricter laws for both is the
first step in the fight to end human trafficking in Alaska.
2:00:42 PM
GRETCHEN STAFT, Board of Directors, Alaska Association of
Criminal Defense Lawyers, said she just received the new CS for
SB 54 so she hasn't had time to identify areas of concern, but
she does believe it is too early to reform Senate Bill 91. That
bill was based on a huge amount of data and research and had the
goals of reducing both state spending and recidivism. It appears
that some of the changes proposed in SB 54 seem to undermine the
goals of Senate Bill 91. She opined that the presumptive active
term of imprisonment for a first class C felony will be
counterproductive. She pointed out the Alaska Criminal Justice
Commission ("Commission") said that the 2017 recommendation to
on this issue was based on reports from law enforcement and
prosecutors. There was no data to show that this would be
effective in reducing recidivism, but it was almost certainly
guaranteed to increase the prison population. She disagreed with
a prosecutor's claim that active jail would incentivize later
treatment. She emphasized that what would incentivize treatment
is a suspended term of imprisonment, and that was provided in
Senate Bill 91.
MS. STAFT emphasized that treatment, employment, housing, and
ties to the family are very important in determining future
success. Sending a person to jail, particularly if they are a
youthful offender, will undermine all the foregoing. She said
she has represented hundreds of theft defendants and none of
them said they weighed the criminal penalties beforehand and
decided to commit the crime because they wouldn't face much or
any jail time if they got caught. People commit crimes for a
variety of reasons including desperation, substance abuse, or
mental illness. She said the reinvestment provisions in Senate
Bill 91 into recovery programs will be helpful in reducing the
overall crime rate, but the bill hasn't been in place long
enough to see the benefit of those changes. Until that data is
available, it's too early to make changes.
CHAIR COGHILL suggested she submit her comments in writing. He
said the accountability measures are primarily what are under
discussion.
2:07:38 PM
VICKI WALLER, representing herself, testified that some of the
consequences in SB 54 are not harsh enough. She admitted she is
struggling with the Commission's recommendations and the public
perception of what is happening. She said it's good to have an
evidenced-based tool in the toolbox, but it's not the full
Monte. She talked about the diversity in Alaska that makes it
difficult to identify what is going on. She also pointed out
that a lot of people charged with a first -time class C felony
have had several previous felonies that pled down to
misdemeanors. "By the time they get their first conviction on a
felony, they've already had several chances." She noted that the
prosecutor's office said that 33 percent of cases aren't
accepted due to lack of resources, and three percent of those
cases are felonies.
She reported that 55 percent of the felonies in superior court
last year were crimes that had victims, and 39 percent of the
misdemeanors had victims. That needs to be considered with the
penalties, she said. She acknowledged that it was clear early on
that the penalty for shoplifting wasn't going to work because a
person commits many shoplifting events before they're caught.
Some thieves hit several stores in one day. She said loss
prevention managers for box stores disagree with the statement
from corrections that shoplifters are generally stealing
toiletries. She said she isn't against treatment, but feels
strongly that victims need justice when they're robbed, their
home is burglarized, or their car is stolen. It doesn't matter
why somebody committed the crime, there must be a consequence
when a victim has suffered a loss. The lack of a consequence is
what is making people so angry. She also expressed
dissatisfaction with the idea that anyone who is sentenced to
less than four years in jail will spend time on an ankle
monitor. She cited the example of someone who committed armed
robbery and was out of jail and on an ankle monitor in six
months. She expressed hope that the committee would take her
testimony into consideration.
CHAIR COGHILL thanked Ms. Waller and asked her to submit her
testimony in writing, because the statistics she cited would be
helpful.
2:13:47 PM
OLIVIA OLSEN, representing herself, said she is the mother of
four children and has struggled with addiction since she was 14
years old. She described Senate Bill 91 as being helpful to her
personally. It gave her an opportunity to be accountable for her
crimes, most of which were theft. She shared that now she
understands how victims feel, but she was stealing to support
her habit and didn't think of the consequences.
In 2012 she pled to two felonies and six misdemeanors. She
served six months and received four months good time. When she
got out she had two violations and had to serve 14 months in
jail with no opportunity for treatment. She said she realized
what she'd done was wrong but it's a difficult cycle to break
without treatment or some kind of help. When she relapsed the
last time, she assumed responsibility and told her probation
officer. She reiterated that Senate Bill 91 offers offenders the
opportunity to be accountable and move forward. She is currently
receiving treatment and working to pay restitution to her
victims.
CHAIR COGHILL thanked Ms. Olsen and told her that she has
demonstrated that some of what the legislature has done has made
a difference in people's lives. He agreed that accountability is
very important
2:19:32 PM
TARA RICH, Legal and Policy Director, ACLU of Alaska, said she
would speak to three aspects of SB 54 that are particularly
problematic: 1) changing violation of conditions of release
(VCOR) from a violation to a class B misdemeanor; 2) changing
the presumptive term for a first-time class C felony from a
suspended sentence to 0-120 days of active imprisonment; 3) and
the increased penalty on a third offense of theft in the fourth
degree. She urged the committee to give the reinvestment and
diversionary programs a chance to work before making changes to
the policy. She pointed out that the 2017 recommendations do not
reflect the same sound goals and processes that the legislature
sought when it created the Commission. She suggested the
committee look at whether the proposed changes will solve the
problem and what it will cost.
She said the issue with violation of conditions of release is
the perception that VCOR offenders need to appear in front of
the judge that decided the underlying criminal case. They are
the most familiar with the case and will make the necessary
changes. The fix that SB 54 proposes is to incarcerate these
individuals at a cost of about $150 per person per day. This is
a very expensive fix and it removes the judge's discretion. She
pointed out that the fix that's already available, and has begun
to work, gives the judge in the original case the discretion to
write instructions in the bail order based on that judge's view
of that case. She emphasized that it is unnecessary and very
expensive for the legislature to step in and make a fix at this
point.
Regarding increasing the first-time class C felony penalty, she
said the Commission noted that there is no evidence that this
fix will achieve the goals of public safety, deterrence, and
rehabilitation. She noted that she provided written testimony
that there is evidence that recidivism rates are higher for low-
risk class C felony offenders who are incarcerated. She
questioned, "Is presumptive incarceration going to provide the
public safety fix that we're looking for?" She pointed out there
has been ample testimony that maintaining community ties,
employment, and housing is crucial in keeping someone from
reentering the criminal justice system.
MS. RICH spoke to the provision that increases the penalty on a
third offense of theft in the fourth degree. She highlighted
that the Commission received no evidence that petty theft is
related to prison sentences. She concluded her comments
emphasizing the importance of making statutory changes based on
evidence-based data. "Before we reopen the ¼ prison pipeline, we
must give this entire program a chance to work as it was
designed. That includes allowing the reinvestment opportunities,
the diversionary programs to work."
CHAIR COGHILL asked if the written testimony she submitted was
directed to version O.
MS. RICH said yes.
2:26:12 PM
CRYSTAL GODBY, Community United for Safety and Protection,
requested the committee remove Section 20 [sic] of SB 54. She
related that she previously was a sex worker for three years
because she was a drug addict and homeless. She stated that she
has been sober for 13 months. She shared that sex workers know
they can't call the police if things go wrong. They have to look
out for each other. This includes talking about clients and
sharing good clients, sharing hotel rooms, giving each other
rides to calls, and waiting outside or hiring someone to wait
outside as a safety net. However, when those safety measures
become felonies, sex workers are much less likely to look out
for one another.
MS. GODBY concluded her testimony urging the committee to listen
to the testimony about the good Senate Bill 91 has done to
reduce recidivism. Women she saw cycling through the system are
now home with their families and holding jobs.
CHAIR COGHILL said he believes the bill addresses her request,
but he is open to further discussion.
2:28:18 PM
BUTCH MOORE, representing himself, advised that he is Bree
Moore's father and he has concerns with Senate Bill 91. He said
SB 54 does not address class B felonies. Senate Bill 91 changed
the penalty for a class B felony to zero to two years in jail
with a suspended imposition of sentence. He said that means a
judge could potentially impose a suspended imposition of
sentence with basically two years of probation for someone who
pleads a murder or manslaughter charge to criminally negligent
homicide. He maintained the charge would be removed from the
offender's record if he/she didn't violate during that two
years. "So that man could be dating your daughter, and you go to
look him up on CourtView and he killed someone, but it doesn't
show up." He cited examples of other class B felonies and urged
the committee to look at those crimes and impose a minimum jail
term.
MR. MOORE expressed frustration with the law regarding violating
conditions of release and class C felonies. He described the
following that he blamed on Senate Bill 91: A man (who he later
identified as Mr. Santiago) assaulted his girlfriend and was
charged with a class C felony. He was released on a deferred
prosecution and given conditions of release that he violated. He
had contact with Anchorage police officers three more times and
was always released. He also walked into the FBI office with a
handgun, which he was not supposed to have, and was released.
After that the man "got on an airplane and went to Florida and
he killed five people and wounded eight."
MR. MOORE expressed appreciation that Senator Coghill brought SB
54 forward to make desperately needed changes to violating
conditions of release and class C felonies. He then described
accounts of Trevon Aldridge. He was arrested and charged with
weapons misconduct and criminal mischief and released on no
bail; in August 2016 he was in possession of a firearm when he
smashed multiple vehicles, including two police cars, but was
let go; and on November 15, 2016 he was arrested for allegedly
shooting William Schmaus in the back of the head. Mr. Moore said
he appreciates that Senate Bill 91 has done good things for some
of the people who testified today, but his appeal is to give
judges the flexibility to impose more than five days in jail for
VCOR when the person "is violent like Santiago or mentally ill
or unstable or has a restraining order".
CHAIR COGHILL clarified that a suspended imposition of sentence
does stay on an individual's record and class B felonies do have
mandatory minimums, just not the first time.
2:35:33 PM
TERRA BURNS, Community United for Safety and Protection, asked
the committee to remove Section 20 [sic] of SB 54. She shared
that she became interested in policies related to sex
trafficking at age 16 when a Fairbanks district attorney decided
against charging her father for trafficking her. The
justification given was that juries didn't like teen
prostitutes. After working in the sex industry for 20 years, she
retired. As part of her master's degree from UAF she researched
the life experiences and policy recommendations of people in
Alaska's sex trade. She said that research was replicated at
Brown University and she now travels the world talking about sex
policy and research. Most recently she spoke at the University
of Cambridge and advised researchers with Amnesty International.
She continued as follows:
Section 20 of this bill proposes to remove subsections
of AS 11.66.130 and 135, which prevent prosecutors
from charging prostitutes with sex trafficking if they
have not induced anybody into prostitution or are not
in a location with a sex trafficking victim.
You've heard a lot of things about what sex
trafficking is, but I think we should be very clear
that 11.66.130 and 135 only apply to having a place of
prostitution, which can include the prostitute's home
or hotel room, and to aiding or facilitating
prostitution, which is so broad that a woman in
Fairbanks was charged with sex trafficking herself for
aiding and facilitating her own prostitution.
You heard earlier that sex trafficking involves force
and coercion, but we don't even have coercion in our
Alaska statute. We should. We should have coercion, we
should have threats, we should have threats against
victims' families especially, but we don't have that.
Force is defined in [AS 11.]66.110, and there is no
exception in 110 or 120 for people who are engaged in
prostitution.
The legislative and administrative intent was clear in
creating the sex trafficking statute in 2012. That
these statutes were to be used against people who
exploited and harmed sex workers, not against sex
workers themselves. But every person the Department of
Law charged under these statutes in the first two
years - 2012 and 2013, was an alleged prostitute
charged with prostitution of herself in the very same
case that she was charged with trafficking herself.
Legislative intent was clear last year in creating the
subsections that Section 20 would remove - that sex
workers who have not induced anyone into prostitution
should not be charged with sex trafficking when their
conduct amounts to prostitution. Despite this clear
intent, you heard Wednesday from Mr. Skidmore that
this was an accidental loophole. This is not an
accidental loophole.
The Department of Law wrote in a June 17 letter that
no one ever had or could be charged with trafficking
themselves under these statutes even though they
clearly were aware that they had filed these charges
and discussed it during the last legislative session.
In their recommendations to the Criminal Justice
Commission, the Department of Law wrote that these
sections would prevent them from prosecuting
independent sex workers working in the same location
as a sex trafficking enterprise. This is untrue on two
levels. First, a prostitution enterprise is defined in
[AS] ll.66.120 and not affected by the subsections
this bill proposes removing. Second, the subsections
clearly say that if a worker is in a location with a
person who has been trafficked, they can still be
charged under [AS 11.66.130 and 135].
More importantly, if a sex worker found herself in a
location with a victim of genuine trafficking, the sex
worker should be encouraged to report this crime
rather than being hunted down as a sex trafficker
herself. Sex workers and clients of sex workers are
usually the first responders in sex trafficking
situations. And your responsibility to public safety
demands that these people not fact felonies for
reporting these situations to law enforcement.
[AS] 11.66.130 and 135 are so broad that they even
define many sex trafficking victims as sex
traffickers. I can tell you of at least one case where
the subsections the bill proposes removing worked as
intended and a victim of violent sex trafficking was
able to make a report after she was assured that she
and other victims could not be charged with
trafficking for driving each other to calls or taking
pictures of each other for ads. But you have not heard
of any cases where a perpetrator was harming someone
and could not be charged with it because of these
subsections.
Removing these subsections is not based on any
evaluations of how they have impacted public safety or
cases that weren't charged or reported because of it.
This is a strong departure from the evidence-based
nature of Senate Bill 91 [and] should not be permitted
to move forward.
Although the trafficking statute was not in existing
when I was a trafficking victim here in Alaska - back
then it was part of the SAM laws. If it had been,
these subsections would have allowed sex workers who
were my coworkers to report my abuse so I would not
have continued being trafficked for three years.
Removing these sections puts sex workers and sex
trafficking victims at risk. And when you create laws
that put us at risk, they get played out. We see them
used against sex workers and sex trafficking victims
who should not be the experiments for how these laws
will play out.
The proposed definition in Section 5 would not have
allowed the woman who worked with me when I was a
victim to report without being charged, even if the
definition were not so unclear. However, as written
the definition causes undue confusion and will prevent
the reporting of actual violent crime.
MS. BURNS encouraged the committee to listen to the addicts and
felons who testified because there is some overlap between the
communities. She reiterated her request to remove Section 20
from the bill.
CHAIR COGHILL asked her to let the committee know the places
that the language doesn't work.
MS. BURNS said she submitted concise information about that.
CHAIR COGHILL said his office would follow up with her.
2:44:26 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO asked if she would provide her testimony in
writing.
MRS. BURNS agreed to do so.
2:45:05 PM
DON HABEGER, Community Coordinator, Juneau Reentry Coalition,
Juneau, Alaska, explained that the coalition started in 2013 as
a community response to high recidivism rates. It was an all-
volunteer workforce until late 2015 when they partnered with the
Alaska Mental Health Trust. In November 2015 he was hired as the
coalition's sole staff member.
He explained that the coalition relies heavily on evidence-based
data and fidelity to research in its work to address recidivism
and ensure public safety. The intent is to cover the back of
somebody who wants community help. This is done using the
concepts of risk, need, and responsivity that the Commission
looked at when it developed community case management.
MR. HABEGER said he is pointing that out because Senate Bill 91
is relatively new and a significant piece of it was evidence-
based. He urged the committee to be mindful of evidence-based
research as it deliberates on SB 54 and make it the center of
any new policies.
2:48:00 PM
DONNA THOMPSON, Priceless Alaska, advised that Priceless speaks
from the firsthand experience of working with law enforcement
and numerous victims. She related that their internal data and
national trends indicate that the crime of exploiting others for
profit is the fastest growing crime in the nation and in Alaska.
This crime has moved into the world of internet recruiting that
allows access for grooming and exploitation of young people by
total strangers. Our children are becoming a new commodity in
what has become a $100 billion sex industry. She described the
current laws as woefully inadequate to deter traffickers from
committing this crime in Alaska.
MS. THOMPSON stated that Priceless Alaska supports SB 54 as a
start to toward keeping the children, youth, and citizenry of
Alaska safe from becoming the next victim of modern day slavery.
CHAIR COGHILL relayed that Ms. Burns and Ms. Thompson both have
the goal of ending sex trafficking, although their approaches
are different.
2:50:49 PM
SENATOR KELLY stated that the earlier testimony linking Senate
Bill 91 and Mr. Santiago was seriously flawed. He continued:
I would like, if possible, for you [Mr. Chairman] and
your office to rebut that testimony because I've heard
it on talk shows. There was quite a bit of it that was
just plain false and inflammatory. I would like it
read into the record, as many other things have been
read into the record, so that we can make sure that
the truth prevails, at least through this process.
CHAIR COGHILL agreed to respond.
2:52:47 PM
LEVY SMITH, representing himself, testified in opposition to SB
54 He said he isn't well versed on either Senate Bill 91 or SB
54, but he was encouraged to testify because he has a personal
connection. He explained that he was born with Joubert syndrome
and has always had anger issues. In 2015 he was incarcerated for
assaulting his mother. He spent three days in jail before he was
placed on third party release. He offered his understanding that
Senate Bill 91 was enacted just eight months ago and encouraged
the committee to wait until there is evidence that the new laws
aren't working. He concluded, "I don't agree with SB 54."
CHAIR COGHILL thanked Mr. Smith for his concise testimony.
He stated he would keep public testimony open and hold SB 54 in
committee awaiting a fiscal note.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|