Legislature(1997 - 1998)
01/23/1997 03:03 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL
SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
January 23, 1997
3:04 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Con Bunde, Chairman
Representative Joe Green, Vice Chairman
Representative Al Vezey
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Fred Dyson
Representative J. Allen Kemplen
Representative Tom Brice
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
SENATE MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Gary Wilken
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
*HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 4
Relating to records generated and maintained by the Department of
Health and Social Services.
- HEARD AND HELD
*HOUSE BILL NO. 6
"An Act amending laws relating to the disclosure of information
relating to certain minors."
- HEARD AND HELD
(* First public hearing)
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HCR 4
SHORT TITLE: SEPARATE RECORDS FOR DELINQUENTS & CINA
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) KELLY,Phillips,Dyson
JRN-DATE JRN-DATE ACTION
01/13/97 21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/13/97 21 (H) HES, FINANCE
01/14/97 59 (H) COSPONSOR(S): PHILLIPS
01/15/97 78 (H) COSPONSOR(S): DYSON
01/23/97 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 6
SHORT TITLE: RELEASE OF INFORMATION ABOUT MINORS
JRN-DATE JRN-DATE ACTION
01/13/97 28 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/3/97
01/13/97 28 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
01/13/97 28 (H) HES, JUDICIARY
01/14/97 59 (H) COSPONSOR(S): PHILLIPS
01/23/97 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
BRUCE CAMPBELL, Legislative Aide
to Representative Pete Kelly
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 411
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 465-2327
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on CSHB 6(HES) and HCR 4
ANGELA SALERNO, Executive Director
National Association of Social Workers, Alaska Chapter
525 Main Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Telephone: (907) 586-4438
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified against CSHB 6(HES)
CHRIS CHRISTENSEN, Staff Counsel
Office of the Administrative Director
Alaska Court System
820 West Fourth Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Telephone: (907) 264-8228
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on CSHB 6(HES) and HCR 4
MARGOT KNUTH, Assistant Attorney General
Central Office
Criminal Division
Department of Law
Representing the Governor's Children's Cabinet
P.O. Box 110300
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300
Telephone: (907) 465-4338
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on CSHB 6(HES)
L. DIANE WORLEY, Director
Central Office
Division of Family and Youth Services
Department Of Health and Social Services
P.O. Box 110630
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0630
Telephone: (907) 465-3191
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HCR 4 and CSHB 6(HES)
BOB BUTTCANE, Juvenile Probation Officer III
Anchorage Intake Unit
Division of Family and Youth Services
Department of Health and Social Services
2600 Providence Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99508
Telephone: (907) 562-2285
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on CSHB 6(HES)
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 96-2, SIDE A
Number 0000
CHAIRMAN CON BUNDE called the House Health, Education and Social
Services Committee meeting to order at 3:04 p.m. Members present
at the call to order were Representatives Bunde, Vezey, Porter,
Dyson, Kemplen and Brice. Representative Green arrived at 3:06
p.m.
Number 0055
HB 6 - RELEASE OF INFORMATION ABOUT MINORS
HCR 4 - SEPARATE RECORDS FOR DELINQUENTS & CINA
CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced that the committee would address two
related bills. The first was HB 6, "An Act amending laws relating
to the disclosure of information relating to certain minors." The
second bill was HCR 4, Relating to records generated and maintained
by the Department of Health and Social Services. He said these
issues are related and the committee would discuss them in their
relationship as it goes along.
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said that Representative Pete Kelly, sponsor of both
bills, is still quite ill. He noted his staff was in attendance.
He said the discussion of the bills would begin today and be
continued on Tuesday, January 28, 1997.
Number 0166
BRUCE CAMPBELL, Legislative Aide to Representative Pete Kelly, said
there was a proposed committee substitute for HB 6.
Number 0273
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN made a motion to adopt the proposed
committee substitute. Hearing no objection, CHAIRMAN BUNDE
announced that CSHB 6(HES) was before the House Health, Education
and Social Services Committee.
Number 0301
MR. CAMPBELL read from the sponsor statement. He said HCR 4 gives
the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) legislative
directive to restructure the Division of Family and Youth Services
(DFYS). This restructuring will split the records relating to
child abuse from the records of criminal acts committed by a minor.
MR. CAMPBELL said the split of staff and personnel protects the
agency from the loss of most of the federal funds now received for
out-of-home placement. He said he believes about $7 million in
federal funds is expended each year for out-of-home placement of
abused children. The separation protects these funds used for
Children in Need of Aid (CINA) kids.
MR. CAMPBELL said getting kids out of dysfunctional homes is an
important option for breaking the cycle of violence with kids who
commit criminal acts. Foster care is a valuable component of the
juvenile justice system.
MR. CAMPBELL said a portion of the fiscal note attached replaces
the federal funds with state dollars, it assumes that federal funds
will be lost once records are released for delinquent children. A
smaller portion of the fiscal note effectuates the organizational
restructuring and the costs associated with that. However, the
experts from DHSS are far better able to explain these details and
their relationship to federal law and federal code.
Number 0378
MR. CAMPBELL said CSHB 6(HES) builds upon HCR 4. It provides for
the release of information about the outcome of agency actions when
a child admits guilt and agrees to a restitution plan as well as
the outcome of agency court records when a child is found
delinquent.
MR. CAMPBELL said the disclosure of the outcome of agency and court
actions is limited in CSHB 6(HES) in two ways. First the bill
focuses on repeat offenders, rather than first time misdemeanants.
Secondly the bill releases only a given set of information about
the minor, not the complete file, psychological report, family
background investigation, previous child abuse records, etc.
MR. CAMPBELL said the focus on repeat offenders recognizes that the
vast majority of kids who are caught committing a criminal act do
so only once. They wake up, say, "Hey, this isn't me," and are
never seen again inside the criminal justice system.
MR. CAMPBELL said repeat offenders appear to need more attention
than the current system provides. To prevent them from developing
a habit or lifestyle of crime, they need additional community
involvement. The concept of confidentiality was developed to
protect kids from being labeled criminals. Unfortunately,
confidentiality is used by a few kids as cover for their criminal
actions. They are able to commit serious crimes, then walk about
masked from their elders and their peers. This invisibility can
act to reinforce their sense of invincibility. Judges are telling
me that they use confidentiality to build a following, not unlike
a "Billy the Kid" or "Jesse James" phenomenon. This braggadocio
and "see what I can do" fuels their desire to live outside
society's rules.
MR. CAMPBELL said kids need clear limits. Negative attention has
its own role in defining limits to civil behavior. I do not
believe that community knowledge of a minor's criminal acts is
harmful. He said he believed it allows the community to interact
naturally to help heal the wounds and troubles of youth today.
Certainly it helps other children say no when they are pressured to
join a peer in a criminal act.
MR. CAMPBELL said kids do dumb things. Even dumber is to get
caught. But dumbest of all is to catch a kid committing a crime
and then ignore it. The professionals are not ignoring the kid,
but you and I are kept ignorant of these acts, and of the needs of
our troubled youth by the existing confidentiality system.
Number 0518
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if there were any questions from committee
members.
Number 0526
REPRESENTATIVE TOM BRICE clarified that questions could be directed
towards HCR 4 and CSHB 6(HES). He asked, specifically, how much
DHSS would lose if they did not divide the records.
MR. CAMPBELL said a spokesperson was here from DHSS and they could
better answer that question.
Number 0574
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE referred to CSHB 6(HES), Section 4, which
would make notification of victim mandatory rather than voluntary.
He asked if there were certain circumstances where a victim might
not want to be notified. He asked if it would be appropriate to
add some language to give the DHSS some leniency so that they would
not be legally and statutorily required to notify the victim.
Number 0635
MR. CAMPBELL said Representative Kelly could answer that question
on Tuesday. He said the language in CSHB 6(HES) could have been
inserted to comply with the constitutional requirement to provide
information to victims. He said there was a constituent request to
telephone victims with the information, so as to not overburden the
staff with having to answer every question in writing. He
clarified that Representative Brice's question specifically
regarded the deletion of "upon the request of a victim."
Number 0708
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said his question was directed to shifting the
requirement to have the state notify the victim in cases where the
victim does not want to be notified. He expressed concern over
what adjustment meant.
Number 0741
MR. CAMPBELL said he would give his understanding of the term
adjustment. He said the numbers that he has heard give "12, 1,400"
referrals to an agency in Fairbanks. He said a vast majority of
those are first time offenders and those people are not seen again.
He said a larger number of them are adjusted without having to go
to court. He said the intake officer sits down across from the
minor and the minor's attorney. When the minor agrees that he was
guilty, then the situation is discussed. Conclusions are drawn as
to punishment such as preforming community service, restitution if
appropriate, writing a letter to the victim or any of several other
things that the minor suggests. He said that is part of the
adjustment process.
MR. CAMPBELL said the cases where the minor or the minor's attorney
wish to continue the debate further and the evidence is still
sufficient the DHSS may go all the way to court and prosecute in
court and file a petition. He said the adjustment proceeds the
petition process. He said, as he understands, out of "12 or 1,400"
only 200 to 300 get to the petition process.
Number 0822
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked if any other state kept these records
open.
Number 0834
MR. CAMPBELL said he did not have accurate numbers on that.
Number 0850
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said that he assumed the committee's questions would
go to Representative Kelly.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said it would be interesting what effect that
policy has had if it has been done in other states.
Number 0865
REPRESENTATIVE J. ALLEN KEMPLEN asked why only one offense was
pardoned in CSHB 6(HES). He said our society has adopted a "three
strikes you're out" approach to these types of issues. He asked
why there was a variation from what is being developed nationally
as public policy and why one offense is merited rather than three.
He asked if it could be changed to three.
Number 0932
MR. CAMPBELL said the concept of CSHB 6(HES) was developed through
a constituent interest. He said, informally, they refer to this
bill as the Dan Osborne tiered system because one of the
constituents in Fairbanks suggested a three tiered system. In the
proposal the first time offense would be confidential, the second
offense would result in the release of the parent's name and the
third time offense would result in the release of both the parent's
name and the minor's name. He said the drafting attorney said
there would be constitutionality problems with releasing the names
of the parents, people who did not really commit a crime. He said
the concept of a tiered system is certainly a point for discussion
and added that Representative Kelly would welcome input.
MR. CAMPBELL said CSHB 6(HES) is the cleanest system to start
drafting on and it is the system that their constituents have said
they liked the best.
Number 0985
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN said he represents, District 16 which
includes Fairview and Mountainview in Anchorage, which have a
reputation of being very rough neighborhoods. He said he has been
active in the Fairview community patrol and has spent time, at the
neighborhood level as a citizen volunteer, in public safety. He
said, although he is not a trained professional, he has observed
that there are different levels of juveniles. He said there are
juveniles that seem to go towards the more hard core activity, gang
related activity. He said he could see those youth taking the
publication of their information as kind of a badge of honor, a
rite of passage into their gang. Other kids might say, "Hey, you
ain't nothing buddy until you get your name published in the paper.
This is the threshold that you got to pass before you are a member
of our gang." He said his concern is that publication would
contribute to that type of mentality prevalent in those hard core
juveniles. He asked if Mr. Campbell could give him some guidance
regarding this concern.
Number 1102
MR. CAMPBELL said this issue came up in a discussion with some
Fairbanks judges and said they had just the opposite approach to
it. The judges perceived that confidentiality allowed the mind set
that Representative Kemplen described. He said the kids could
start bragging about what they had done far more then if other
people knew about it. He said the release of information not only
carries with it the possibility mentioned by Representative
Kemplen, but also carries with it the ability of other minors
around them to look around and say, "Wait a minute my parents don't
like this or other elders that they respect." He said the kids
will see a negative reaction and they will react accordingly. He
said the secrecy in the process allows the serious, hard core kids
to truly cover their tracks and develop, within their peer group,
a bragging "Billy the Kid" following.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to page two of CSHB 6(HES) where a
second misdemeanor was treated in the same manner as if it were a
crime that would be punishable as a felony. He cited a story where
he innocently was grouped with college students who were arrested
for a noise violation. He expressed concern that if an innocent
youth were caught twice, his and his parent's name would be
published in the same vein as someone who the first time had been
carrying a knife, the second time carrying the gun. He said he did
not think, as a society, we wanted to link those type of crimes.
Number 1238
MR. CAMPBELL said yes if, as a youth, Representative Green pleaded
guilty and if the case was formally adjudicated or it went through
a court system and he was found guilty with a previous misdemeanor.
He said a violation or a lower level crime is not covered in CSHB
6(HES). He said he is not sure if noise is a misdemeanor or a
violation.
Number 1269
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said the key is whether or not you plead guilty or
had been found guilty.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said it was his understanding that if the case
has not been adjudicated, it has not actually gone to trial.
Number 1283
MR. CAMPBELL said if you start at Section 2 of CSHB 6(HES), you are
talking about those records from a court dispositional order which
means that you have been found adjudicated delinquent.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN said he understood.
MR. CAMPBELL said the portion that was in the original bill, not in
CSHB 6(HES), dealt with arrest records. He said arrest is not
dealt with in CSHB 6(HES).
Number 1343
ANGELA SALERNO, Executive Director, National Association of Social
Workers (NASW), Alaska Chapter, said they have 155,000 members
nationwide and 460 members in Alaska. She said NASW strongly
opposes CSHB 6(HES) and does not recommend its passage. She said
these proposed amendments to the Alaska Children's Code will
fundamentally and dramatically change the juvenile justice system
in the way that we have structured it.
MS. SALERNO said confidentiality of juvenile records provides a
certain protection for youth, protection that they need in order to
successfully rehabilitate them, and prevent further crime. She
said this is the mission of the juvenile court and has been since
its inception. The other part of her concern is that there is no
proof that this measure will work as Representative Brice referred
to earlier. She said this is a new idea in juvenile justice and
she has not found, in her studies, any research to back up such a
dramatic measure. She said NASW believes that breaching
confidentiality for minors will result in stigmatization of the
minor, labeling and might create obstacles to the youth's future
employability. She said it could actually promote further crime
rather than deter it.
Number 1431
MS. SALERNO said, in her discussions with Representative Kelly's
staff, there seemed to be a feeling that secrecy is bad for kids,
that if we let the community know what is going on with kids the
community will rally around and assist the kid. She said she is
skeptical of that scenario. She fears that the community might
shun the kid and we could really have a future criminal on our
hands where, now, one might not exist.
Number 1464
MS. SALERNO said she has been working on some proposed changes to
CSHB 6(HES) which might mitigate some of the harsher features of
the bill. She received permission from CHAIRMAN BUNDE to discuss
them. She said she would also discuss them with Representative
Kelly. She said CSHB 6(HES) does not have an age limit on it. The
bill would allow the courts to release information on the youngest
of juvenile offenders, offenders who are 12, 13 and 14-years-old.
She said very young children have the greatest potential for
rehabilitation. She has heard it said that if we don't release the
names of these young kids they are more likely to get recruited by
gangs. In the thinking of NASW, what will happen with CSHB 6(HES)
is that we will be turning them over to the gangs. If you release
their names, then those kids have the opportunity to become career
criminals rather than staying in the system and being
rehabilitated.
Number 1513
MS. SALERNO said another change to CSHB 6(HES) would be the
deletion of the provisions which would allow the court to release
information about kids who have committed a second misdemeanor. As
Representative Green stated, those could be very minor
infringements of the law. Minor things which would not create a
situation where it would be in our best interest to release the
names of these kids. Minor things such as non-violent crimes. She
said we are concerned about kids who are committing serious violent
crimes such as felony offenses.
Number 1536
MS. SALERNO said, before we release the names, could we not ask the
court to review the order. She said it might provide an additional
safeguard to the youth, especially those youth who experience a
serious impairment such as seriously emotionally disturbed
children, children who experience mental illness, or other serious
impairments. Those kids need treatment, not stigmatization in the
community.
Number 1558
MS. SALERNO said, finally, she wanted to suggest that if we are
going to release a kid's name out into the community, and ask the
community to help them, let's make sure that there is a plan for
that help. She said we could put into law that a written,
individualized case plan be developed for the youth. She said
there would be elements that would be similar to most youth, but it
would be individualized to the youth. The case plan would include
the responsible parties, what treatment would be provided, time
lines for that completion and outcomes.
Number 1602
MS. SALERNO said she wanted to clarify something that Mr. Campbell
had said to how she read CSHB 6(HES). She referred to Section 5,
and said that adjustment is pre-adjudication. She said CSHB 6(HES)
would allow that kids who are not adjudicated, who do not go to
that length, can also have their names released. Cases that are
being adjusted informally.
Number 1614
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if, at that adjustment, the offender has to
acknowledge their guilt. He said that although it is not official
adjudification, they are basically admitting that they are guilty.
Number 1630
MS. SALERNO said there is enough evidence to prove it as well, but
it is not that next step. She said it is at this stage where there
is an opportunity to treat kids, when we have a chance to get them
into the kind of services that NASW supports. For example, victim
offender mediation and other programs of restorative justice rather
than the prevailing attitude of punishment and retribution. She
said she would like to see more of that and a great deal less of
what becomes punishment. She said CSHB 6(HES) could be very
dangerous to the community.
Number 1666
MS. SALERNO said she is not, nor are other social workers, naive
about the dangers to the community about serious violent offenders.
She said the Governor's Conference on Youth and Justice reported
that those crimes are being committed by a small group of hard core
offenders. She said she has no trouble with getting those kids off
the street by releasing their names if that what the committee
decides to do. She said we need to take the opportunity when we
can get it to treat kids, to get them the help that they need. She
said NASW supports prevention, by globally attacking the problems
of poverty, child abuse, child sexual abuse, early intervention
through such programs as Healthy Families. She said we need to
take a balanced and restorative approach.
Number 1709
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if she felt the system is currently working
and then asked if the system has worked for the past 20 years.
Number 1722
MS. SALERNO referred to what has happened over the past 20 years.
She said Alaska has a "juvenile bubble." From 1980 to 1990
nationwide juvenile population grew 1 percent while in Alaska it
grew 40 percent. She said 33.8 percent of Alaska's population is
between the ages of zero and 19. She said Alaska has more kids and
therefore an increased number of juvenile crimes. She said our
social problems are increasing. She referred to testimony in the
committee file citing a number of factors, she feels are involved,
and research shows correlates highly with juvenile crime. She said
Alaska is second in the nation on child abuse, child sexual abuse
and 124,000 children are in poverty. She concluded that these are
all factors. She said it is a complex problem.
Number 1774
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said that we can almost stipulate that the system is
not working and we are probably all here wanting to find something
that works. We might agree on a different vehicle, but our role is
to find something that works.
Number 1780
MS. SALERNO said, in response, let's take a broader look at it. We
are trying to tweak the system here in a quite reactive way. We
might not know what happens on the other end. She said this might
be a dangerous tweak that we don't have any proof or research on at
all.
Number 1795
REPRESENTATIVE FRED DYSON read, "the goal of the juvenile system is
to help youths in trouble become law abiding citizens," and asked
if it was fair to say it's a goal or is it the goal of the system.
Number 1814
MS. SALERNO said one of the other things she does in her life is
that she is a social services educator and has studied the juvenile
system quite extensively from its inception. She said it was
designed to be rehabilitative with the other goal being
accountability. Those are dual goals; reintegration into society
and accountability.
Number 1833
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked if she would logically infer that the
prevention of further crimes by that particular juvenile is not a
goal of the system.
Number 1843
MS. SALERNO said she would infer that it certainly is a goal.
Prevention of crime would be the outcome of rehabilitation.
Number 1848
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked about "protection from further victims."
Number 1850
MS. SALERNO said protection of victims is certainly a goal. She
said that CSHB 6(HES) drives a wedge and asked if we can have one
without the other. She asked if it was not possible to have both.
Number 1861
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked her if she had to choose between the two
would she or her organization choose protecting the perpetrator and
his/her confidentiality over the victims.
Number 1868
MS. SALERNO said NASW supports the protection of confidentiality of
the minor.
Number 1887
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked how long, in American law, we have
protected confidentiality of minors.
Number 1893
MS. SALERNO said the juvenile court was established about the turn
of the century.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked if all the states have done that since
that time.
MS. SALERNO said to her knowledge, yes, the juvenile court was part
of a nationwide movement during the Progressive Era. She said she
does not have the information in front of her, but she would say,
yes, all the states adopted the philosophy that children had the
disability of their youth. In order to best rehabilitate them and
make them productive in society, confidentiality was going to be
needed.
Number 1916
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if it was fair to say that all Alaskans
have the same ultimate goal, although how we get there is
different. We would like to be safe from all types of criminal
perpetration, but certainly we want to do something with our kids.
He referred to her proposal for setting the age limit at 16 and
said that some kids, at age 13, are 6 foot 5 inches and 250 pounds.
He said it is a awesome figure to say, we're going to treat him
like a child. Unfortunately his mind might be a child, but his
body is certainly an adult. He expressed concern about making a
special dispensation to that "hulk" that might be out there.
Number 1986
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to the case plan which she had
suggested and asked if she would be amenable to a blanket plan
rather than having a special plan drawn up for every children. He
said, if CSHB 6(HES) were passed into law, why couldn't it require
a plan covering two or three different kinds of problem children.
Number 2010
MS. SALERNO said she would answer the second question first. She
said there could be a template to derive the case plan from, but
said it is important to note that each kid is different. Each kid
has circumstances in his/her life; different family setting,
different educational needs and certainly a different history. She
said a sound professional approach to that would demand that we
individualize the case plans.
Number 2033
MS. SALERNO referred to his first question and said it is
remarkable how large teenagers are growing. She said it is part of
the problem because teenagers are large, they are mobile, they look
like adults and they sometimes act like adults, but they are not
adults. They lack the decision making skills, the experience and
they lack some of the resources that might help them when their
names are released in public. She said an adult has a lot of
different ways to get around the publication of their name, ways of
mitigating it in their lives whereas children don't. She said she
does not really know the answer to that question. She said folks
are alarmed and even quite afraid when they see these very large,
300 pound teenagers bearing down on them in the street.
Number 2070
CHAIRMAN BUNDE cited her work and experience and said maybe we
could even talk with law enforcement people, but said it was his
understanding that violent perpetrators and, certainly, when
someone is caught for a violent crime it is seldom their first
offense. He said very few are arrested as a felony for their first
arrest or at least their first offense. He said the age is
decreasing. He referred to Ms. Salerno's proposal to draw the line
at age 16, but asked if in the general public there were adults
getting juveniles to commit violent crime because they would be
treated as juveniles and asked whether or not we would be creating
another artificial barrier at age 16. Wouldn't it just get the 14-
year-old to commit crimes and essentially encourage recruitment.
Number 2103
MS. SALERNO said it is a concern and said that everyone has heard
those stories in the news. She reiterated that what we are
advocating is that these kids don't just go away, they are just not
released and not treated in any fashion. She said NASW advocates
secured detention for those kids that need it, all the resources of
DHSS and, frankly, the community as well. She said we are on the
same page, we would like to see..."
Number 2122
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked how the community was supposed to weigh in
when they don't know who the perpetrators are.
Number 2126
MS. SALERNO said the community, right now, isn't equipped to give
that help. She said she is skeptical that the community will rally
around and nurture this child.
Number 2133
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said he agreed that the community would probably not
gather around and nurture, but do something else.
Number 2138
MS. SALERNO questioned whether or not the community would even
assist. She asked whether or not the community would do anything
other shun and further stigmatize.
Number 2144
REPRESENTATIVE BRIAN PORTER said he had discussed with Ms. Salerno
some of these kind of things. He said they agree totally in one
area, but he said he would have to disagree with her in this area.
He said some of the things she suggested were discussed when he
participated in the juvenile justice commission this past summer.
He said, quite frankly, the gist of the commission's report will be
that the traditional, confidential, rehabilitative, protective
philosophy of the system isn't working and needs to be adjusted.
He said an individual court's review to make that determination,
just on the release, he doesn't hold as being as significant as Ms.
Salerno is suggesting. He said he got the feeling that she thinks
the system will implode if a kid's name is released and the chances
of rehabilitation is gone.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said he thinks just the opposite. He said he
has personally seen too many cases where kids use the system; know
they are protected, know that they can re-offend, know that
unfortunately we don't have the resources to deal adequately with
the minor kinds of things. He said, that being recognized by the
commission, by trying to adopt procedures and deferral systems
which would allow local communities more effort in that authority
to deal with kids so that early intervention can happen. He said
our system has the state doing everything and that needs to be
adjusted as well.
Number 2222
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said the court's review on each case would
leave us with a situation where every kid in Klawock was going to
have their name released because that is the way the judge out
there would do it whereas the judge in Seward would not.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said the releasing of a second misdemeanor
offense, if it were minor, would be a concern, but asked how much
of a stigma would it be if it were minor offense.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said every time he hears that Alaska has the
second highest rate of this and that in the state, he cringes. He
said you only have to look at the demographics of Alaska to see why
we have such a high crime rate and a high incidence of juvenile
offenders when we have so many more of them in our population than
people over age 18.
Number 2254
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said, finally, it is his and many people of
the commission's hope that one of the other by-laws that was passed
last year and said he hopes to look at it this year, was to see
more parents involved in these kinds of things, instead of the
allowance for a kid to have to go to a adjudication or a petition
hearing and not even have a parent there. He said that is not
going to happen anymore. When parents go to those now, the first
one, and they are told the next time that your son or daughter does
this, your name is going to be in the paper. He thinks this will
provide some additional motivation that we don't currently have.
Number 2285
CHAIRMAN BUNDE reminded everyone that the committee meeting will be
on teleconference next Tuesday. He said there is written testimony
included in the committee file. He said he would continue to
provide this testimony as it came to the committee. He recognized
the presence of Senator Wilken.
Number 2308
CHRIS CHRISTENSEN, Staff Counsel, Office of the Administrative
Director, Alaska Court System, said as this was his first
appearance before the committee he would make the same disclaimer
that he makes every two years. He said as a general rule the
supreme court does not take a position in favor of or against
legislation. The only exception to that rule is when legislation
directly affects the internal administration of the judicial
branch. The court believes, very strongly, that the constitution
makes this your forum for the consideration of public policy issues
and it is not appropriate for the court to inject it's own policy
views into this forum. He said the court will offer technical
suggestions on legislation as more legislation affects the courts
than any other entity. He said the court will offer fiscal notes
when they believe something costs the court money and when they do
offer fiscal notes they will try to let the legislature know if
there is a cheaper way of accomplishing a goal.
MR. CHRISTENSEN said the court takes no position on this particular
bill. He said he would be attaching a fiscal note, depending on
the amendments the committee adopts.
TAPE 97-2, SIDE B
MR. CHRISTENSEN said he has not drafted a fiscal note yet because
he feels it is possible to amend the bill in such a way that would
either reduce the fiscal note by a factor of ten or eliminate it
entirely. He said, as the members know, adult criminal records are
currently public. The number of requests that the court receives
is staggering. In Anchorage alone the court gets about 75 people
a day who come in with about 40,000 files handed out each year. He
said those figures are just of criminal files. He said the total
number of civil files goes up into the hundreds of thousands.
MR. CHRISTENSEN said in person adult requests are relatively simple
to deal with. The requestor looks through the index to see if the
name of the person is in there, writes the name down and gives it
to a Range 8 file clerk. The clerk goes, grabs the file, gives it
to the requestor. The requestor looks through the file and finds
the information they are seeking.
Number 0029
MR. CHRISTENSEN said it is not that easy with the existing
children's files. He said most of the names in the children's
index are confidential, so a private citizen cannot come in and
look through the index to see if a particular kid is in there. A
court employee would need to do that. He said that most of the
contents of a file are confidential, so an employee is going to
have to actually look through the file and sanitize it by pulling
out the relevant information before it is actually given to a
member of the public. Some of these files are up to six inches
thick. He said adults files are kept by the crime and you might
have ten different files if you are an adult criminal. Juvenile
files are typically kept in one file for their whole period of
their childhood. He said you are going to have someone looking
through a six inch thick file and figure out, well, have they been
convicted of a felony, have they been convicted of a misdemeanor
for a second time, what is the relevant information that I can then
hand out. He said this procedure is not something that a Range 8
file clerk is going to be able to do. This is something that a
Range 16 legal technician, a paralegal is going to have to do.
Number 0073
MR. CHRISTENSEN said the court has one additional problem, the
Victim's Rights Act that the legislature passed back around 1991.
He said, as you recall, the Victim's Rights Act prohibits the court
from giving out information from the files which has either the
telephone numbers or addresses of the place of work or residence of
a victim. It also prohibits the court from giving out the names of
victims of certain types of offenses, particularly sexual offenses.
He said the court would also need the paralegal to go through the
file to make sure that none of this information is handed out to
the requestor.
Number 0091
MR. CHRISTENSEN said to put this into perspective, the court's
clerical costs for implementing the Victim's Rights Act are
probably a little over $100,000 a year. He said the only reason
that they are so low is because the court interpreted that act as
applying only to files which were created from the effective date
on and not to old files. He said the court did not sanitize the
hundreds of thousands of files already in existence. He said it is
a lot of work with existing files. He said the court suspects that
most of the people who come into the courthouses and request an
adult file, and these people include potential employers, banks,
landlords and neighbors, once they find out that a juvenile record
is available are also going to walk down the hall and to find that
file. He said if you are an employer and you are hiring a 22 year
old right out of college and are willing to spend the time and
money to go look at his adult record, you are probably going to
want to find out if he was convicted of a felony theft when he was
16 or 17 years old.
Number 0143
MR. CHRISTENSEN said there is one additional problem. He said
there is no centralized or computerized court file system. He said
each court keeps its own records. If you go into the Anchorage
courthouse and ask for the record of a juvenile or an adult, all
you will be told about is what they have been convicted of in the
city of Anchorage. You will not know anything about any of the
other 14 juvenile court locations statewide.
MR. CHRISTENSEN said there are two ways to lower or eliminate the
fiscal note. One way would be amending the bill so that it clearly
applies only to files that are generated after the effective date
of the law, so that the court would not have to go back and
sanitize the existing files.
Number 0153
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if there was any habeas corpus problem with
the legislature passing laws now that would then allow people to go
back and examine records that were created.
Number 0165
MR. CHRISTENSEN said you could argue that allowing people to go
back now and look at records, which were confidential at the time
of the conviction, is problematic because, well, the purpose isn't
to serve as an extra punishment, the purpose is to protect the
public, but in fact it is an extra consequence which they did not
know they were going to have when they originally plead guilty. He
said there is a potential legal problem to allow people to look at
old files. If we only have a supply the new files that are
created, the court will set up a different kind of file system. A
public index will be on the counter which only has the names in it
of kids who have been convicted of a felony or of a second offense.
If a person wants to see a kid's record we'll say look through the
index, if the name is in there then the court will pull the file.
He said, as each of these files is created, there will be a one
page document right up at the top that lists the name, the parent's
name and the dispositional order. The court would just have to
copy this one page and hand it out, so it would be relatively
inexpensive. He said this would be one way to get the fiscal note
decreased.
Number 0203
MR. CHRISTENSEN said he just looked at CSHB 6(HES) and said there
were some changes made that indicate that the intention of the
drafter of CSHB 6(HES), but it is not completely clear to him.
MR. CHRISTENSEN said a second way to decrease the fiscal note would
be to look at Section 8 of the original bill, he thought it was
Section 5 of CSHB 6(HES), providing that DFYS is also responsible
for releasing records. He said the records DFYS releases are the
records of kids that it adjusts. The records the court would
release are the records that the court adjudicates. Something
which could be done, without involving the courts, would be to have
DFYS release both the records of the children who were adjusted and
the records of the kids who are adjudicated by the courts. He said
the kids who are adjudicated by the courts is only about 10 percent
to 15 percent of the total, the court does not see most of these
children. He said, because DFYS is the prosecuting authority, they
have the information including the name of the kid, the parent's
name and they know what the court's disposition is. He said, he is
not certain, but he believed that DfYS records are far more
centralized than those at the courts so that a requestor might
actually be able to get information on a statewide basis, rather
than a local basis.
Number 0250
MR. CHRISTENSEN said there was one further problem which he wanted
to bring to the committee's attention, but would not reflect it in
a fiscal note because it is speculative. He said he has raised
this issue in House Judiciary Standing Committee. One of the
things that drives the costs of the criminal justice system is the
trial rate. He said right now the state of Alaska has lots of
judges, lots of prosecutors and lots of public defenders and said
only about 10 percent of adults who are charged with a crime
actually go to trial, the rest of them primarily plead guilty or no
contest. He said there are lots and lots of people handling only
10 percent of the cases. He said any time you increase the
consequences of a crime, you increase the rate at which people
decide to go to trial.
MR. CHRISTENSEN said the significance of this in the juvenile
system, is that while a juvenile has the same right to a public
defender if they are sent to a court. A juvenile also has the same
right to a jury trial as an adult does, but they very rarely
exercise this right. As recently as five years ago, the state was
seeing one juvenile jury trial a year. As the consequences of
juvenile conduct has been increased by the legislature the state is
starting to see more and more jury trials. He said CSHB 6(HES)
provides one additional consequence and there will be some kids who
say, "Well, I'm getting a free public defender. I don't want my
name released, why the heck not go to trial? What do I have to
lose? I'm not going to be punished any more harshly for doing
that." He said CSHB 6(HES) might have this additional cost. It
is a speculative cost so he would not put it in a fiscal note, but
wanted to sensitize the committee to this issue.
Number 310
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN referred to Mr. Christensen's last point and
asked him to give a feel as to what CSHB 6(HES) might do.
Number 0320
MR. CHRISTENSEN said he couldn't and that is why in good conscience
he wouldn't put a fiscal note on it. He said the court knows it
happens. He said trial rates have gone up slightly for adult
crimes when the penalty is increased. He said the records are not
as clear with juvenile cases in part because it is a much smaller
set of numbers.
0335
CHAIRMAN BUNDE clarified that Mr. Christensen had already been in
touch with the bill's sponsor regarding the fiscal note challenges.
Number 0352
MARGOT KNUTH, Assistant Attorney General, Central Office, Criminal
Division, Department of Law, said she was representing the
Governor's Children's Cabinet on legislation relating to children
and youth, especially those bills that are an outgrowth of the
Youth and Justice conference held this past year. She said she was
the reporter for the conference and displayed the unabridged
version of the conference report labeled, "Governor's Conference on
Youth and Justice." She said there is a smaller copy, an abridged
version which is also called, "Governor's Conference on Youth and
Justice," and contains most of the core content that was reflected
in the unabridged version. She said in the conference,
confidentiality of juvenile records was the most divisive topic
considered. She said the greatest amount of hours were spent on it
with, certainly, the widest spectrum of proposed solutions.
Number 0428
MS. KNUTH said the Governor will be introducing a bill that, for
the most part, reflects the consensus reached in the conference.
This bill will hopefully be available to the public on Monday. She
said it would be difficult for her to anticipate the bill, but she
would discuss the recommendation that was ultimately reached by the
conference. She passed out relevant copies of pages from the
conference report.
MS. KNUTH said when looking at the issue of confidentiality, the
first topic that the conference members disagreed on was what is
the point of confidentiality, what is the purpose in releasing the
information. She added that there was a spectrum of opinions on
this. Some people believed that the point of releasing the
information was to protect the public so that they could know when
an offender is out there. Some people believe that it could have
an impact on the offender's decision to commit an offense and that
it could actually have a deterrent affect on juvenile crime. Some
people believe that public disclosure stigmatizes and makes the
child feel more alienated from the good path and could even lead to
increased criminal activity. She concluded that the conference saw
an enormous spectrum with these issues.
Number 0508
MS. KNUTH said she would be remiss if she did not note that
Representative Porter and Representative Kelly were two of the most
attentive members of the conference from the legislature. She said
the other issue raised was what problem are we trying to address.
She said, when the conference attendees stepped back that far, the
first overriding objective was to reduce juvenile offenses. She
said there was a group that was adamantly pushing on disclosure of
public records and then there was another group that ultimately
prevailed and said what we really need is swift, appropriate
consequences for these offenses which the state is not able to do
because of limited resources. She said the state is focusing on
serious offenders and there is this experience of kids "skating" on
the minor offenses. She said, to a certain extent, this has been
fueling the public disclosure, confidentiality focus.
Number 0566
MS. KNUTH said one of the best results to come out of the
conference was a commitment to work with communities and let them
respond appropriately to the minor juvenile offenses. She said
this can be done without creating criminal records for the kids and
without having general public disclosure. The format the
communities want to use varies tremendously throughout the state.
In small villages the community court system and the cooperative
agreement that the state has entered into with Elim and Koyuk. In
those villages there will be elders that the kids respond to and
there will be an appropriate sanction by that community court. If
the kid doesn't comply, he/she will get bumped over to DHSS and
DFYS and go through the formal adjudication process.
Number 0606
MS. KNUTH said in Anchorage what they want, more than anything
else, is a hearing officer system where someone is in affect a pro
temp judge and the child is required to appear with a parent in
front of this judicial officer where there is a proceeding that has
some measure of formality. She said this hearing won't result in
a conviction of record and it won't result in public disclosure of
the name, but it will result in an order for restitution; community
work service presumably. She said that if the kid did not comply
with the order, one of the consequences would be to go for
adjudication back at DHSS. She said this is a voluntary diversion
type program, but is something that Anchorage feels will give them
a lot more leverage instead of the perennial "skating" through the
state system.
MS. KNUTH said other places, such as Mat-Su, have a diversion panel
in progress which they want to continue. Youth court has been
used. She said all of these very creative solutions are being
proposed because there is agreement that our current system is not
working and we have to do something to bring these kids in. She
said she is talking about minor offenders because that is what most
of them are. She said the state does have serious offenders and
that is where the state's "SWAT team" needs to come down. She said
the state needs to be able to focus on kids that are at risk of
becoming serious chronic offenders or who are serious chronic
offenders and get in their face, stay in their face and walk hand
in hand with them until adulthood and never let up there. She said
it is sort of a bifurcation of the state's juvenile justice system
that is rather radical for the state. She said the state has been
trying to do everything all these years and have finally come to
terms with the fact that it doesn't work, it's not working and we
want to do something different.
MS. KNUTH said with that background, the Youth and Justice
conference said the state definitely needs more disclosure of
juvenile records. It has been a mistake to have all of these
records withheld in all events. She said the conference attendees
looked at the spectrum and drew the lines in slightly different
places than the sponsor of CSHB 6(HES).
Number 0721
MS. KNUTH said she has not had an opportunity to speak with the
sponsor, due to his illness, as to where those lines differ. She
said Representative Kelly was very patient last year when the party
line was always, "wait to see what the Governor's conference does."
She said now that we have it, Representative Kelly has been very
cooperative in wanting to work with the Administration to see where
common ground can be reached. She said she did not feel
comfortable in going through specifics with the committee when she
hasn't yet had a chance to discuss it with Representative Kelly.
Number 0746
CHAIRMAN BUNDE noted that some committee members had a 4:30 p.m.
commitment so the meeting would end at 4:30 p.m.
Number 0772
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN clarified that Ms. Knuth would be at the next
meeting.
Number 0781
L. DIANE WORLEY, Director, Central Office, Division of Family and
Youth Services, Department Of Health and Social Services, was next
to testify. She introduced Bob Buttcane, a juvenile probation
officer in the Anchorage office. She said that she expects during
the legislative session this year, because of the Governor's
conference and the mood of the public that a number of issues
related to juvenile justice will be raised. She said Mr. Buttcane
was asked to work with the state office to provide the ins and outs
as well as the day to day activities of the state's probation
officers and of the youth counselors. She felt that Mr. Buttcane
will be able to add a more realistic approach to the questions that
the legislators have and be able to give specific information in
that regard.
Number 0839
MS. WORLEY said she would like to address HCR 4, related to the
restructuring of DFYS, make a couple of points about CSHB 6(HES)
and then let Mr. Buttcane make a few comments relating to some of
the points that have been brought up.
Number 0860
MS. WORLEY reminded people who attended the committee meetings last
year of the continuing discussions of the inability to disclose
juvenile records. She said, currently, DFYS has both the juvenile
youth services section and the family services section tied
together in both their administrative and in much of their
financial management. Most of the money DFYS has for the services
they provide is generated from federal 4E dollars, which is related
to children who are placed in out-of-home care. One of the
requirements for getting money is that DFYS maintain
confidentiality of their clients. If the current system of DFYS
began disclosing juvenile records the division would lose close to
$7 million of federal 4E funds. She said it is a large chunk of
money which goes to provide a lot of services for the clients that
DFYS works with.
Number 0917
MS. WORLEY said as the committee continued in this discussion last
year, DFYS was asked how other states are able to do this and how
Alaska can make this happen without losing the $7 million. She
said DFYS sat down last year and began looking at it knowing that
this was going to be an issue and that it is, definitely, a high
priority for many people. She said HCR 4 relates directly to this
issue; how can we restructure DFYS, keeping youth services and
family services within the same division without having to create
a whole other entity, but still allow the disclosure of juvenile
records. She said DFYS has done some drafting of some structural
changes and said it is a little different than the changes proposed
in HCR 4. She said DFYS would meet with Representative Kelly to
fine tune the wording. She said the changes are not so much a
separation of DFYS files, but a separation of the administrative
management and the fiscal operations of the two sections. What
DFYS is looking to do in their draft ideas, without a finalized
plan, is putting a clear separation for youth services and family
services within the division and under the director.
MS. WORLEY said DFYS learned through the Governor's conference that
the juvenile justice system is a little fragmented based on
regionalization or the location. She said the restructuring will
allow the disclosure of juvenile records and DFYS is hoping that
the state will be able to strengthen the entire juvenile justice
system and give it a more cohesive statewide approach as to how we
are going to deal with juveniles. She said DFYS feels that there
will be more benefits besides the disclosure of records in the
restructuring.
Number 1009
MS. WORLEY referred to the funding and said this division will not
totally save the 4E dollars. She said, currently DFYS collects
around $700,000 based on juveniles that the state places in foster
care and out-of-home care and said that money will be lost.
Number 1030
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked if the money she referred to was a per
capita type of arrangement or if it was a fixed figure.
Number 1037
MS. WORLEY said it was an estimate DFYS was using based on what had
been claimed in the past. She said the number is based on the
number of children that DFYS has in out of home care. She said
DFYS took the number based on what had been claimed last year,
which was approximately $700,000. She said $700,000 is a much
smaller loss than $7 million. In the fiscal note that DFYS will be
attaching to CSHB 6(HES) will be the loss of the $700,000 plus an
additional loss of close to $400,000 for the actual restructuring.
She said the restructuring will eliminate some positions, creating
a couple of different positions. She said the restructuring will
shift positions to create positions specifically related to
juvenile justice and some for family services to create a bit of a
separation there.
Number 1093
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked if DFYS would lose the money because the
state is abandoning the confidentiality.
Number 1101
MS. WORLEY said, yes, that is correct. She said that when the
state begins disclosing information that has been confidential on
juveniles, DFYS will lose the money related to those juveniles.
Number 1110
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked if there was an appeal to that process.
Number 1115
MS. WORLEY said DFYS has had many discussions with the federal
government related to this issue and said there is not an
indication that there is an appeals process; an ability to appeal.
She said the state could make that attempt, but there is no
precedence set for that. She said when this has occurred in other
states, they have had to lose those funds as part of the 4E
regulations.
Number 1141
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said, from her comments, that other states that are
releasing this information and have chosen to pay the price.
Number 1148
MS. WORLEY said DFYS has done some research to see what other
states are doing. She said every state has a variety of ideas of
how they are going to address the situation. She said there are
many different structures. In some states juvenile justice is
within the department or in other departments. She said sometimes
they have a separate youth program such as in California where they
have the "Youth Authorities," a separate system of the DHSS.
Number 1177
CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked if she and the bill's sponsor could give the
committee a brief overview of what other states do when the
committee meets on Tuesday.
Number 1189
MS. WORLEY said she would be happy to do that and referred Chairman
Bunde to a publication from the Office of Juvenile Justice. She
said the publication is an examination of states and what states
are doing in juvenile justice. It looks at some of the current
legislation and some of the changes.
Number 1204
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said it would be helpful if the committee could get
that publication before the Tuesday meeting. He said that if she
got a copy to him, he would pass it among the committee members.
Number 1212
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON asked if the present confidentiality
regulations that DFYS follows preclude giving information to sworn
peace officers.
Number 1226
MS. WORLEY said DFYS is able to disclose information to certain
people on an "as to need to know" basis. She said it depends upon
the relationship. She said DFYS is able to disclose information to
schools, to counselors and with peace officers as well. She said
this is within the guidelines of the federal regulations.
Number 1260
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said that sworn officers of the state have
represented to him that DFYS investigators, who are often in many
homes with marginal situations, have knowledge and information that
is not being reported to the police officers and they wish that
this information would be reported. He said there is a conflict of
interest, in a sense, in that DFYS in their well intended efforts
to protect the children are not disclosing information that would
be helpful in solving crimes.
Number 1304
MS. WORLEY clarified that Representative Dyson is talking about
situations when a social worker or a probation officer does a home
visit, goes into a home and they sees other types of potential
illegal activities but they are not sharing that information.
Number 1324
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said yes, but he would not have inserted the
word, "other."
MS. WORLEY said she would have to look into that for him.
Number 1337
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said he would be interested to hear, in this
committee or in the House Judiciary Standing Committee, specifics
on what it is that the feds are saying causes the loss of the
$700,000. He said, it seems to him, that there should be the
ability to (indiscernible) the record of a criminal act and the
placement in a foster home. He said he realizes that when dealing
with feds, as he has, that sometimes it is impossible. He said he
could not understand it.
Number 1371
MS. WORLEY said she would bring in the information that she has and
the definitions and responses that DFYS has received.
Number 1380
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER commented that the Congressional delegation
from the state of Alaska, as they are well positioned, might give
us the ability to change that.
Number 1401
BOB BUTTCANE, Juvenile Probation Officer III, Anchorage Intake
Unit, Division of Family and Youth Services, Department of Health
and Social Services was next to testify. He referred to CSHB
6(HES) and said there are some victims that really want to put the
matter behind them. He said for those victims to get a phone call
out of the blue just reopens some old wounds. He said if we
allowed victims the opportunity to know everything about this
child, when he's released and so on, then the state can do
everything to make sure they are informed. He said calling people
carte blanche and telling them that the person who burglarized your
home two years ago is going to be out on Tuesday when the victim
has gotten on with their lives would cause a great deal of harm.
He said he feels the release of information needs to be initiated
by the victim.
Number 1453
MR. BUTTCANE said there is a real purpose in opening juvenile
records; public safety and rehabilitation. He said where the lines
should be drawn is really the issue. He said CSHB 6(HES) might go
a little too far. Adolescents are learning and experimenting who
they are. He said publishing their names in a paper because, in
the course of their trying to figure out what is right and what is
wrong and how does their life work, they make a mistake and their
name is published. He said he thinks, especially with the younger
adolescents, that they would be ostracized in their schools and
there would be very little chance that we could intervene to try to
save them. He said we need to look more at where we draw the line,
but said there are valid reasons in some cases to make sure that
names are on billboards to say, "Hey, watch out for this kid." He
said he does not think CSHB 6(HES) quite gets to that.
Number 1516
CHAIRMAN BUNDE said that we are certainly here to help CSHB 6(HES)
get to wherever we collectively feel it is best to get to. He said
we could summarize by saying that we agree it takes a whole village
as long as most of the village knows what is going on.
Number 1532
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to conduct, CHAIRMAN BUNDE
adjourned the meeting of the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee at 4:28 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|