Legislature(2017 - 2018)GRUENBERG 120

10/23/2017 01:00 PM House 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.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
03:50:23 PM Start
03:51:06 PM SB54
08:06:21 PM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
-- Delayed to 15 Minutes Following Session --
Heard & Held
-- Testimony <Invitation Only> --
-- Public Testimony --
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
               HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                        October 23, 2017                                                                                        
                           3:50 p.m.                                                                                            
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
Representative Matt Claman, Chair                                                                                               
Representative Zach Fansler, Vice Chair                                                                                         
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins                                                                                          
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux                                                                                                 
Representative David Eastman                                                                                                    
Representative Chuck Kopp                                                                                                       
Representative Charisse Millett (alternate)                                                                                     
Representative Louise Stutes (alternate)                                                                                        
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
Representative Lora Reinbold                                                                                                    
OTHER MEMBERS                                                                                                                 
Representative Andy Josephson                                                                                                   
Representative Geran Tarr                                                                                                       
Representative Justin Parrish                                                                                                   
Representative George Rauscher                                                                                                  
Representative Dan Ortiz                                                                                                        
Representative Dan Saddler                                                                                                      
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 54(FIN)                                                                                                  
"An  Act  relating  to  crime   and  criminal  law;  relating  to                                                               
violation of  condition of release; relating  to sex trafficking;                                                               
relating  to sentencing;  relating to  imprisonment; relating  to                                                               
parole;  relating to  probation;  relating to  driving without  a                                                               
license;  relating   to  the   pretrial  services   program;  and                                                               
providing for an effective date."                                                                                               
     - HEARD & HELD                                                                                                             
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
BILL: SB  54                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: CRIME AND SENTENCING                                                                                               
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) COGHILL                                                                                                  
02/10/17       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/10/17       (S)       JUD, FIN                                                                                               
02/17/17       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
02/17/17       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
02/17/17       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
02/24/17       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
02/24/17       (S)       -- MEETING CANCELED --                                                                                 
03/01/17       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/01/17       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/01/17       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/03/17       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/03/17       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/03/17       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/06/17       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/06/17       (S)       -- MEETING CANCELED --                                                                                 
03/08/17       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/08/17       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/08/17       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/10/17       (S)       JUD AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)                                                                      
03/10/17       (S)       Moved CSSB 54(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                    
03/10/17       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/13/17       (S)       JUD RPT CS  3DP 1NR    NEW TITLE                                                                       
03/13/17       (S)       DP: COGHILL, COSTELLO, KELLY                                                                           
03/13/17       (S)       NR: MEYER                                                                                              
03/28/17       (S)       FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                                                                      
03/28/17       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/28/17       (S)       MINUTE(FIN)                                                                                            
03/28/17       (S)       FIN AT 1:30 PM SENATE FINANCE 532                                                                      
03/28/17       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/28/17       (S)       MINUTE(FIN)                                                                                            
03/31/17       (S)       FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                                                                      
03/31/17       (S)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
03/31/17       (S)       MINUTE(FIN)                                                                                            
03/31/17       (S)       FIN AT 1:30 PM SENATE FINANCE 532                                                                      
03/31/17       (S)       -- MEETING CANCELED --                                                                                 
04/03/17       (S)       FIN RPT CS  1DP 4NR 2AM    NEW TITLE                                                                   
04/03/17       (S)       NR:    MACKINNON,   BISHOP,    DUNLEAVY,                                                               
04/03/17       (S)       AM: HOFFMAN, OLSON                                                                                     
04/03/17       (S)       DP: VON IMHOF                                                                                          
04/03/17       (S)       FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532                                                                      
04/03/17       (S)       Moved CSSB 54(FIN) Out of Committee                                                                    
04/03/17       (S)       MINUTE(FIN)                                                                                            
04/07/17       (S)       TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                                                                     
04/07/17       (S)       VERSION: CSSB 54(FIN)                                                                                  
04/08/17       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/08/17       (H)       STA, JUD, FIN                                                                                          
05/04/17       (H)       STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
05/04/17       (H)       <Bill Hearing Canceled>                                                                                
10/23/17       (H)       STA AT 12:30 AM GRUENBERG 120                                                                          
10/23/17       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120                                                                           
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
BYRON CHARLES                                                                                                                   
Ketchikan, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of SB 54, testified.                                                                  
JEFFERY TEMPLE, Director                                                                                                        
Corporate Affairs                                                                                                               
Fred Meyer                                                                                                                      
Portland, Oregon                                                                                                                
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of SB 54, offered                                                                     
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
BUTCH MOORE                                                                                                                     
Big Lake, Alaska                                                                                                                
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of SB 54, testified.                                                                  
ADAM LEGG                                                                                                                       
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of SB 54, testified.                                                                  
BONNIE LILLEY                                                                                                                   
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of SB 54, offered                                                                     
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
CHRISTINA LOVE                                                                                                                  
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of SB 54, testified.                                                                  
JORDAN SHILLING, Staff                                                                                                          
Senator John Coghill                                                                                                            
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of SB 54, presented a                                                                 
PowerPoint titled, "Senate Bill 54, An Overview" of the                                                                         
legislation, and answered questions.                                                                                            
GREGORY RAZO, Chair                                                                                                             
Alaska Criminal Justice Commission                                                                                              
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   During  the hearing of  SB 54,  presented a                                                             
PowerPoint  titled,  "Alaska  Criminal  Justice  Commission,  and                                                               
answered questions.                                                                                                             
SUSANNE DIPIETRO, Executive Director                                                                                            
Alaska Judicial Council                                                                                                         
Alaska Court System                                                                                                             
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  54,  answered                                                             
NICOLE BORROMEO, Executive Vice President/General Council                                                                       
Alaska Federation of Natives                                                                                                    
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of SB  54, offered AFN's                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
BEN MALLOTT, Vice President                                                                                                     
Alaska Federation of Natives                                                                                                    
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of SB  54, offered AFN's                                                             
support for the legislation.                                                                                                    
MIKE COONS                                                                                                                      
Palmer, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  During the hearing of SB 54, testified.                                                                  
JAHNA LINDEMUTH                                                                                                                 
Attorney General                                                                                                                
Department of Law                                                                                                               
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the hearing of SB  54, testified and                                                             
answered questions.                                                                                                             
KACI SCHROEDER, Assistant Attorney General                                                                                      
Criminal Division                                                                                                               
Legal Services Section                                                                                                          
Department of Law                                                                                                               
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:   During  the  hearing  of SB  54,  answered                                                             
TARA RICH, Legal and Policy Director                                                                                            
American Civil Liberties Union of Alaska                                                                                        
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   During the  hearing of SB 54,  testified in                                                             
support of the legislation.                                                                                                     
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
3:50:23 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR MATT  CLAMAN called the House  Judiciary Standing Committee                                                             
meeting  to  order at  3:50  p.m.  Representatives Claman,  Kopp,                                                               
LeDoux,  Fansler,  and  Millett  (alternate)  for  Representative                                                               
Reinbold  were present  at the  call to  order.   Representatives                                                               
Eastman,  Stutes (alternate)  and Kreiss-Tomkins  arrived as  the                                                               
meeting was in progress.                                                                                                        
                   SB 54-CRIME AND SENTENCING                                                                               
3:51:06 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN announced  that the only order of  business would be                                                               
CS FOR  SENATE BILL NO.  54(FIN), "An  Act relating to  crime and                                                               
criminal  law; relating  to violation  of  condition of  release;                                                               
relating to sex trafficking; relating  to sentencing; relating to                                                               
imprisonment;   relating  to   parole;  relating   to  probation;                                                               
relating to driving  without a license; relating  to the pretrial                                                               
services program; and providing for an effective date."                                                                         
CHAIR CLAMAN opened public testimony on SB 54.                                                                                  
3:51:59 PM                                                                                                                    
BYRON CHARLES advised  that he has been part of  the state system                                                               
for quite a  few years and that he recently  submitted a document                                                               
to Representative  Scott Kawasaki  depicting primary  examples of                                                               
the types  of programs  that could be  implemented in  the state,                                                               
especially as  to management of  all property, waters,  and more.                                                               
He  explained  that this  particular  training  program would  be                                                               
provided by the federal government  for incarcerated young people                                                               
who were  ready to  return to society.   He said,  "I know  for a                                                               
fact  that the  State of  Alaska is  using one  person to  make a                                                               
decision  on all  those that  are incarcerated  when it  comes to                                                               
programs, and  that's the  state Mental  Health Commission."   He                                                               
related  that he  had witnessed  two qualified  psychologists who                                                               
were forced  to leave their  jobs and  they were willing  to work                                                               
with incarcerated  individuals who  desired to do  something with                                                               
their lives.  Currently, the  federal government wants to be part                                                               
of this and he sincerely  hopes they get (indisc.) because strict                                                               
sanctions  can be  imposed  on those  falling  under the  federal                                                               
policy that  was applied to  the state  when it was  a territory.                                                               
He  said  he  would  like to  see  more  qualified  psychologists                                                               
working with  those incarcerated  individuals who are  willing to                                                               
do  something  with  their  lives   and  are  willing  to  accept                                                               
responsibility for their actions.                                                                                               
3:55:13 PM                                                                                                                    
JEFFERY TEMPLE, Director, Corporate  Affairs, Fred Meyer, advised                                                               
that Fred Meyer is a  Northwest retailer with many stores located                                                               
in Alaska, it employs over 3,300  associates in the state, and it                                                               
supports SB 54.  On behalf  of Fred Meyer, he advised that during                                                               
the period,  January 1,  2016 through  September 24,  2016, theft                                                               
dollars  recovered were  approximately $1.2  million, and  during                                                               
the  same time  period in  2017,  it increased  to $1.7  million;                                                               
theft  dollars  lost are  calculated  at  $942,000 in  the  prior                                                               
period, and it  increased to $1.1 million during  the same period                                                               
for  2017.   He  explained that  when this  data  is tallied  and                                                               
aggregated, it creates a change  of approximately $700,000 during                                                               
that  time  frame,  and  he asserted  "this  would  be  addressed                                                               
favorably" for  Fred Meyer, and  other businesses  throughout the                                                               
State of Alaska, by passing SB 54.                                                                                              
CHAIR CLAMAN asked  that Mr. Temple forward Fred  Myer's data and                                                               
information to his office and will share it with the committee.                                                                 
3:57:45 PM                                                                                                                    
BUTCH MOORE advised that he  had previously forwarded suggestions                                                               
for SB  54, and referred  to violations of conditions  of release                                                               
prior to Senate Bill 91  [passed in the Twenty-Ninth Alaska State                                                               
Legislature], wherein  a person could  be sentenced to up  to one                                                               
year, and  that SB  54 changes it  from zero to  five days.   For                                                               
example, in the  event a violent offender  violated the condition                                                               
of release  of bail  by being  caught with  a firearm,  the state                                                               
should be  able to give  them more time.   Also, he  said, first-                                                               
time Class  B felony convictions,  prior to Senate Bill  91, were                                                               
one to three  years minimum mandatory, and under  Senate Bill 91,                                                               
it is zero to two years  with a potential suspended imposition of                                                               
the sentence  (SIS), and  no jailtime.   He stated  that Attorney                                                               
General  Jahna Lindemuth  wrote  a letter  regarding  SB 54,  and                                                               
advised that 90 to 95 percent  of all convictions were reached by                                                               
a plea deal.  Therefore, he  pointed out, in the event someone is                                                               
charged  with a  Class  A felony  and  they plead  to  a Class  B                                                               
felony, conceivably, they could receive  no jailtime, and if they                                                               
were charged  with a  Class B felony  and prosecuted,  they could                                                               
potentially receive no jailtime.   Significant changes need to be                                                               
made  to  SB 54  because  the  prosecution  lost its  ability  to                                                               
bargain and an  offender believes they will  receive no jailtime,                                                               
he said.                                                                                                                        
4:00:26 PM                                                                                                                    
ADAM LEGG  referred specifically to the  sex trafficking language                                                               
in  Secs. 3  and  4,  and advised  that  in  January, the  Alaska                                                               
Criminal  Justice Commission  included  a  recommendation to  the                                                               
legislature  regarding   potential  loopholes  created   for  sex                                                               
traffickers by the passage of SB 91.   At that time, he said that                                                               
the commission said as follows:                                                                                                 
     The  provisions   of  SB  91   that  altered   the  sex                                                                    
     trafficking   statutes   were    not   based   on   any                                                                    
     recommendation  from  the  commission.   A  legislative                                                                    
     history  suggesting these  provisions were  intended to                                                                    
     ensure that  sex workers  simply working  together, not                                                                    
     exploiting  one another,  could not  be prosecuted  for                                                                    
     trafficking  each  other,  or  trafficking  themselves.                                                                    
     However,  as passed,  the provision  could  be read  so                                                                    
     that a  person who might  otherwise be found  guilty of                                                                    
     sex trafficking, i.e., someone  receiving money for sex                                                                    
     work performed  by others,  could avoid  prosecution if                                                                    
     that person engaged in sex work personally.                                                                                
MR. LEGG stated  that he agrees with the  Alaska Criminal Justice                                                               
Commission,  and  other  organizations  working  first-hand  with                                                               
survivors of this  heinous crime, and he urged the  passage of SB
54 with its current sex trafficking language intact.                                                                            
4:02:17 PM                                                                                                                    
BONNIE  LILLEY advised  she is  a 58-year  old single  woman, and                                                               
since the passage of Senate Bill  91, her life has changed due to                                                               
the active  drug dealers on  her street, with many  shootings and                                                               
thefts.  She  said she encourages the passage of  SB 54; however,                                                               
she asked  that it be  strengthened and  described that SB  54 is                                                               
like putting  a band-aid on  a cut to  the jugular because  it is                                                               
not  enough to  stop the  rampant crime  taking place  in Alaska.                                                               
Rampant crime has been blamed on  drugs and the economy, which is                                                               
true; however,  due to these  lenient laws with  no repercussions                                                               
for  theft  and  criminal  activity,  many  people  have  started                                                               
businesses  dealing  in  stolen  goods.     She  asked  that  the                                                               
committee  look at  a possible  means to  finance a  taskforce to                                                               
look  into the  professional criminal  rings actively  working in                                                               
Alaska because  it is starting  to take  a toll on  its citizens.                                                               
She stressed that she personally  hates guns, but she now conceal                                                               
carries and  she will not  go to the  local Fred Meyer  without a                                                               
gun in  her pocket due to  the crime that has  taken over Alaska.                                                               
She  asked that  the  committee take  this  issue seriously,  and                                                               
aggressively and rapidly work to solve the problem.                                                                             
4:05:15 PM                                                                                                                    
CHRISTINA LOVE  related that she  is a single mother,  a resident                                                               
of  Juneau,  and  a  survivor of  domestic  violence  and  sexual                                                               
assault.   Ms. Love advised that  when she was 12  years old, her                                                               
father was  put in jail  for crimes  against her 12  siblings and                                                               
herself.   She  explained  that she  is  a formerly  incarcerated                                                               
person  in long-term  recovery for  IV use  of opioids  and other                                                               
mind-altering  substances, and  described herself  as a  survivor                                                               
and  overcomer.   She  said, "That's  important  because when  we                                                               
first  started this  journey of  Senate Bill  91, we  really just                                                               
wanted an even playing field"  because when she was released from                                                               
jail she  did not have  the same  services or access  to services                                                               
that her father  received when released from jail  as a convicted                                                               
pedophilia, such  as access  to food  stamps, housing,  and such.                                                               
She was not  eligible for those services and, as  such, her child                                                               
also did not have access to  those services.  She stated that the                                                               
bill is  so important,  especially when  looking at  her journey,                                                               
where she  is now as  a productive  member of society  in working                                                               
with  people  struggling  with  substance  use,  mental  illness,                                                               
formerly   incarcerated  individuals,   and  those   with  hidden                                                               
disabilities.   Previously,  she   advised,   she  was   Juneau's                                                               
Disability  Abuse  Response  Team  Coordinator  and  her  primary                                                               
purpose  was working  with people  with disabilities  to be  sure                                                               
they had their services and;  therefore, she has a good knowledge                                                               
of  the state's  systems  of  care and  how  to  get people  into                                                               
accessing  those systems.   She  said that  in speaking  from her                                                               
experience, this bill  has the opportunity to  address those core                                                               
causes of what  brings people into jail.   Currently, the numbers                                                               
and evidence show  that 90 percent of  incarcerated people suffer                                                               
from disabilities,  whether substance  abuse, mental  illness, or                                                               
fetal alcohol  syndrome, of which  Alaska has an  enormously high                                                               
rate.  She stressed that she knows  the reason she is not in jail                                                               
is because she  was embraced by her community, and  had access to                                                               
those services  offering a  continuum of  care that  continues to                                                               
support  her in  being  successful, and  supports  her child  and                                                               
4:08:01 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX   asked  why   her  father,   a  convicted                                                               
pedophilia, had  access to services  and she did not  have access                                                               
to services.                                                                                                                    
MS. LOVE answered that her crimes  were drug related and, at that                                                               
time, anyone  with a  drug offense  did not  have access  to food                                                               
4:09:04 PM                                                                                                                    
JORDAN  SHILLING,  Staff,  Senator  John  Coghill,  Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature,  turned to  PowerPoint titled,  "Senate Bill  54, An                                                               
Overview"  slide  2,  table  of contents,  and  said  the  slides                                                               
include  the  following:  violation   of  conditions  of  release                                                               
(VCOR); sex trafficking  in the third and  fourth degrees; first-                                                               
time  C-felony presumptive  sentencing;  sex offender  probation;                                                               
Class A  misdemeanor sentencing; Class B  misdemeanor sentencing,                                                               
specifically  theft in  the fourth  degree;  no valid  operator's                                                               
license  (NVOL);  pretrial  risk  assessments;  and  the  Alcohol                                                               
Safety Action Program (ASAP).                                                                                                   
4:10:03 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  SHILLING turned  to  slide 3,  "Violation  of Conditions  of                                                               
Release (VCOR)," Sections 1, 2,  9, and advised that violation of                                                               
conditions of  release is  a pretrial  offense where  a defendant                                                               
has violated the  conditions applied by the court.   In 2015, the                                                               
Alaska  Criminal   Justice  Commission   recommended  downgrading                                                               
violations  of conditions  of release  (VCOR)  to an  arrestable,                                                               
jailable violation,  enacted through Senate  Bill 91, but  it was                                                               
not implemented  exactly as intended.   Therefore,  he explained,                                                               
early on,  some people arrested  on VCOR  were not being  held in                                                               
jail pending  a bail review,  and judges and magistrates  did not                                                               
feel  they  had  the  legal  authority to  detain  someone  on  a                                                               
violation.   He remarked  that while  some jurisdictions  found a                                                               
solution to  this issue, the  commission did recommend  that this                                                               
be returned  to a misdemeanor  punishable by  up to five  days of                                                               
active  imprisonment  to  ensure   defenders  are  held  in  jail                                                               
awaiting a bail review hearing in  front of a judicial officer in                                                               
their underlying case.                                                                                                          
4:11:22 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. SHILLING  turned to slide  4, "Sex Trafficking,"  Sections 3,                                                               
4, 5, 13, 14,  20, 22, and advised that as  to sex trafficking in                                                               
the  third and  fourth  degree, basically  the  changes put  into                                                               
Senate  Bill  91 were  not  recommended  by the  Alaska  Criminal                                                               
Justice  Commission.   However,  he said,  those provisions  were                                                               
vetted by the Department of Law  (DOL) prior to being included in                                                               
Senate Bill 91 and the language  did not pose any problems at the                                                               
time.   He explained the  intent of  the provision was  to ensure                                                               
that sex  workers who  are working  together, and  not exploiting                                                               
each other,  would not be  prosecuted for trafficking  each other                                                               
or trafficking themselves.  Later,  he advised, the Department of                                                               
La  (DOL)   claimed  the   language  was   problem  in   that  it                                                               
inadvertently  created a  loophole allowing  a sex  trafficker to                                                               
avoid  prosecution  for the  lower  degrees  of sex  trafficking.                                                               
Therefore,  SB  54  repeals  those  provisions  and  attempts  to                                                               
address  some  of  the  original  issues  with  the  state's  sex                                                               
trafficking statutes, he explained.                                                                                             
4:12:18 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  SHILLING  turned to  slide  5,  "C-Felony," Class  C  felony                                                               
sentencing, Section  6, and  advised that  under current  law, an                                                               
individual,  with  no prior  felonies,  convicted  of a  Class  C                                                               
felony  receives a  presumptive sentence  of up  to 18-months  of                                                               
suspended  imprisonment,  and  up  to  five-years  of  supervised                                                               
probation.   Of course,  he offered,  the way  presumptive ranges                                                               
work is  if an aggravator  were proven up, this  individual could                                                               
spend up  to five-years in  prison, and the presumptive  range is                                                               
up to 18-months  of suspended imprisonment.  He  advised that the                                                               
commission  heard  numerous  concerns  about  this  provision  in                                                               
particular,  prosecutors   felt  that  some  of   these  felonies                                                               
warranted jailtime,  and members  of the  community felt  that it                                                               
did  not express  community condemnation,  which is  an important                                                               
principle  in  the  Constitution  of the  State  of  Alaska  when                                                               
considering   sentencing.     This   legislation  establishes   a                                                               
presumptive  sentence of  up to  one-year of  active imprisonment                                                               
for first-time FC felonies, he said.                                                                                            
4:13:25 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. SHILLING turned to slide  6, "Sex Offender Probation" Section                                                               
7, and  explained that as Senate  Bill 91 moved through  the five                                                               
committees, at one  point the bill evolved in such  a manner that                                                               
the maximum  probation term lengths actually  conflicted with the                                                               
minimum  probation term  lengths for  felony sex  offenders.   In                                                               
that regard,  he explained,  a decision  was made  in one  of the                                                               
committees  to eliminate  the conflicting  minimums,  and as  the                                                               
bill continued  to evolve,  the maximums  and minimums  no longer                                                               
conflicted, but the minimums for  sex offender probation were not                                                               
reinstated at that  point.  It is not that  a judge cannot impose                                                               
probation, he  explained, it is  that there are not  any minimums                                                               
to ensure it, and even though  it is incredibly unlikely a felony                                                               
sex  offender would  not receive  probation, the  commission felt                                                               
strongly  there ought  to  be  minimums in  place.   The  sponsor                                                               
worked  with  the  Department  of  Law  (DOL)  to  determine  the                                                               
appropriate  minimums,   and  DOL  suggested  returning   to  the                                                               
previous minimums,  which is exactly  what happened.   He offered                                                               
that the legislation is 15-years  for an unclassified felony, 10-                                                               
years for a Class A or Class B  felony, and 5-years for a Class C                                                               
4:14:33 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. SHILLING turned to slide  7, "Class A Misdemeanors," Sections                                                               
8, 11, 12, and offered that  Senate Bill 91 enacted a presumptive                                                               
sentencing range  of zero  to 30-days for  many First  and Second                                                               
Class A misdemeanors.   However, he pointed  out, even first-time                                                               
offenders could receive a sentence  of up to one-year for certain                                                               
offenses,  and  cases  where  the defendant  has  more  than  two                                                               
criminal  convictions for  similar conduct.   Prosecutors  voiced                                                               
concern about the increase in  penalty occurring after the second                                                               
conviction, rather  than starting the gradual  increase after the                                                               
first  conviction.   Therefore, he  said, these  sections of  the                                                               
bill  provide   an  additional  aggravating  factor   whereby  an                                                               
individual with  one prior conviction  for that conduct  could be                                                               
sentenced up to 60-days.  Also,  he pointed out, there is another                                                               
section  of the  bill  that establishes  a  five-year "look  back                                                               
period" for  the purposes of  counting priors when  sentencing an                                                               
individual for a Class A misdemeanor.                                                                                           
4:14:36 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  SHILLING turned  to  slide  8, "Theft  4,"  Section 10,  and                                                               
advised this is the act of  stealing something under $250, and it                                                               
is  not robbery  or burglary  which are  felonies.   Research has                                                               
shown  that  most   of  the  thefts  in   this  category  average                                                               
approximately $50.  Senate Bill  91 reduced first and second time                                                               
fourth  degree  theft to  be  non-jailable  with probation  only,                                                               
although, possibly  restitution and  fines, but no  jailtime; and                                                               
zero to five-days suspended imprisonment  for third or subsequent                                                               
offenses.   He  advised that  the  commission received  a lot  of                                                               
feedback   from  businesses,   law   enforcement  officers,   and                                                               
prosecutors, who felt that it  had emboldened some offenders, and                                                               
argued that  possible jailtime acts  as a deterrent  and reflects                                                               
community condemnation.   As  a result,  he said,  the commission                                                               
recommended that third-time theft in  the fourth degree should be                                                               
punishable up to ten-days in jail.   That being said, he offered,                                                               
this bill  goes much  further than  what the  commission actually                                                               
recommended this year  because not only does it  provide for that                                                               
10-days in  jail for third  and subsequent offenses,  it actually                                                               
moves  jailtime up  to the  second offense,  and jailtime  can be                                                               
utilized for  the first offense  if that offender  violates their                                                               
conditions of probation.                                                                                                        
4:16:59 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  SHILLING turned  to slide  9, "No  Valid Operator's  License                                                               
(NVOL),"  Section 15,  and  advised that  this  was an  oversight                                                               
being  corrected in  that  Senate  Bill 91  made  driving with  a                                                               
suspended  license  into an  infraction  if  the reason  for  the                                                               
license suspension was something other  than a DUI.  For example,                                                               
non-payment of child support or  something similar, he suggested.                                                               
However, by not similarly reducing  this offense to an infraction                                                               
caused a disparity  in the law wherein someone  committing a less                                                               
serious   offense  of   simply  not   having  a   license,  would                                                               
potentially be punished more severely  than someone who had their                                                               
license taken away for non-payment  of child support, or a number                                                               
of  moving  violations.    He   reiterated  that  this  provision                                                               
resolves an inequity in the statute.                                                                                            
4:17:50 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  SHILLING turned  to slide  10,  "Pretrial Risk  Assessments"                                                               
Section 17, and advised that the  provisions of Senate Bill 91 go                                                               
into effect in a few weeks and  the law will require the court to                                                               
consider a risk  score prior to making a  release decision, which                                                               
is risk  to public  safety and  risk of  not appearing  in court.                                                               
However, he said, the law  requires the Department of Corrections                                                               
(DOC) to conduct this assessment  on every defendant, but not all                                                               
defendants  will actually  be in  custody pre-arraignment  due to                                                               
being  released under  the bail  schedule, or  a law  enforcement                                                               
officer may have  used their discretion to issue a  citation.  He                                                               
described  that it  is impractical  to conduct  an assessment  on                                                               
folks not in custody  and it does not make a lot  of sense when a                                                               
release decision had  already been made without a  risk score, he                                                               
said.     The  commission  recommended  limiting   pretrial  risk                                                               
assessments  to   only  those  defendants  in   custody,  or  any                                                               
defendant  out of  custody  if the  prosecution  so requests,  he                                                               
4:18:55 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. SHILLING turned to slide  11, "Alcohol Safety Action Program"                                                               
Section 21, and advised that  Senate Bill 91 limited referrals to                                                               
the  Alcohol Safety  Action  Program (ASAP)  to  DUI and  refusal                                                               
offenders only.   The other  body made a  change to this,  it was                                                               
not  recommended by  the commission,  but it  expands the  use of                                                               
ASAP for drug possession offenders, he explained.                                                                               
4:19:30 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT referred  to inflation-proofing  on theft                                                               
and  asked  why  that  was  not changed  in  SB  54,  because  in                                                               
reviewing some of the notes from  the Department of Law (DOL), it                                                               
believed it may not be  constitutional to have inflation-proofing                                                               
on the theft threshold.                                                                                                         
MR.  SHILLING advised  that it  is not  in the  bill because  the                                                               
commission did not  recommend it, and noted that he  had not read                                                               
that legal  advice and  did not know  whether that  provision had                                                               
been challenged and found unconstitutional.                                                                                     
4:20:14 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   KREISS-TOMKINS   referred   to   violations   of                                                               
conditions  of  release wherein  Mr.  Shilling  stated that  some                                                               
jurisdictions found  a solution even  under the current  law, and                                                               
asked him to explain those solutions.                                                                                           
MR.  SHILLING  answered  that  the court  system  may  be  better                                                               
situated to respond, but he  heard that the jurisdictions added a                                                               
special  page to  a form,  or  a box  to  check on  a form,  that                                                               
ameliorated the  situation.  He  related that the  First Judicial                                                               
District arrived  at this solution quickly,  and the commission's                                                               
recommendation  stated that  the problem  is not  universal.   He                                                               
related that the  commission recommended it in  January 2017, and                                                               
it  may be  interesting to  follow up  to determine  whether that                                                               
problem still exists.                                                                                                           
CHAIR CLAMAN  advised the Alaska Criminal  Justice Commission has                                                               
already released its  report to the legislature,  due November 1,                                                               
2017, which is contained within the committee packet.                                                                           
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS commented  that a  take away  from                                                               
various  committee deliberations  last  year was  that when  non-                                                               
violent offenders  are incarcerated  for certain periods  of time                                                               
there  is a  criminogenic  effect.   Also, non-violent  offenders                                                               
after  being incarcerated  can become  violent  offenders in  the                                                               
future.   He asked whether  there is  a threshold period  of time                                                               
wherein the data  indicates that that effect takes  place after a                                                               
certain period of incarceration.                                                                                                
MR.  SHILLING  referred  to  the  2015  Alaska  Criminal  Justice                                                               
Commission  report,  and  noted  that with  respect  to  specific                                                               
durations  of   time,  research  shows  that   low-risk  pretrial                                                               
defendants held  longer than 24-hours  could have  a criminogenic                                                               
effect, and  it is  specific to low-risk  individuals.   There is                                                               
also  research  showing  that low-level  drug  offenders  have  a                                                               
higher risk  of recidivating when  incarcerated for  long periods                                                               
of time, he advised.                                                                                                            
4:23:18 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  noted her  understanding that  when Senate                                                               
Bill 91  was originally  passed, there was  the idea  that rather                                                               
than incarcerating  people, to  invest the  money that  was saved                                                               
from  not   building  a  new   prison,  into  alcohol   and  drug                                                               
rehabilitation   programs.     She  asked   the  status   of  the                                                               
reinvestment currently,  noting there are still  a limited number                                                               
of beds for opioid addiction, and such, statewide.                                                                              
MR. SHILLING  responded that Senate  Bill 91 created  a framework                                                               
for a six-year  reinvestment plan, the first two  fiscal years of                                                               
that  plan  have  been  completed,  and  the  full  plan  entails                                                               
reinvesting  $99  million over  those  six-years.   To  date,  he                                                               
advised, $22  million has been  reinvested, and by  following the                                                               
plan  for  just  one  more  year,  $40  million  will  have  been                                                               
reinvested.   The money  is there,  he said, and  it has  hit the                                                               
streets  in  a number  of  areas,  such as  pretrial  supervision                                                               
wherein 60 new law enforcement  officers will begin on January 1.                                                               
These officers can make warrantless  arrests, carry firearms, and                                                               
ensure  that defendants  are following  the  conditions of  their                                                               
release.     This  reinvestment   money  includes,   as  follows:                                                               
substance abuse treatment; reentry  services; and new money going                                                               
into the  Council on  Domestic Violence  and Sexual  Assault that                                                               
had dried  up over the years,  and now Senate Bill  91 reinstated                                                               
that money.   He remarked  that "reinvestment's a real  thing and                                                               
we're just two years in now."                                                                                                   
4:25:38 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX offered  that clearly not all  of the crime                                                               
being experienced  in Anchorage is  the result of Senate  Bill 91                                                               
as there are a myriad of  reasons, but it does appear that Senate                                                               
Bill 91 may  have exacerbated certain things.  She  asked why the                                                               
commission's  research  did not  indicate  that  the crime  being                                                               
experienced would happen.                                                                                                       
MR. SHILLING acknowledged  there are a number  of complex reasons                                                               
crime moves up and down, and  he referred to the many discussions                                                               
about  the opioid  crises, budget  cuts, economic  recession, and                                                               
the truth is that crime  began increasing long before Senate Bill                                                               
91 was  enacted.  Violent  crimes have slowly increased  over the                                                               
last  30-years with  big  spikes in  2015,  property crime  began                                                               
increasing in  2011 with big  spikes in  2015, and these  are all                                                               
are prior  to the introduction  of Senate  Bill 91.   He stressed                                                               
that the  commission considered  a lot of  research and  data and                                                               
made a set of 21 evidence  based recommendations with the goal of                                                               
reducing crime and holding offenders  accountable by investing in                                                               
programs that actually reduce the crime rate.                                                                                   
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked whether  Mr. Shilling was saying that                                                               
none of the  crime being experienced in Anchorage is  a result of                                                               
Senate Bill 91.                                                                                                                 
MR. SHILLING  replied that he  does not  know the answer  to that                                                               
question,  but Brad  Myrstol, Ph.D.,  University  of Alaska  made                                                               
many presentations to the legislature  on crime rates and what is                                                               
happening  in   Alaska.     Mr.  Shilling   said  he   could  not                                                               
definitively say that  passing a bill, such as Senate  Bill 91 or                                                               
SB 54,  makes crimes go up  and down, and it  certainly cannot be                                                               
proven out with data.                                                                                                           
4:27:49 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  offered that when reviewing  the State of                                                               
Texas and  timing, Texas passed  its criminal justice  reform and                                                               
"we use that  kind of a standup model," although  it did not have                                                               
a  fiscal crisis,  opioid  crisis,  or a  recession.   She  asked                                                               
whether  the   Alaska  Criminal  Justice  Commission   took  into                                                               
consideration  any of  the outward  pressures Alaska  was facing,                                                               
and  whether the  timing  was wrong  because  it exacerbated  the                                                               
uptick in crime.   She commented that phase one  was probably the                                                               
wrong time  to perform that  portion of Senate Bill  91, although                                                               
phases two  and three  "are pretty great."   Moving  forward, she                                                               
asked, whether the commission will  take into consideration those                                                               
outward pressures happening in Alaska  before it recommends going                                                               
forward, because timing is an issue.                                                                                            
MR. SHILLING  answered, "I don't  think I fully understand  and I                                                               
need to  be real careful about  not getting outside of  the scope                                                               
of my  expertise."   He stated  that he knows  what is  in Senate                                                               
Bill 54,  but as to these  complex questions about the  causes of                                                               
crime and timing, he is not the correct person to answer.                                                                       
4:29:25 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  CLAMAN  pointed  out that,  statutorily,  the  legislature                                                               
directed  certain  instructions  to   the  commission  about  its                                                               
responsibility, and  it did not  include assessing the  health of                                                               
the overall economy.                                                                                                            
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT  said   that  possibly,  those  statewide                                                               
outward pressures should  be part of the  discussion when passing                                                               
a justice reform crime bill.                                                                                                    
4:30:08 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  FANSLER referred  to slide  5, Section  6 of  the                                                               
Class C  felonies, wherein Mr.  Shilling had mentioned  that this                                                               
was  pretty much  for a  straight up  first-time felony  offender                                                               
without  any aggravators  or such.   He  asked that  Mr. Shilling                                                               
define an  aggravator, and breakdown how  typically an aggravator                                                               
is attached to a crime, for the public's information.                                                                           
MR.  SHILLING noted  that the  Department of  Law (DOL)  may best                                                               
speak to  how common  aggravating and  mitigating factors  are in                                                               
practice.   He explained that  there are at least  20 aggravating                                                               
factors, and  aggravating and mitigating factors  allow the court                                                               
to sentence  someone above  or below the  presumptive range.   He                                                               
suggested that  the members think  about these ranges  as default                                                               
ranges, except that they can be  departed from, and each class of                                                               
felony has  a hard maximum that  cannot be exceeded even  with an                                                               
aggravator.   For example, in the  case of a Class  C felony, the                                                               
maximum  is  five-years, and  if  the  individual has  one  prior                                                               
felony, the  sentencing range is  one- to three-years  under this                                                               
statute, and  if they  have two  or more, it  is three-  to five-                                                               
4:31:35 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  referred to the upcoming  60 new officers                                                               
on the  streets in January,  and requested an explanation  of the                                                               
parameters on those warrantless arrest situations.                                                                              
MR.  SHILLING answered  that  the legal  standard  for making  an                                                               
arrest for a pretrial service  officer is probable cause, as with                                                               
any law enforcement officer.   These officers, he explained, will                                                               
make warrantless  arrests if needed  on defendants  violating the                                                               
conditions of  their release and  breaking the  court established                                                               
CHAIR CLAMAN  pointed out that  officers cannot arrest  anyone on                                                               
the street  without a  warrant, they can  only arrest  someone on                                                               
pretrial  release  subject to  their  supervision  as a  pretrial                                                               
service officer.                                                                                                                
MR. SHILLING answered in the affirmative.                                                                                       
4:32:43 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked whether social  media was as alive as                                                               
it  is currently  when the  commission considered  the amount  of                                                               
jailtime for  first and second  time theft offenses, and  when it                                                               
considered issues in  other states.  Five years ago,  she said, a                                                               
person  would not  have expected  the  kind of  folks robbing  or                                                               
shoplifting from  a convenience  store to actually  realize there                                                               
was  a "get  out  of jail  free card,"  and  now everyone  knows,                                                               
probably through  social media, that  with first and  second time                                                               
offenses "you'd  get nothing, absolutely  nothing."   She pointed                                                               
out that even  with the corrections SB 54 provides,  there is one                                                               
get  out  of  jail  free  card,  and  asked  whether  anyone  has                                                               
researched or analyzed the effect of social media.                                                                              
MR. SHILLING described  the question as complex and  that he does                                                               
not have  the answer to  social media's effect on  the heightened                                                               
awareness  of the  state's  criminal justice  statutes.   In  the                                                               
event  SB  54  passes,  the first-time  theft  offender  is  non-                                                               
jailable; however,  he pointed out  that there is  suspended time                                                               
imposed that  can be  applied to the  individual if  they violate                                                               
the conditions  of their probation.   Also, beyond  the life-time                                                               
criminal  record, there  is a  period of  probation, restitution,                                                               
and fines, that  could be imposed which is how  he would describe                                                               
a first-time offender being treated under SB 54, he said.                                                                       
CHAIR CLAMAN opined  that he has seen research that  prior to the                                                               
justice  reform   efforts,  typically    a  first-time   Class  B                                                               
misdemeanor theft offender would rarely receive jailtime.                                                                       
MR.  SHILLING responded  that, pre-Senate  Bill  91, petty  theft                                                               
offenders spent on average of 23-days in prison post-conviction.                                                                
4:36:04 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN noted  that under  SB 54,  it is  zero to                                                               
five-days,  and zero  to  ten-days, and  asked  whether that  was                                                               
actual time spent in jail, or  whether it included good time, and                                                               
how much time those people would actually serve in a jail cell.                                                                 
MR.  SHILLING  responded  that  he does  not  recall  whether  it                                                               
applies to  sentences this short,  although, he knows that  to be                                                               
eligible for parole, a person must  be sentenced in excess of 181                                                               
days.   He said  his hunch is  that good time  does not  apply in                                                               
this case, but DOL was available to answer.                                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  asked that  Mr. Shilling  take a  look at                                                               
that issue  because when  the military  sentences people  to one-                                                               
month, good time would apply.                                                                                                   
CHAIR CLAMAN  advised that  DOL will be  presenting later  and he                                                               
encouraged Representative  Eastman to  pose the same  question to                                                               
that department.                                                                                                                
4:37:16 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP said  he  wanted to  be  sure he  understood                                                               
correctly  that  the Alcohol  Safety  Action  Program (ASAP)  was                                                               
expanding screening to  any alcohol or drug  related offense, and                                                               
not  solely to  DUIs.   He  opined that  this  would restore  the                                                               
court's  ability to  monitor treatment  of all  drug and  alcohol                                                               
offenders, and not solely DUI offenders.                                                                                        
MR.  SHILLING agreed,  and  he explained  that  this expands  the                                                               
types of offenders that can be  referred to, and accepted by, the                                                               
ASAP.   He related that he  does not have the  strongest grasp on                                                               
everything  ASAP  does,  but  he   does  know  that  it  conducts                                                               
screenings,  refers  people  to  treatment,  and  monitors  those                                                               
people going through treatment.                                                                                                 
4:38:10 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP commented that  this change is significant in                                                               
light  of Alaska's  current opioid  crisis.   Representative Kopp                                                               
then referred to  the misdemeanor Class C  felony assault changes                                                               
and  noted that  it  appears  to reconcile  the  problem where  a                                                               
prosecutor may  be forced to  plead down a  Class C felony,  if a                                                               
person  strangled a  household member  to a  misdemeanor, wherein                                                               
they could  receive up  to one  year in jail  for just  hitting a                                                               
household member, and now, for  more severe behavior a person can                                                               
get more severe penalty.                                                                                                        
MR. SHILLING answered in the affirmative.                                                                                       
4:39:55 PM                                                                                                                    
GREGORY RAZO,  Chair, Alaska Criminal Justice  Commission, turned                                                               
to  slide  2,  "Commission  Process,"   and  explained  that  the                                                               
recommendations are  fundamentally and foundationally  based upon                                                               
research.    In   the  case  of  criminal   justice  reform,  the                                                               
foundational research  was meant  to look  at recidivism  and the                                                               
return to jail within three years of being released.                                                                            
MR. RAZO  stated that prior  to criminal justice reform,  two out                                                               
of every  three people returned  to prison within three  years of                                                               
being released,  an approximate 66  percent recidivism rate.   He                                                               
noted that part of the  commission's process includes stakeholder                                                               
outreach, and that  every meeting is a public  meeting subject to                                                               
notice and subject  to the meeting process.  In  addition, as the                                                               
commission  developed its  criminal  justice  reform efforts,  it                                                               
performed specific  stakeholder outreach,  it spoke  with victims                                                               
of  crimes,  and  traveled  to rural  Alaska  to  understand  the                                                               
problems  confronting  the people  living  in  that  area     The                                                               
commission   performed  a   fact  based   system  assessment   to                                                               
understand how  the system was  currently operating  by reviewing                                                               
data from the  University of Alaska, Department  of Public Safety                                                               
(DPS), Department of Corrections  (DOC), and Department of Health                                                               
and Social  Services (DHSS).   These  facts and  figures obtained                                                               
supported exactly  where Alaska stood at  the time, and it  had a                                                               
good sense of  where the state was before  recommending where the                                                               
state  might be  with  some  changes to  the  system.   Mr.  Razo                                                               
explained  that because  the  commission was  looking  at such  a                                                               
large  criminal  justice system  with  many  aspects to  it,  the                                                               
commission broke its research into  work groups, such as [victims                                                               
of crimes], pretrial, sentencing, and post-conviction.                                                                          
4:44:00 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. RAZO  turned to slide  3, "Goals of Criminal  Justice Reform"                                                               
and advised  that the  directive was  to look  into what  sort of                                                               
programs  to  use that  could  be  proven  to result  in  reduced                                                               
recidivism, and what programs would  enhance public safety if the                                                               
state  performed the  reinvestment  piece.   The commission  also                                                               
looked  into  implementing  evidence  based  pretrial  practices;                                                               
focusing   prison  beds   on  serious   and  violent   offenders;                                                               
strengthening probation  and parole supervision;  improve reentry                                                               
programming; and ensuring oversight and accountability.                                                                         
4:46:59 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  RAZO turned  to slide  4,  "Reinvest in  Programs Proven  to                                                               
Reduce Recidivism & Protect Public  Safety - Reinvestment in FY17                                                               
& FY18" and noted that  approximately $25.5 million was set aside                                                               
for  reinvestment,  and of  that  amount,  $2.5 million  was  for                                                               
substance  abuse  treatment;  $3   million  for  reentry  support                                                               
coalitions  around  the   state;  enhancing  violence  prevention                                                               
programs for  victims; and giving  the legislation a tool  to use                                                               
to have  some notion of  what a return  on investment for  any of                                                               
these programs  was.   He said, that  over this  two-year period,                                                               
there has been $8.5 million of reinvestment money.                                                                              
4:48:36 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  RAZO turned  to slide  5,  "Reinvest in  Programs Proven  to                                                               
Reduce Recidivism  & Protect Public Safety  - Future Reinvestment                                                               
2019-2022"  noting  the $4  million  for  treatment in  community                                                               
resource  centers  (CRC) "half-way  house."    He explained  that                                                               
previously,  no  treatment took  place  in  a half-way  house,  a                                                               
person  entered a  half-way  house  on their  path  to return  to                                                               
society, and in  many cases, it was an avenue  to return a person                                                               
to  their  prior  criminal  conduct.    He  continued  explaining                                                               
reinvestments,  as  follows:  treatment  can  occur  in  half-way                                                               
houses and  it is  part of  the continuum  of care  and treatment                                                               
that begins when initially put  in jail; $4 million for treatment                                                               
in prison; $8 million for  treatment in the community and reentry                                                               
services.  He advised that  some money comes from Medicaid reform                                                               
and  appropriations, with  the focus  on supervised  probation by                                                               
probation  officers  wherein  the   person  is  held  immediately                                                               
accountable; and  $8 million for  violence prevention  program in                                                               
the community aimed at supporting victims and victims' rights.                                                                  
4:50:06 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. RAZO  turned to slide  6, "Invest in  Evidence-Based Pretrial                                                               
Practices"  and  advised that  $13.5  million  was spent  by  the                                                               
Department of Corrections (DOC) to  establish a pretrial unit and                                                               
train a  new group of  probation officers.   Released individuals                                                               
will be monitored  to be certain they appear in  court or they do                                                               
not drink,  and if the  person does violate the  conditions, they                                                               
are back  in jail.  He  explained that the methodology  to impose                                                               
risk based pretrial enforcement  is an extensive and deliberative                                                               
mechanism that is also tracked by the commission.                                                                               
4:51:34 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. RAZO  turned to slide 7,  "Evidence-Based Pretrial Practices"                                                               
and explained  that the slide  depicts pretrial before  and after                                                               
the enactment of Senate Bill 91.                                                                                                
4:52:02 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  RAZO turned  to slide  8, "Focus  Prison Beds  on Serious  &                                                               
Violent  Offenders -  Prison Population  Composition -  Snapshot"                                                               
and advised  that the legislature  asked the commission  to focus                                                               
on prison  beds and on serious  and violent offenders.   He noted                                                               
that  from   FY15  through  FY17,   the  number   of  non-violent                                                               
misdemeanor offenders taking up prison  beds has gone down, which                                                               
was  the expected  result, violent  misdemeanors have  stayed the                                                               
same, non-violent  felonies have gone down,  and violent felonies                                                               
have risen.  He related that  a factor to be determined from this                                                               
small non-statistically  relevant slice of evidence  is that when                                                               
looking at this  graph, the violent felony offenders  are in jail                                                               
and, he advised  that there are more violent  felony offenders in                                                               
jail than prior to starting the whole process.                                                                                  
4:52:56 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  RAZO  turned to  slide  9,  "Strengthen Probation  &  Parole                                                               
Supervision"  and  explained  that   the  idea  behind  probation                                                               
supervision is that  there be swift consequences  if probation is                                                               
violated, and  not that  the person waits  for six-months  to get                                                               
into court  and in the  meantime, stacks up  probation violations                                                               
until there  is a  hearing that  takes days of  court time.   The                                                               
idea is  that the probation  officer should be able  to determine                                                               
whether or not  the person violated their conditions,  and if so,                                                               
there would be  a swift consequence.  The  violations being filed                                                               
for violation  of probations  have increased  substantially which                                                               
means  that  even  more  people are  being  violated  today  than                                                               
previously, which was the expected outcome.                                                                                     
4:54:05 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  RAZO turned  to  slide 10,  "Strengthen  Probation &  Parole                                                               
Supervision" and noted that the  percentage of people actually in                                                               
prison for  violations of  probation have  gone down  because the                                                               
people  are  not sitting  in  jail  waiting for  their  probation                                                               
hearing.   These people are going  into jail for three,  five, or                                                               
ten  days for  violation of  probation  time, and  when they  are                                                               
released they  still have a job,  a place to live,  and are still                                                               
subject to  the strong conditions  the court placed upon  them in                                                               
the first place, but their lives  have not been disrupted to send                                                               
them back into criminality.                                                                                                     
4:54:53 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  RAZO  turned to  slide  11,  "Reduce Prison  Expenses  While                                                               
Preserving Public  Safety" and explained  that the  average daily                                                               
prison population  has gone down  since criminal  justice reform,                                                               
which was asked  of the commission by the legislature,  and it is                                                               
predicted to continue.                                                                                                          
4:55:13 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. RAZO  turned to  slide 12,  "Prison Population  Decreased 437                                                               
Beds Since Implementation" and pointed  out that $3.8 million has                                                               
been avoided since criminal justice  reform was implemented, such                                                               
that the operational  costs were reduced with the  closure of the                                                               
Palmer  Correctional  Center,  and  $5.6  million  was  saved  at                                                               
approximately $42 per day to house a prisoner.                                                                                  
4:55:56 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. RAZO turned to slide  13, "Alaska Criminal Justice Commission                                                               
Recommended  Changes  to  Sentences  -  for  first-time  Class  C                                                               
felonies"  that  resulted   in  SB  54,  and   advised  that  the                                                               
commission's recommendation for Class C  felonies was a jail term                                                               
of zero to  90 days, which was not unanimous,  and it would still                                                               
retain  the suspended  time of  up to  18-months.   Currently, he                                                               
said, SB 54  has the potential of up to  one-year of jailtime for                                                               
Class  C  felonies.    He  offered that  as  the  commission  was                                                               
considering changes  to Senate Bill 91,  the recommendations that                                                               
came out  of the  commission in  January 2017  were fundamentally                                                               
different  than the  recommendations the  commission first  made.                                                               
He  explained that  "they were  recommendations"  based upon  two                                                               
days of  public hearing  testimonies that  included constituents,                                                               
law enforcement, the average citizen,  and the victims of crimes,                                                               
who "were  screaming that this  is not working  for us."   At the                                                               
end of  the day,  he commented, that  anecdotal testimony  is not                                                               
statistical  data  and it  is  not  the  same  sort of  data  the                                                               
commission originally  relied upon,  but it  was data  that could                                                               
not  be  ignored.    Consequently,  he  advised,  the  commission                                                               
decided to change  its methodology going forward  with respect to                                                               
criminal justice reform and take  into consideration the sorts of                                                               
things Representative LeDoux had questioned.                                                                                    
4:58:10 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. RAZO turned to slide  14, "Alaska Criminal Justice Commission                                                               
Recommended  Changes  to  Sentences" referred  to  violations  of                                                               
conditions of  release and the  increase in penalties  for theft,                                                               
and  advised that  he  realizes  theft in  the  fourth degree  is                                                               
plaguing  Alaska's  communities  and   that  he  understands  the                                                               
4:58:49 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. RAZO  turned to  slide 15, "New  Project for  the Commission"                                                               
and  offered that  there  still  remains a  number  of things  on                                                               
commission's plate  such as,  how to  handle people  charged with                                                               
crimes who  are chronically intoxicated, which  is different from                                                               
the folks  detoxing.   Prior to  the changes  to Title  47, these                                                               
people  were "stored  in prisons"  until they  became sober,  and                                                               
they  are creating  a problem  in hospitals  and law  enforcement                                                               
because  police officers  have  no  idea what  to  do with  these                                                               
folks.   Unfortunately, these folks  are so intoxicated  they are                                                               
unable to take  care of themselves, but they have  not broken the                                                               
law and being drunk in public is  not a violation of the law.  It                                                               
is only  violations of the law,  in general, that will  allow law                                                               
enforcement to deprive  someone of their liberty, and  to do that                                                               
without a judge  and a due process proceeding  is problematic and                                                               
unconstitutional  in many  people's regard.   He  noted that  the                                                               
commission is struggling  with this problem and  is considering a                                                               
possible voluntary  agreement to sleep  it off until they  are no                                                               
longer a danger to self or others.                                                                                              
MR.  RAZO  referred  to  the  10/22/17  Alaska  Criminal  Justice                                                               
Commission Annual  Report and  explained that  it goes  through a                                                               
number of issues  the commission has worked on over  the last few                                                               
5:02:32 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  referred to  Title 47, and  someone being                                                               
drunk,  and  commented  that  currently   Class  C  felonies  are                                                               
considered a  misdemeanor and are  not jailable  offenses, except                                                               
that  the person  has  the fundamental  problem  of drugs  and/or                                                               
alcohol.  Currently,  she said, the state is not  able to address                                                               
the underlying issues because it is a misdemeanor.                                                                              
MR.  RAZO opined  that  the state  has  gotten comfortable  about                                                               
using  criminal justice  to  deal with  mental  health, which  he                                                               
described as  a slippery slope.   Mr.  Razo remarked that  in his                                                               
opinion, it is important there  are facilities available so folks                                                               
"can sleep  it off," and have  a safe and secure  spot where they                                                               
would not  be victimized, and someone  could intervene medically,                                                               
if necessary,  and those sorts  of things  cost money.   He said,                                                               
"For us to complain about crime  when we've reduced the amount of                                                               
spending,  fundamentally,  by a  third  we  spend on  our  entire                                                               
criminal  system  and  expect  that  crime  isn't  going  to  act                                                               
accordingly, I think is magical thinking."                                                                                      
5:04:22 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT noted  that the  legislature created  the                                                               
commission to focus on recidivism  and reduction of costs, but it                                                               
did not  focus equally as  to public  safety, which is  where the                                                               
legislature  failed the  commission.   Currently, she  noted, the                                                               
state is  witnessing a  response from the  public in  not feeling                                                               
safe.  She  asked whether Mr. Razo would be  open to an amendment                                                               
directing the Alaska Criminal Justice  Commission to move forward                                                               
with public safety  at the top, then recidivism,  then costs, and                                                               
redefining  the  commission's mission,  or  whether  it could  be                                                               
performed internally  "without the  legislature dictating  to you                                                               
what to look at?"                                                                                                               
MR. RAZO responded that each  commissioner believes that reducing                                                               
recidivism  increases   public  safety,  it  is   not  a  mission                                                               
statement  issue  because  reducing  recidivism  enhances  public                                                               
safety and it is the "flip side  of the same coin.  He noted that                                                               
with regard  to the low-level  offenses that were  either changed                                                               
to violations,  or Class C  felonies that resulted  in supervised                                                               
probation, the  thinking and resources  behind those  changes was                                                               
that  those sorts  of changes  could result  in increased  public                                                               
safety through reduced recidivism.                                                                                              
CHAIR  CLAMAN,  speaking  as  a member  of  the  Alaska  Criminal                                                               
Justice Commission,  commented that if there  is one overwhelming                                                               
sentiment  he has  received  by sitting  in  on the  commission's                                                               
meetings, it is that public safety is its highest priority.                                                                     
5:07:32 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT referred  to the  risk assessment,  which                                                               
she opined  was solely a function  of DOC, and asked  whether the                                                               
commission had  contracted for  a risk  assessment and  whether a                                                               
draft  risk assessment  was  available.   She  asked whether  the                                                               
Alaska  Court  System, Department  of  Public  Safety (DPS),  and                                                               
Department of Law (DOL) should be  an intricate part of that risk                                                               
assessment  rather  than just  laying  it  on  the hands  of  DOC                                                               
because she  would like more input  from outside of DOC  as it is                                                               
just  one  touch to  a  criminal.    Whereby, she  further  asked                                                               
whether  there was  a contract  and  whether the  state would  be                                                               
better served  with more folks  taking the initiative  and having                                                               
MR.  RAZO answered  that in  looking  at the  development of  the                                                               
pretrial risk assessment  division and the tools it  will use, it                                                               
included every  one of those stakeholders  Representative Millett                                                               
named.   The function of  the pretrial risk assessment  is within                                                               
the DOC,  except in  order to  comprehensively develop  an entire                                                               
new unit within the Department  of Corrections, the Department of                                                               
Public  Safety  (DPS), the  Department  of  Law (DOL),  [and  the                                                               
Alaska  Court  System]  have  been  intimately  involved.    This                                                               
system,   he   offered,  involves   such   things   as  the   law                                                               
enforcement's  initial encounter,  the booking  process, and  the                                                               
person's involvement in the court  system, and he described it as                                                               
all intimately related.   The stakeholder list  of people invited                                                               
to  every meeting  the DOC  holds on  updates regarding  the risk                                                               
assessment  and procedures  includes one  hundred people,  and he                                                               
described a  strong participation from  DOL, DPS, and all  of the                                                               
folks in  DOC that are trying  to learn this new  methodology and                                                               
5:10:10 PM                                                                                                                    
MR. RAZO advised  that in terms of contracting it  out, DOC hired                                                               
a person  to be  in charge  of the pretrial  program and  it also                                                               
relied upon the  same sorts of empirical  evidence the commission                                                               
relies on in determining what might  work in Alaska.  As it turns                                                               
out, he  explained, the factors  determining whether a  person is                                                               
at  risk for  failure to  appear are  different than  the factors                                                               
determining whether that  person is at risk for  committing a new                                                               
criminal  act.   It is  a sophisticated  tool, he  described, and                                                               
tools are never perfect and  are subject to change with oversight                                                               
and regular review by the  commission.  Other states implementing                                                               
these sorts  of tools found  unintended consequences in  that the                                                               
tool was  discriminatory for certain  classes of people,  and DOC                                                               
is trying  to avoid those  sorts of  mistakes.  He  advised, "No,                                                               
they  did  not  go  out  to  contract"  with  some  outside  risk                                                               
assessment provider to develop the  tool, "they took the best and                                                               
worked  with that  to determine"  that there  are two  factors in                                                               
Alaska to consider.  Possibly,  he opined, because Alaska is such                                                               
a  large  state,  failure  to  appear  in  Alaska  would  not  be                                                               
considered the same factor in another state.                                                                                    
5:12:22 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  asked whether the whole  approval process                                                               
is on DOC, and that the  criminal justice commission does not get                                                               
to  approve it  or disapprove  it,  neither does  DPS, the  court                                                               
system,  or   the  Department  of   Law.    She   commented  that                                                               
stakeholder engagement  is great, and asked  whether there should                                                               
be a better approval process.                                                                                                   
5:13:01 PM                                                                                                                    
SUSANNE  DIPIETRO, Executive  Director, Alaska  Judicial Council,                                                               
Alaska  Court System,  clarified  that  the tool  is  one bit  of                                                               
information the pretrial enforcement  officers use.  The officers                                                               
consider  a number  of objective  factors,  come up  with a  risk                                                               
score, and  make a recommendation  to the judge and  the parties.                                                               
The actual decision is made in  court on bail, she clarified, and                                                               
it is not made within DOC.                                                                                                      
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT  said  she  was talking  about  the  risk                                                               
assessment tool.                                                                                                                
MS. DIPIETRO noted that Representative  Millett was talking about                                                               
the actual tool itself and explained  that it is actually just an                                                               
actuarial  tool, similar  to something  an insurance  company may                                                               
use to predict whether the person would get into an accident.                                                                   
She explained that the tool was  developed by a researcher at CJI                                                               
Research Corporation (CJI).                                                                                                     
CHAIR  CLAMAN pointed  out  that  the tool  itself  has been  the                                                               
subject of  tremendous discussion on the  Alaska Criminal Justice                                                               
Commission and  the commission made recommendations  about how to                                                               
proceed and directions  were given to DOC.  In  the event someone                                                               
is  released under  certain conditions  based  on the  assessment                                                               
tool, he  opined that the  prosecution has a  right to ask  for a                                                               
quick  hearing  to reconsider  if  the  prosecution believes  the                                                               
judge's decision on pretrial release was flawed.                                                                                
MR. RAZO  remarked that in  the event  the scores for  failure to                                                               
appear  and the  likelihood of  committing a  new crime  are very                                                               
low,  there is  a presumption  of  release.   The entire  process                                                               
happens  quickly  because  a  person  has a  right  to  a  speedy                                                               
arraignment and must  be brought before a  judge within 48-hours.                                                               
Consequently,  he  said, an  interview  does  not take  place  to                                                               
determine whether a person is  risky, it is basically an analysis                                                               
of their background.                                                                                                            
5:16:22 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  referred to violations of  probation, and                                                               
noted  that  Mr.   Razo  had  stated  that   in  some  instances,                                                               
violations had increase  but that was a good thing  because it is                                                               
what he expected to see ...                                                                                                     
MR.  RIZO  (indisc.)  probation   violations,  not  new  criminal                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN clarified  that  it  is probations  being                                                               
violated, and  Mr. Razo  had expected to  see that  because these                                                               
people have been taken out of prison ....                                                                                       
5:16:52 PM                                                                                                                    
MR.  RAZO advised  that, generally  speaking, when  a person  has                                                               
completed their  sentence they  are almost  always released  on a                                                               
supervised  felony probation  with  a probation  officer.   Under                                                               
certain circumstances,  he advised, a  person can be  released on                                                               
parole after  the Parole Board  decided that this person  met the                                                               
criteria and should  be released from jail.   Subsequent to their                                                               
release, he  explained, they have  a probation or  parole officer                                                               
monitoring them to  make sure they follow  the judge's conditions                                                               
as to what  they can and cannot do while  on probation or parole.                                                               
Previously, he explained, when a  person violated their probation                                                               
by  drinking, for  instance, the  person would  have a  probation                                                               
violation  filed against  them,  and they  could be  incarcerated                                                               
immediately with  a right  to a hearing  and representation.   At                                                               
that time, he offered, the  district attorneys, public defenders,                                                               
and court would  gear up, and there would be  a hearing which was                                                               
usually  a  lengthy period  of  time  later.   These  folks  were                                                               
accused  of violating  a condition  of probation,  they were  not                                                               
judged on  it, but they  were doing a  lengthy period of  time in                                                               
jail on what  is essentially a technical  violation of probation.                                                               
He pointed out that this  person had not committed another crime,                                                               
they had had a drink.   Currently, he explained, if the probation                                                               
officer  has probable  cause to  believe  that person  has had  a                                                               
drink because  he walked in with  alcohol on his breath,  he goes                                                               
to  jail for  three days  for  the first  time.   The intent,  he                                                               
offered, is to let that person  realize there is a consequence to                                                               
violating orders  from the  judge, and if  they violate  again it                                                               
will be  five days.  It  empowers that person, he  described, and                                                               
at  the  same  time  the   criminal  justice  reform  allows  the                                                               
probation  officer  to  give  incentives to  people  who  do  not                                                               
violate their  probation by  decreasing the  amount of  time that                                                               
person is on probation.                                                                                                         
5:19:46 PM                                                                                                                    
MS.  DIPIETRO   explained  that   when  DOC   measures  technical                                                               
violations of  parole and probation,  it does  not have a  way to                                                               
count the number  of times people have violated  because DOC only                                                               
has a  way to count  the number  of times the  probation officers                                                               
have filed  on a  violation.   She referred to  the graph  of the                                                               
increases,  and explained  that it  is  the number  of times  the                                                               
officers had  filed on  violations, and  it does  not necessarily                                                               
mean  that  because  there  are more  people  out  on  supervised                                                               
probation,  it is  driving the  increase.   It  is believed,  she                                                               
pointed out,  that officers are  more likely to file  quickly the                                                               
first  time  rather  than  giving  the  person  a  pass  because,                                                               
previously,  the procedure  involving a  technical violation  was                                                               
onerous, it took a long time, and  a few would stack up before it                                                               
could get around to being  adjudicated.  The current thinking, as                                                               
to  the increase  in violations  of probation,  is that  officers                                                               
have this new swift and certain  process and they are more likely                                                               
to  address that  first violation  with a  filing, as  opposed to                                                               
"sort of just  a wait and see" whether the  person does it again.                                                               
The point  of swift,  certain, and  proportionate, is  filing the                                                               
first time,  and the fact that  "in that second slide"  there are                                                               
fewer  supervision  violators  taking  up  beds,  it  shows  more                                                               
violations  being  filed  but  they are  coming  in  for  shorter                                                               
amounts of times, she said.                                                                                                     
5:21:40 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN referred  to Mr.  Razo's statement  as to                                                               
the offenders in prison due  to violent offenses being the focus,                                                               
and Mr.  Razo also  mentioned that the  emphasis was,  not having                                                               
anyone  in  prison that  was  not  in  that category  of  violent                                                               
offenses, and asked the amount of  weight that was given [to that                                                               
focus].   He related  that if  he was next  on the  list to  be a                                                               
victim  of a  violent offense,  he  would prefer  the person  was                                                               
already  in prison  before they  committed violence  against him.                                                               
To what extent  is weight given to the victims  or future victims                                                               
of situations, he quiered.                                                                                                      
MR. RAZO replied that the  idea behind criminal justice reform is                                                               
that the protection of victims is  given great weight, and that a                                                               
person who  has committed a  violent offense  be in prison  for a                                                               
long time  and serve a long  sentence.  He offered  that possibly                                                               
the person had  a mental health disorder  that was unsuccessfully                                                               
treated or  was not treated, and  while they were in  prison they                                                               
actually received the  sorts of services that would  make it less                                                               
likely they  would commit  a violent  felony.   Interventions are                                                               
taking  place that  reduce crime,  which is  the mechanism  and a                                                               
pillar  supporting  criminal justice  reform  in  that there  are                                                               
alternatives to prison  that can work to reduce  crime, and there                                                               
is proof of that, he said.                                                                                                      
5:23:52 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN  advised that the  commission was shown  a statistic                                                               
wherein  many violations  occur  within the  first  three to  six                                                               
months.   He related  that the swift  and certain  short-term fix                                                               
has a positive impact because  offenders figure out how to behave                                                               
in  society  better  without  spending   a  long  time  on  short                                                               
technical violations.                                                                                                           
MR. RAZO  agreed, and he stated  that it is less  disruptive goal                                                               
is to  not be  disruptive and  the person has  to start  all over                                                               
5:24:58 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX related that she  was a proponent of Senate                                                               
Bill 91 in  2016, but in view  of all of the  crime in Anchorage,                                                               
she  has started  to  re-evaluate.   The  Anchorage 2014  through                                                               
9/2017  crime  statistics  for   vehicle  theft  appear  to  have                                                               
experienced a  huge rise  subsequent to  the enactment  of Senate                                                               
Bill 91.   She said that  while she realizes all  sorts of crimes                                                               
have been on  the rise for a number of  years, in Anchorage there                                                               
has been a  large spike in vehicle theft which  she suspects is a                                                               
result of  Senate Bill 91  as a possible  unintended consequence.                                                               
It gives  her pause,  she noted, that  after the  testimonies and                                                               
all of the research, that the  spike in crime was not anticipated                                                               
by  the  research,  and  asked  why she  should  believe  in  the                                                               
research when it comes to other matters.                                                                                        
MR. RAZO responded that  he completely understands Representative                                                               
LeDoux's thinking, and  the same question could be  asked that if                                                               
the  previous mayor  of Anchorage  had  decided not  to send  new                                                               
police officers to the police  academy and diminishing the police                                                               
force by  a couple  hundred people, would  that have  resulted in                                                               
more or  less crime.   He related that there  is no way  to prove                                                               
that, it  is not the  sort of evidence  one could say  that there                                                               
was a  statistical correlation  between this  to that,  they just                                                               
happened at  the same  time.   He said that  he agrees  that when                                                               
looking at  vehicle theft,  this "hockey  stick rise"  in vehicle                                                               
theft is definitely something that  has to be contended with, and                                                               
he argued that contending with  it means hiring more prosecutors,                                                               
more police officers,  and task forces devoted  to vehicle theft.                                                               
Although, he said, he would find  it difficult to believe that 14                                                               
months  of  criminal  justice reform  implementation,  which  had                                                               
little to  do with vehicle  theft, resulted in the  vehicle theft                                                               
increase.    The future  will  show  whether statistics  actually                                                               
support  the increase  because it  is a  mathematical statistical                                                               
correlation  that is  being discussed.   Those,  he pointed  out,                                                               
were what the  commission wanted the legislature to  decide as to                                                               
whether  or not  this  might be  a  good idea  for  Alaska.   For                                                               
example, he said,  the way one legislator might  go about dealing                                                               
with  the  crime  in  Alaska  could  be  different  from  another                                                               
legislator, and  these things  happened about  the same  time and                                                               
they  relate to  each other,  except that  other things  happened                                                               
just about the same time.                                                                                                       
5:29:26 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER  referred to the reinvestment  programs on                                                               
slides 4, 5, and 6, and asked  Mr. Razo to describe how the money                                                               
is being used, whether it is for people or facilities.                                                                          
MR. RAZO  responded that the  money DOC  spent on its  portion is                                                               
easy to  track, understand, and  is accountable.   The Department                                                               
of  Health and  Social  Services  (DHSS) spent  a  great deal  on                                                               
developing  community reentry  and  supporting existing  programs                                                               
that  support reentry,  which leverages  both  state and  federal                                                               
money to  build up these  community coalitions.   He said  he did                                                               
not know the number of people that  were put to work as a result.                                                               
He  related that  there is  still a  long way  to go  as to  what                                                               
happens in  half-way houses and  whether half-way houses  are the                                                               
best way  to deal with  folks coming out  of prison.   He offered                                                               
that a  nice thing  that happened  at the  same time  as criminal                                                               
justice reform is  the "Results First Initiative."   He explained                                                               
that  the  University of  Alaska  collaborated  with all  of  the                                                               
agencies to express in real  numbers the sorts of programs, their                                                               
cost, and  the return on investment  on those programs.   Many of                                                               
the results  are what a person  would expect, and he  pointed out                                                               
that first  of all, it  costs more  money to provide  programs in                                                               
rural Alaska,  although, they have  good effects.  It  costs more                                                               
to  spend  money  on  therapeutic courts  because  it  employs  a                                                               
judicial officer,  court system  staff, and  there are  the folks                                                               
that go to  the hearings, so a hearing is  expensive, except that                                                               
they get  pretty good  results, he  expressed.   The cost/benefit                                                               
breakdown  is  from the  Results  First  Initiative process,  for                                                               
example, the batterer's programs have  been a popular tool to use                                                               
to educate folks  involved in domestic violence  sorts of crimes.                                                               
Although, he noted,  the return on investment  for those programs                                                               
have  been less  than  he would  have expected.    Those are  the                                                               
mechanisms being  used to help  the legislature judge  whether it                                                               
is spending  its money in  the correct  places.  He  advised that                                                               
even  with all  of  that,  the money  the  state  is spending  on                                                               
prevention and treatment of substance  abuse and alcohol abuse is                                                               
completely  insufficient, particularly  with regard  to detox  in                                                               
this pervasive age  of heroin and opioid addiction.   He stressed                                                               
that the state has  a long way to go until it  can spend money on                                                               
places for  these folks, such  as determining who can  help them,                                                               
and the rules and regulations.                                                                                                  
5:33:58 PM                                                                                                                    
MS. DIPIETRO added  that the commission researched  how the money                                                               
had  been spent  and it  is included  in the  10/22/17 commission                                                               
report.  She explained that  the Council on Domestic Violence and                                                               
Sexual Assault has  been investing its funds, such  as $1 million                                                               
in 2017, and $2 million in  2018, and in community based violence                                                               
prevention  and  bystander  programs, including  Green  Dot;  the                                                               
COMPASS project,  and a  lot of  programs that  encourage healthy                                                               
relationships for  youth, girls,  and boys; and  adult mentorship                                                               
programs in  the communities.   She opined  that this is  some of                                                               
the money the committee may find most impactful.                                                                                
5:34:53 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  FANSLER asked  for a  yes or  no answer,  in that                                                               
when  Mr. Razo  looks at  the  system assessment,  whether it  is                                                               
under the purview  of this commission to look at  things like the                                                               
lack  of  ability to  retain  or  hire  folks in  these  systems.                                                               
Currently  in Bethel,  he pointed  out, there  are two  probation                                                               
officers and that  will not get the job done  when switching to a                                                               
major  pretrial  system  that  puts  a  much  larger  onerous  on                                                               
probation and parole.                                                                                                           
MR.  RAZO responded  that under  Senate Bill  64, [passed  in the                                                               
Twenty-Eighth  Alaska State  Legislature]  the  commission has  a                                                               
broad mandate  with the additional requirements  that were placed                                                               
on the  commission, and  said he  did not have  an opinion  as to                                                               
whether it was something in its statutory purview.                                                                              
5:35:50 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER  referred to the "hockey  stick spike" and                                                               
asked  the proper  window, sample  size, or  ideal world  for the                                                               
legislature to  look back  and determine  whether the  state made                                                               
progress with Senate Bill 91 reforms.                                                                                           
MS. DIPIETRO  answered that the  statute requires  the commission                                                               
to report  the recidivism rate  within three years, and  in terms                                                               
of  any  connection  between crime  rates  and  criminal  justice                                                               
reform, it is important to  understand that crime rates fluctuate                                                               
radically  over  time.   She  related  that the  commission  will                                                               
continue to  track crime rates and  continue to break it  down by                                                               
property crimes  versus violent crimes  of which is  difficult to                                                               
correlate.    She  said  she   does  not  know  of  any  research                                                               
suggesting there is  much of a correlation  between these things,                                                               
but the commission  will track it and present  the information to                                                               
the legislature.                                                                                                                
5:37:46 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  FANSLER surmised  that  he is  hearing that  more                                                               
time is needed, and asked Mr.  Razo, in speaking on behalf of the                                                               
commission,  whether   SB  54  is   a  proper  vehicle   for  the                                                               
legislature to  address these issues.   For example, he  said, if                                                               
vehicle theft is spiking, would  it be smarter to reclassify that                                                               
as a  different type of crime  so there is more  surgical scoping                                                               
when   it   comes   to  this,   rather   than   changing   entire                                                               
classifications for one or two crimes that may be spiking.                                                                      
MR. RAZO replied that as the  chair of the commission he does not                                                               
have a good answer, but in  his personal opinion, the best way to                                                               
deal with  vehicle theft is to  have more police officers  on the                                                               
CHAIR  CLAMAN  commented  that  a  current  proposal  before  the                                                               
commission is  whether to  take vehicular  homicide and  create a                                                               
separate  group  of  offenses   relating  to  vehicular  homicide                                                               
because there are  a number of ways in which  it is different, as                                                               
a legal  matter, than all of  the other homicides.   He predicted                                                               
that within the  next six months the legislature  would receive a                                                               
recommendation as to vehicular homicide.                                                                                        
5:39:45 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  KOPP noted  appreciation for  Mr. Razo's  work on                                                               
the  commission,  and  also  for his  comment  that  the  visible                                                               
presence of law  enforcement has a deterring effect  on crime, of                                                               
which he  wholeheartedly agrees.   He referred  to slide  12, and                                                               
noted  that  the   statistical  data  point  read   the  cost  of                                                               
incarceration was $42  per day, except in  other presentations he                                                               
has heard an amount more than  three times that amount.  He asked                                                               
whether this was a community residential center cost per day.                                                                   
MS.  DIPIETRO  responded  that  the  $42  per  day  is  called  a                                                               
"marginal cost,"  which is  the amount  it costs  DOC to  add one                                                               
more  person, and  the $159  a day  figure is  larger because  it                                                               
includes "fixed costs."  She  explained that whether DOC has five                                                               
prisoners  or   5,000  prisoners,   a  commissioner  of   DOC  is                                                               
necessary, buildings are  needed, and there still  are some fixed                                                               
costs,  but if  there  are five  prisoners and  it  moves to  six                                                               
prisoners in  the same  building with  the same  commissioner and                                                               
the same  number of  correctional officers, the  cost is  $42 per                                                               
5:41:41 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   KOPP  referred   to  criminal   justice  reforms                                                               
encompassing the  probation accountability with  enforcement, and                                                               
asked whether  the more  targeted supervision  based on  the risk                                                               
assessment of  higher risk offenders  is resulting in  the higher                                                               
petition to  revoke probation violations  because people  are not                                                               
being  supervised equally  and  are more  focused  on those  more                                                               
likely to offend.                                                                                                               
MR.  RAZO  advised that  he  does  not  know  the answer  to  the                                                               
question, but he "guessed that is  what is happening" as that was                                                               
the desired result.                                                                                                             
MS. DIPIETRO added  that the figures on  probation revocations do                                                               
not  include  Probation  Accountability and  Certain  Enforcement                                                               
(PACE) because they  were trying to give the  legislature an idea                                                               
of  the situation  with the  new  probation supervision  reforms.                                                               
The  commission has  the figure  with PACE  and they  are similar                                                               
trends, but  the PACE program has  been in place for  a long time                                                               
and it  did not  seem appropriate  to add  that into  the figures                                                               
related to Senate Bill 91.                                                                                                      
5:43:18 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP  referred to  an earlier  question as  to the                                                               
commission's seemingly slow responsiveness  to spikes in crime or                                                               
justice  trends,  and asked  whether  about  one year  ago  these                                                               
recommendations were put forward in  this bill so the legislature                                                               
could take action.                                                                                                              
MR. RAZO related that the  commission prefers that as many people                                                               
as possible attend  its public hearings and testify  and when the                                                               
commission first  heard from a  room full of police  officers who                                                               
had come to  listen to the commission, he said  he wanted to hear                                                               
from them even  if they did not necessarily want  to testify.  He                                                               
related  that he  reached out  into  the audience  and asked  for                                                               
input  from these  folks who  had taken  the time  to attend  the                                                               
meeting because police  officers have valuable input.   These men                                                               
and women work  on the ground every day in  a most dangerous job,                                                               
and  he said  he  believed it  would  be a  waste  of a  valuable                                                               
opportunity to not hear from law enforcement.                                                                                   
5:44:34 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  asked how Senate  Bill 91 helps  a heroin                                                               
user charged with a first-time misdemeanor.                                                                                     
MR. RAZO replied  that if a person is convicted  of possession of                                                               
heroin, formerly a Class C  felony, under criminal justice reform                                                               
they  face  up  to  18-months  of  supervised  felony  probation.                                                               
(Indisc.) reduction of misdemeanor, that situation.                                                                             
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT referred to  a mere drug possession heroin                                                               
user's  first-time  misdemeanor, and  asked  how  Senate Bill  91                                                               
helps that person.                                                                                                              
MS. DiPIETRO responded that prior  to the system assessment, many                                                               
of  these convicted  first-time  Class C  felony drug  possessors                                                               
were  going to  prison for  periods  of time,  and for  low-level                                                               
possessors, not dealer,  prison can be criminogenic,  as has been                                                               
discussed.   In response  to the question,  she suggested  it may                                                               
help  that first-time  heroin  user to  not go  to  prison for  a                                                               
length  of time.    However, she  pointed out,  that  is still  a                                                               
criminal justice  intervention, it is still  a misdemeanor crime,                                                               
and the idea is that the  arrest, charging, pleading, or going to                                                               
trial,  is an  intervention in  a person's  life that  could lead                                                               
them  to consider  whether their  life  was moving  in the  right                                                               
direction  or  whether they  might  consider  the possibility  of                                                               
treatment.  The idea behind  the escalation of the penalties, she                                                               
explained, is  that the  possessor who is  not addicted  does not                                                               
come back, but the people who  do have a problem will be arrested                                                               
again and  again, and as  they prove through their  behavior that                                                               
they do  have a big  problem, the  grasp of the  criminal justice                                                               
system  on them  increases.   She advised,  that is  the way  the                                                               
structure   is  designed   to  intervene   with  low-level   drug                                                               
5:47:24 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  noted that the amount  of mere possession                                                               
was changed  to a new  structure of possession of  narcotics, and                                                               
when reviewing  what the statute  was changed  to, it could  be a                                                               
MS. DIPIETRO answered that Representative  Millett was correct in                                                               
that there is that murky  category of what is called user/dealer,                                                               
people  who  deal a  little  bit  in  order  to serve  their  own                                                               
5:48:16 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  asked whether  the committee  should take                                                               
the time to  review the commission's new  recommendations and try                                                               
to  get   it  right.     She  said   she  does  not   want  these                                                               
recommendations falling on deaf ears because some are valuable.                                                                 
MR. RAZO  advised that  that is entirely  up to  the legislature,                                                               
the  recommendations   made  by   the  Alaska   Criminal  Justice                                                               
Commission were all  of the recommendations shown  in the report.                                                               
Although, he pointed  out, some of the  recommendations were made                                                               
over one-year  ago and have  not yet had  action, but all  of the                                                               
recommendations   in    the   report   are   solid    and   sound                                                               
recommendations.  He  related that the commission  would not have                                                               
made  recommendations for  changes  in criminal  law, policy,  or                                                               
procedure,   without  going   through  the   process  that   each                                                               
commissioner demands.                                                                                                           
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT thanked  Mr. Razo  for the  timeliness of                                                               
the report, and  asked whether he had read the  "op-ed piece from                                                               
the Nome police commissioner in yesterday's paper?"                                                                             
MR. RAZO answered, "No."                                                                                                        
5:50:55 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  referred to Mr. Razo's  previous response                                                               
to  vehicle thefts  and that  criminals are  not behaving  in the                                                               
manner expected and  "we're not sure why."  He  asked whether the                                                               
commission had considered  that with the reduction  of 437 inmate                                                               
beds, that  perhaps it is due  to these individuals not  being in                                                               
prison and it is easier to steal a car out of prison.                                                                           
MS. DIPIETRO  pointed out that  the directive for  the commission                                                               
was  to  consider  recidivism  reduction,  and  recidivism  means                                                               
people who have  already been touched by the  system.  Therefore,                                                               
she explained, some  crime has been committed by  people who have                                                               
already been through  the system, and some crime  is committed by                                                               
people  who have  not been  through the  system and  she did  not                                                               
exactly know  the proportion.   The  commission's recommendations                                                               
are designed to  reduce recidivism which is why  she is reluctant                                                               
to try to  link crime rates to changes in  laws because the crime                                                               
rate is different from reducing  recidivism.  The system can only                                                               
reduce recidivism for people it  affects, those that have come to                                                               
its attention.   Personally, she said, she  wonders whether these                                                               
are people who have already been  through the system and who have                                                               
this high recidivism  rate and can the state try  to reduce that;                                                               
or whether  it is new  people who have  never been in  the system                                                               
before and are just now  starting their criminal justice journey.                                                               
These are  questions the commission  is interested in, but  it is                                                               
difficult for her  to draw conclusions at this  stage, knowing so                                                               
little, she commented.                                                                                                          
MR. RAZO  responded that  his answer  was not  different because,                                                               
essentially, there  is no way  to link the two  concepts together                                                               
at this point based upon what is known.                                                                                         
5:53:38 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  referred to the process  of someone being                                                               
brought in  as a heroin  user who now  has a misdemeanor  and the                                                               
person is then  arrested and released, and  arrested and released                                                               
again, and at some point,  the person actually receives jailtime.                                                               
He described  that Mr. Razo  was expecting law enforcement  to be                                                               
patient  individuals and  more akin  to  caseworkers because  "an                                                               
awful  lot of  time" is  spent with  a single  person.   He asked                                                               
whether that was a realistic  expectation of law enforcement when                                                               
considering  all  of  the  paperwork  involved,  and  the  police                                                               
officer  not  really  receiving  any reward  in  the  short  term                                                               
because the bad guys are still out doing bad things.                                                                            
MR. RAZO replied that what has  been done, at this point, is only                                                               
a fraction  of what  needs to  be done  to confront  the problems                                                               
facing the  state.  He pointed  out that the City  of Seattle has                                                               
diversion  programs in  place wherein  a law  enforcement officer                                                               
has the opportunity to tell a  person with a "needle sticking out                                                               
of their  arm" that they  have a choice  right now, either  go to                                                               
treatment with the police officer  now who will get them enrolled                                                               
and will meet  the case worker, or,  they can go to  jail.  That,                                                               
he  explained,  is  a  type  of  discretionary  and  diversionary                                                               
program that can exist in a  full-bodied system of justice and it                                                               
is the  type of  intervention a  police officer  can use  to give                                                               
someone a clear choice on what  they want to do with their lives.                                                               
He remarked that Alaska is not  anywhere close to that point, and                                                               
criminal  justice  reform looks  forward  to  the possibility  of                                                               
creating  diversion  programs  and  alternatives  offering  clear                                                               
paths for  addicts caught for  the first-time in their  lives and                                                               
not having  their lives ruined  with a felony conviction.   Those                                                               
types of  programs have  worked in  other jurisdictions,  and not                                                               
just for  caseworkers but  for law  enforcement also  because law                                                               
enforcement enjoys having the discretion  to do something besides                                                               
hauling someone off to jail, he said.                                                                                           
5:57:41 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX referred  to  the  first-time heroin  user                                                               
arrested for their first misdemeanor  and the idea of intervening                                                               
in their lives to attempt to get  them off the track they are on,                                                               
and asked whether there is currently  anyplace for them to go for                                                               
substance abuse treatment in Anchorage.                                                                                         
MR. RAZO responded that there are not enough places.                                                                            
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  asked  how  many beds  are  available  in                                                               
Anchorage for opioid treatment.                                                                                                 
MR. RAZO answered there are 15 beds for detox.                                                                                  
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  clarified, for  heroin and  alcohol detox,                                                               
or "for everything detox."                                                                                                      
MR. RAZO advised  that he does not know the  answer but there are                                                               
not enough beds,  and said detox is described as  the most needed                                                               
portion of treatment.                                                                                                           
5:58:54 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked  whether the cart was  put before the                                                               
horse because  possibly the detox/treatment  places should  be up                                                               
and running  before letting  that first-time  misdemeanant heroin                                                               
user back  out on  the street  where, in  order to  support their                                                               
habit, will  steal someone's  car.  She  suggested that  it makes                                                               
more sense  to have detox/treatment places  available, and opined                                                               
that some  of the jurisdictions pursuing  criminal justice reform                                                               
do  have those  facilities  up and  running  before changing  the                                                               
sentencing rules.                                                                                                               
MR.  RAZO  opined  that  the  various  states  offering  criminal                                                               
justice  reform  are  all  unique and  individual.    Except,  he                                                               
pointed out,  the fundamental idea  is that  it is better  for an                                                               
individual  with an  addiction  problem  facing their  first-time                                                               
arrest  to  be  afforded  the  opportunity  to  deal  with  their                                                               
problem, and not their crime.                                                                                                   
6:00:43 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX asked  whether it  was realistic  that the                                                               
person deal  with their problem  without treatment  facilities by                                                               
putting  them back  out on  the street  while still  experiencing                                                               
their addiction problem and breaking into cars.                                                                                 
CHAIR CLAMAN  added that  there is a  shortage of  treatment beds                                                               
but when putting someone in  jail for heroin possession for three                                                               
months,  three years,  or thirty  years, the  likelihood is  that                                                               
they will  be released from jail  with a heroin problem  that has                                                               
not been treated.                                                                                                               
MR. RAZO  pointed out that the  policy question is what  the best                                                               
use  of the  people's money  and  if it  is better  to spend  the                                                               
people's money on providing  treatment beds, prevention programs,                                                               
and all of  the sorts of things known to  be fundamentally needed                                                               
by Alaskans, or to spend it on prisons.                                                                                         
6:01:55 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  noted that Senate Bill  91 included three                                                               
phases that  were in the wrong  order.  Wherein, she  said, phase                                                               
one should have been put to  the bottom, and after phases two and                                                               
three  were completed,  to then  discuss the  reclassification of                                                               
the criminal code and sentencing.                                                                                               
MR. RAZO,  in his  purely personal  opinion, answered  there were                                                               
roughly  55 public  hearings for  those choosing  to spend  their                                                               
time with  the commission  in trying  to understand  the concepts                                                               
being  discussed today.    Ideally, he  remarked,  he would  have                                                               
enjoyed  having at  least  a  year to  try  to  explain the  same                                                               
concepts  to law  enforcement, the  courts, the  prosecutors, the                                                               
defense bar,  and everyone involved  in the system.   He stressed                                                               
that these  concepts are important to  comprehend in appreciating                                                               
why the  commission would change  the criminal justice  system so                                                               
dramatically,  and it  would have  been well  worth the  time and                                                               
effort to first educate people as  to what the changes in the law                                                               
would mean.   Then,  ideally, within that  period of  time, spend                                                               
the money with upfront spending in  order to have the programs in                                                               
place.   That process,  he stressed, would  have brought  about a                                                               
better result, although  it would not have dealt with  any of the                                                               
other potential factors that may be impacting crime today.                                                                      
6:03:56 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT   commented  that  she   appreciated  his                                                               
response  because  there was  zero  frontend  loading, which  was                                                               
needed.   Phase one  changes all  of the  sentencing requirements                                                               
and allows  people with problems  to go free to  recommit crimes,                                                               
which is  why the  public is  upset, although  the public  is not                                                               
upset  about phases  two  or three,  she  offered.   Implementing                                                               
phases two and  three first would have made  phase one successful                                                               
and people want to repeal Senate Bill 91, she advised.                                                                          
MR. RIZO said  he would take Representative  Millett's comment as                                                               
a rhetorical statement.                                                                                                         
[Chair Claman moved the committee back to public testimony.]                                                                    
6:06:10 PM                                                                                                                    
NICOLE  BORROMEO,   Executive  Vice   President/General  Council,                                                               
Alaska Federation of Natives, was available to testify.                                                                         
6:06:26 PM                                                                                                                    
BEN MALLOTT,  Vice President, Alaska  Federation of  Natives, was                                                               
available to testify.                                                                                                           
MS. BORROMEO advised that the  Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN)                                                               
was  "intensely supportive"  of Senate  Bill 91  in 2016,  and is                                                               
"fiercely opposed" to SB 54  because the criminal justice reforms                                                               
in Senate Bill 91  are the right thing to do  for Alaska, and the                                                               
contemplated adjustments  are premature.  However,  she said, the                                                               
annual convention  wrapped last  week and  through the  course of                                                               
those three  days, the  delegates and  members of  AFN redirected                                                               
its position.   The AFN  now favors the  swift passage of  SB 54,                                                               
and  would like  the committee  to work  with members  across the                                                               
aisle and  the other body to  see this passed during  this fourth                                                               
special  session.   The  Federation  of  Native is  committed  to                                                               
seeing this  bill passed this session  and is happy to  work with                                                               
other stakeholders, she said.                                                                                                   
MR.  MALLOTT  reiterated that  the  Federation  of Natives  (AFN)                                                               
passed a resolution in support of  SB 54, and it looks forward to                                                               
working with the committee.                                                                                                     
MS.  BORROMEO stressed  that  the  AFN does  not  want  to see  a                                                               
complete repeal of Senate Bill 91.                                                                                              
6:08:06 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER  asked whether  it is AFN's  position that                                                               
it wishes to see SB 54 passed in  its exact form at this time, or                                                               
whether it advocates  for any changes.  He said  he was aware the                                                               
time period of incarceration for Class C felonies was an issue.                                                                 
MS.  BORROMEO clarified  that AFN  advocates  for the  "speediest                                                               
passage possible," and there are aspects  of the bill that no one                                                               
is  particularly  happy about,  but  in  the interest  of  moving                                                               
Alaska forward,  it would like to  see SB 54 passed  this special                                                               
session.  Therefore,  she said, whatever that looks  like is what                                                               
the AFN would like to see passed, she said.                                                                                     
6:09:02 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT referred  to the  three phases  of Senate                                                               
Bill 91,  and the  public's backlash  and frustration  with phase                                                               
one,  and asked  that if  phase one  was repealed  and everything                                                               
else   went  through,   would  AFN   be  comfortable   with  that                                                               
MS. BORROMEO responded that she  was uncomfortable offering AFN's                                                               
position.   To  the question  of whether  the phases  are out-of-                                                               
order, she  said that  the AFN does  not necessarily  believe the                                                               
phases were  out-of-order because  a lot  of data  suggested this                                                               
was the  correct order.   She opined  that all could  agree there                                                               
was  not a  proper  educational campaign  and  many folks  across                                                               
Alaska do not  understand the bail schedule and where  it ties in                                                               
[with the  legislation].  She suggested  better informational and                                                               
educational  sessions on  the bail  schedule and  how it  impacts                                                               
Senate Bill 91.                                                                                                                 
6:11:16 PM                                                                                                                    
MIKE  COONS  related that  the  "process  is  a farce,  pure  and                                                               
simple."   Senate Bill 91  went through deliberations  and public                                                               
input,  it  passed  regular  session, and  the  Senate  had  more                                                               
hearings than  the House of Representatives  (audio difficulties)                                                               
taking  time to  hear from  Alaskans (audio  difficulties) Senate                                                               
Bill 91.   Senate Bill 91, flawed as it  is, (audio difficulties)                                                               
knee  jerk  action of  indecision.    Prosecute shoplifting,  car                                                               
theft   was   (audio   difficulties)  level   that   all   (audio                                                               
difficulties)  deliberative  review  of  the  law  affecting  all                                                               
Alaskans.    Yet, (audio  difficulties)  crimes  with the  (audio                                                               
difficulties) attorney  general all were in  (audio difficulties)                                                               
noticed in  the earlier  testimony (audio  difficulties) Attorney                                                               
General  Sessions  now   (audio  difficulties)  federal  attorney                                                               
general (audio  difficulties).  [The audio  difficulties made Mr.                                                               
Coons's testimony extremely difficult to decipher.                                                                              
6:14:26 PM                                                                                                                    
The committee took an at-ease from 6:14 p.m. to 6:31 p.m.                                                                       
6:31:52 PM                                                                                                                    
JAHNA  LINDEMUTH, Attorney  General, Department  of Law,  advised                                                               
she  that  has   been  in  the  role  of   attorney  general  for                                                               
approximately  15  months,  and  other than  the  state's  fiscal                                                               
crisis,  opined  that the  largest  issues  facing the  State  of                                                               
Alaska  are of  public  safety.   She  stressed  that the  budget                                                               
crisis  and the  opioid crisis  hit Alaska  at exactly  the worst                                                               
time  in that  DOL  lost  over 20  percent  of  its general  fund                                                               
budget,  the  criminal  division  was  cut  at  approximately  12                                                               
percent, and the state's crime  statistics for 2015 and 2016 went                                                               
through the roof in  all areas.  At the time  of the budget cuts,                                                               
it was not  known that 2015 and 2016 crime  statistics "were what                                                               
we  were" when  those cuts  were made.   Last  year she  reviewed                                                               
DOL's budget  and recommended that  the department stay  flat and                                                               
not make  further cuts,  which is  where DOL  ended up  last year                                                               
other than the  small tweak of adding a prosecutor.   She related                                                               
that all  of the  cuts to  DOL took place  prior to  her becoming                                                               
attorney general.                                                                                                               
ATTORNEY GENERAL LINDEMUTH  advised that Senate Bill  91 has been                                                               
blamed for  a lot of things  that could be further  blamed on the                                                               
state's fiscal  crisis and the  budget cuts to the  public safety                                                               
system.  She  explained that as the attorney general  she sits on                                                               
the  Alaska Criminal  Justice Commission,  and although  she does                                                               
not have a criminal law  background, said that she has completely                                                               
steeped herself in  criminal law during the last 15  months.  She                                                               
explained there  are regular  Alaska Criminal  Justice Commission                                                               
meetings, and  subcommittee meetings associated with  issues, and                                                               
quite a few  meetings on criminal justice policy  issues.  Public                                                               
safety is the  department's top priority, aside  from the state's                                                               
fiscal crisis, she pointed out.                                                                                                 
6:35:20 PM                                                                                                                    
ATTORNEY GENERAL  LINDEMUTH, in explaining  the origin of  SB 54,                                                               
advised  that the  commission heard  public testimony,  testimony                                                               
from  prosecutors and  law enforcement,  and she  spoke with  the                                                               
Department of  Public Safety (DPS),  and her  employees regarding                                                               
the  implementation and  unintended consequences  in Senate  Bill                                                               
91, and where to make  changes.  Subsequent to those discussions,                                                               
Commissioner Walt Monegan and  Attorney General Lindemuth drafted                                                               
most  of the  recommendations  that  became SB  54,  and the  key                                                               
issues  seen  in  the  legislation that  passed  the  Senate  are                                                               
recommendations from  Department of  Law (DOL) and  Department of                                                               
Public  Safety (DPS).   As  a matter  of process,  she explained,                                                               
they took  those recommendations to  the commission and  had them                                                               
vetted and voted on before  bringing them to the legislature, and                                                               
commented that  that was a good  policy means of getting  to good                                                               
substance on  criminal justice legislation.   The issues  seen in                                                               
SB 54  are the  adjustments to criminal  justice reform  that the                                                               
department believes should be changed now, she explained.                                                                       
ATTORNEY   GENERAL  LINDEMUTH   advised  that   in  the   future,                                                               
additional ideas the  department would like to  see addressed may                                                               
come forward.   For instance,  the Title 47  issues, intoxication                                                               
and incapacitation issues  that existed prior to  Senate Bill 91.                                                               
The commission  is currently grappling with  what long-term fixes                                                               
could be made to  improve the system, but it is  not yet ready to                                                               
bring forward a policy recommendation, she said.                                                                                
6:37:26 PM                                                                                                                    
ATTORNEY GENERAL  LINDEMUTH related that the  department would be                                                               
satisfied if  SB 54 was  passed at  this time, and  then starting                                                               
the  dialogue of  what more  can be  accomplished.   Her personal                                                               
recommendation, she offered,  is that beyond SB  54, as currently                                                               
passed  by the  Senate, the  next  best thing  to be  done is  to                                                               
better fund  public safety.   Attorney General  Lindemuth advised                                                               
that during the  next session, her recommendation will  be to add                                                               
more  money for  prosecutors  with targeted  adds  to the  public                                                               
safety  system,  which  could  include  adds  to  DPS,  and  most                                                               
importantly the social services pieces  and treatment pieces.  As                                                               
Representative  LeDoux  noted,  there are  not  enough  treatment                                                               
options, especially with  the opioid epidemic taking  off the way                                                               
it has with  the demand for those services even  greater than two                                                               
years  ago, more  resources  must  be added  at  that level,  she                                                               
CHAIR  CLAMAN  noted that  many  of  the recommendations  in  the                                                               
Alaska  Criminal Justice  Commission's report  are located  in SB
54, and asked  that tomorrow she explain  the recommendations not                                                               
listed in  SB 54, why she  was not asking the  committee to amend                                                               
SB 54, and  what her timeline would be for  the committee to look                                                               
at any additional recommendations.                                                                                              
6:39:40 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  noted there was  a [letter] "with  a bunch                                                               
of recommendations"  the Department  of Law  (DOL) had  made when                                                               
initially discussing Senate Bill 91.                                                                                            
ATTORNEY GENERAL LINDEMUTH opined  that Representative LeDoux was                                                               
referring  to  the memorandum  directed  to  the Alaska  Criminal                                                               
Justice Commission from the Departments  of Law and Public Safety                                                               
that resulted in SB 54.                                                                                                         
6:40:20 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  clarified that Representative  LeDoux was                                                               
referring to  the 6/17/2017, [letter]  directed to  Governor Bill                                                               
Walker from John Skidmore, Department  of Law referencing "SB 91,                                                               
Omnibus Criminal Law and Procedure; Corrections."                                                                               
CHAIR  CLAMAN  reminded  the committee  that  this  [letter]  was                                                               
previously emailed to each member.                                                                                              
REPRESENTATIVE   MILLETT  advised   that  contained   within  the                                                               
[letter] are recommendations and  questions posed by Mr. Skidmore                                                               
that the legislators should have read  that "came out so close to                                                               
while  we were  debating  it on  the floor."    She requested  an                                                               
updated memorandum on Senate Bill 91  now that phase one had been                                                               
implemented, and  asked whether DOL  had the same  concerns, such                                                               
as, the inflation proofing and separation of powers issue.                                                                      
6:42:00 PM                                                                                                                    
ATTORNEY GENERAL LINDEMUTH  responded that Representative Millett                                                               
was discussing  the "bill  review [letter]"  for Senate  Bill 91,                                                               
and explained that a bill review  is prepared for the governor on                                                               
every  bill that  passes the  legislature, and  it describes  the                                                               
provisions of a bill.   She clarified that it is  not meant to be                                                               
a recommendation one  way or the other, it is  meant to "tell the                                                               
governor what the legislature is proposing that he sign."                                                                       
6:42:27 PM                                                                                                                    
ATTORNEY GENERAL LINDEMUTH advised  that tomorrow she will submit                                                               
three documents  DOL prepared for  SB 54,  as follows: FAQ  on SB
54; list of all  Class C felonies in Title 11 as  one of the main                                                               
fixes being  addressed in SB  54 is giving courts  the discretion                                                               
for  jailtime  for Class  C  felonies  because many  things  fall                                                               
within  Class  C felonies,  some  are  non-violent but  many  are                                                               
violent offenses  that deserve giving  judges the  discretion for                                                               
jailtime;  and the  5/19/17, memorandum  from  John Skidmore  and                                                               
addressed to  Senator Coghill that  discusses where  Alaska falls                                                               
as a state  on Class C felonies vis-a-vie other  states that have                                                               
undertaken criminal  justice reform.   She  pointed out  that the                                                               
evidence behind  Senate Bill  91 was  that longer  jail sentences                                                               
were not  any better  than shorter jail  sentences, and  what the                                                               
department  is  doing  in  proposing zero  to  one-year  Class  C                                                               
felonies  still  fits  within  that  evidence  submitted  to  the                                                               
commission from  the PEW Foundation,  and it is  still consistent                                                               
with criminal  justice reform.   She  said that  contained within                                                               
the  evidence submitted  to the  commission that  lead to  Senate                                                               
Bill 91,  it did  not see  evidence that  zero jailtime  would be                                                               
appropriate for  Class C felonies.   It was one of  those things,                                                               
she described, where  those in the trenches  putting together the                                                               
package,  "we think  just kind  of dialed  it back  a little  too                                                               
far."   The  department's  recommendation is  dialing  it up  and                                                               
giving a little  more discretion to judges for  Class C felonies.                                                               
Previously, she explained,  it was zero to two-years,  and DOL is                                                               
recommending   zero  to   one-year  because   it  believes   that                                                               
accomplishes the issues DOL and  law enforcement were seeing with                                                               
these  Class C  felonies, but  it  is still  consistent with  the                                                               
principles behind criminal justice reform.                                                                                      
CHAIR CLAMAN  asked whether  there was a  memorandum from  DOL in                                                               
roughly January 2017 that made  the more narrowed recommendations                                                               
related to SB 54.                                                                                                               
ATTORNEY GENERAL  LINDEMUTH replied  that the  January memorandum                                                               
is   the  memorandum   to  the   commission   itself  [with   the                                                               
recommendations   from  DOL   and  DPS],   the  commission   then                                                               
considered  those recommendations  and  the recommendations  that                                                               
came out of  the commission are not exactly the  same as what was                                                               
recommended by the departments, but DOL  is fine with where SB 54                                                               
is now, as passed by the Senate.                                                                                                
6:45:43 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  referred to  Senate Bill 91,  and offered                                                               
concern that  the legislature lessened  the penalty for  a police                                                               
officer injured in the line of duty.                                                                                            
ATTORNEY GENERAL LINDEMUTH deferred to Kaci Schroeder, DOL.                                                                     
6:47:09 PM                                                                                                                    
KACI  SCHROEDER, Assistant  Attorney General,  Criminal Division,                                                               
Legal   Services  Section,   Department  of   Law,  opined   that                                                               
Representative Millett  was referring  to the  overall sentencing                                                               
and  explained that  sentences were  reduced overall,  except the                                                               
most  serious offenses,  such as  homicide.   However, she  said,                                                               
Representative Millett was referring  to crimes committed against                                                               
law enforcement  and there is  an aggravator present  wherein the                                                               
sentence  could be  enhanced if  a crime  was directed  at a  law                                                               
enforcement officer.                                                                                                            
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT commented that  the legislature lowered it                                                               
in Senate Bill 91.                                                                                                              
MS. SCHROEDER  reiterated that the sentences  were lowered across                                                               
the board.                                                                                                                      
6:47:59 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN offered  his understanding  that in  some                                                               
instances,  aggravators  are  not  allowed  to  be  used  as  far                                                               
increasing this penalty.                                                                                                        
MS. SCHROEDER asked that he repeat the question.                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN  referred to  a previous discussion  as to                                                               
how aggravators  can sometimes be  used, and sometimes  cannot be                                                               
used.  He  opined that with Senate Bill 91,  there are additional                                                               
instances where the judge cannot consider aggravators.                                                                          
MS. SCHROEDER  answered that  she is unaware  of any  language in                                                               
Senate  Bill  91  preventing  the  use of  an  aggravator.    She                                                               
explained that in  the event there is an element  of the offense,                                                               
DOL  cannot use  that element  to  aggravate the  sentence.   For                                                               
example, she  offered, if the  element of the offense  requires a                                                               
dangerous  instrument or  a deadly  weapon, DOL  cannot then  use                                                               
that instance to  aggravate the offense.  Senate Bill  91 did not                                                               
affect  that, it  has been  law  for a  long time,  and the  same                                                               
aggravators are present as prior to Senate Bill 91, she said.                                                                   
6:49:01 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN said  he understands that to  be the case,                                                               
except  now  that the  penalty  has  been  reduced, that  cap  is                                                               
lowered  and there  could  or could  not be  an  aggravator.   He                                                               
commented that it would not raise that cap one inch.                                                                            
MS.  SCHROEDER  responded that  the  maximum  sentences for  each                                                               
offense, such as a  Class C felony and a Class  B felony, are the                                                               
same  as  prior to  Senate  Bill  91.    She explained  that  the                                                               
presumptive ranges  within those offenses have  been adjusted and                                                               
once  an  aggravator   is  proved,  it  is   within  the  judge's                                                               
discretion to sentence up to the maximum.                                                                                       
6:49:40 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT   commented  that  she   thinks  criminal                                                               
justice reform  is a good  idea, although its  implementation has                                                               
caused  some issues.   She  noted  the question  had been  raised                                                               
about  inflation proofing  and  separation of  powers, and  asked                                                               
whether Attorney General Lindemuth  still believes the "inflation                                                               
proofing has  the issue of  separation of powers  within changing                                                               
the inflation proofing."                                                                                                        
CHAIR CLAMAN clarified that Senate  Bill 91 includes an inflation                                                               
proofing  mechanism  on theft  offenses  that  would be  adjusted                                                               
every  five-years,  and  Representative Millett  is  raising  the                                                               
question about whether that decision by the legislature ...                                                                     
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  interjected that the question  was raised                                                               
by DOL.                                                                                                                         
CHAIR CLAMAN agreed, and he  said that Representative Millett was                                                               
raising the  question of  whether DOL  thinks that  "we shouldn't                                                               
have done that."                                                                                                                
ATTORNEY  GENERAL LINDEMUTH  explained  that the  purpose of  the                                                               
bill review is  to identify issues that may exist  in the future,                                                               
and  DOL identified  some legal  uncertainty as  to what  a judge                                                               
would do with  that particular issue in the future.   She pointed                                                               
out  that it  is not  something  DOL was  saying the  legislature                                                               
needs to fix.                                                                                                                   
6:51:04 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  paraphrased a  portion of  the memorandum                                                               
as  follows:  "No  other  state  in the  country  has  a  similar                                                               
provision  of the  law that  adjusts  the value  of threshold  or                                                               
property crimes  for inflation.   So, having the jud  -- judicial                                                               
branch adjust  the property crime  thresholds may also  raise two                                                               
separation  of powers  issue," and  it  goes into  the first  and                                                               
second  issue.   She related  that the  issue was  raised in  the                                                               
memorandum,  and asked  whether  it should  be  clarified now  so                                                               
inflation  proofing is  not part  of the  question or  part of  a                                                               
problem going out into the future.                                                                                              
ATTORNEY  GENERAL LINDEMUTH  opined  that the  idea of  inflation                                                               
proofing is  a good  policy idea, and  DOL identified  that there                                                               
were some  potential legal challenges.   She related  that "since                                                               
we're already here and we're already  doing that" to wait and see                                                               
whether  there is  a court  challenge on  that particular  issue.                                                               
She explained  that when the  Department of Law (DOL)  prepares a                                                               
bill review, it tries to  identify legal issues for the governor.                                                               
She pointed out that within  a bill's legislative process, DOL is                                                               
involved  along  the   way,  and  in  the  event   DOL  sees  any                                                               
constitutional issues  it works  with the  legislators to  try to                                                               
resolve the  issue during  that process, and  this issue  did not                                                               
rise  to the  legislative level  of something  that needed  to be                                                               
fixed, she advised.                                                                                                             
6:53:07 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN offered  that at  five-years out,  in the                                                               
event there  is a legal  challenge and the  court finds it  was a                                                               
problem, approximately how many cases might be impacted.                                                                        
ATTORNEY GENERAL  LINDEMUTH replied that  she does not  have that                                                               
number as  that would be on  a case-by-case basis.   In the event                                                               
there was  situation such as  that, any  change to the  law would                                                               
have to come back to  the legislature, other than being inflation                                                               
proofed at the front-end, she explained.                                                                                        
6:53:54 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked exactly  who would challenge the law,                                                               
because  the  person being  prosecuted  would  not challenge  the                                                               
inflation proofing as that person  would benefit by the inflation                                                               
proofing, presumably.                                                                                                           
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT commented, the guy  who is charged the day                                                               
before with the lower, lower ...                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX advised  Representative  Millett that  she                                                               
was asking Attorney General Lindemuth.                                                                                          
CHAIR  CLAMAN  pointed  out  that   the  legislature  raised  the                                                               
misdemeanor theft  level to $1,000,  and say inflation  bumped it                                                               
up to $1,100, and someone was  charged with a Class A misdemeanor                                                               
for  $900 in  property theft,  and  one-year later  the level  is                                                               
$1,100, that  person is charged  with a misdemeanor  for stealing                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  asked  whether  that  person  would  have                                                               
standing to ...                                                                                                                 
ATTORNEY  GENERAL LINDEMUTH  responded  that it  is difficult  to                                                               
speculate about  a potential legal  challenge, and she  could not                                                               
think of a party that may  challenge this, but that does not mean                                                               
it would  not be  challenged in the  future, possibly  Fred Meyer                                                               
who believes ...                                                                                                                
CHAIR  CLAMAN interjected  that  because victims  of crimes  have                                                               
rights here, the challenge would come from a victim of crime.                                                                   
6:56:38 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  opined that under  administrative parole,                                                               
a person  could have their  sentence reduced by 75  percent based                                                               
on the  use of  administrative parole in  the sentencing  and not                                                               
going before the Parole Board.                                                                                                  
ATTORNEY GENERAL LINDEMUTH deferred to Kaci Schroeder.                                                                          
MS. SCHROEDER answered  that for certain types  of offenders with                                                               
certain  classes of  offenses  who meet  the  criteria must  have                                                               
served  one-fourth of  their sentence,  or the  mandatory minimum                                                               
required under  law, or the  term of imprisonment imposed  by the                                                               
judge subject to discretionary limitations.   She advised that it                                                               
is  generally for  property-type  of offenses  because there  are                                                               
many  exclusions,  such  as  crimes against  a  person,  Class  C                                                               
felonies, sex offenses, and more.   She offered that she does not                                                               
know  how this  is  working on  the  ground as  that  would be  a                                                               
question for the  Department of Corrections (DOC) as  to how many                                                               
people  it has  seen who  are  eligible and  released under  this                                                               
6:58:11 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT described that it  is a policy question as                                                               
to whether  the legislature wants  a prisoner to  have one-fourth                                                               
of  their sentence  to serve  or  ... it  is a  big reduction  in                                                               
sentencing based  on some of  the circumstances  being discussed.                                                               
She  asked  the  logical  reason the  legislature  should  reduce                                                               
someone's sentence by 75 percent.                                                                                               
ATTORNEY GENERAL  LINDEMUTH opined  that the commission  may have                                                               
more insight  as to that recommendation,  and added that it  is a                                                               
carrot/stick issue because many provisions  in Senate Bill 91 are                                                               
trying to  incentivize good behavior,  together with the  idea of                                                               
putting the  most egregious  and violent people  in prison.   She                                                               
commented that  using flexible consequence-type issues  for those                                                               
non-violent  lesser   offenses  fits  within  the   parameter  of                                                               
criminal justice reform.                                                                                                        
7:00:06 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  CLAMAN offered  a  scenario  of an  assault  in the  third                                                               
degree  against a  firefighter absent  an  aggravator, and  under                                                               
this amendment, if  it is a first offense that  person would face                                                               
a sentence  of zero to  one-year.  He  asked what happens  to the                                                               
sentencing  range if  the prosecution  proves  up the  aggravator                                                               
that it is a uniformed firefighter.                                                                                             
MS. SCHROEDER answered  that if the prosecution is  able to prove                                                               
the  aggravator, the  judge could  sentence up  to the  five-year                                                               
maximum for a Class C felony.                                                                                                   
7:00:54 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP pointed out that  for decades there have been                                                               
provisions, such  as AS 12.55.078, suspending  entry of judgment,                                                               
which read as follows:                                                                                                          
          (a) Except as provided in (f)  of this section, if                                                                    
     a person is  found guilty or pleads guilty  to a crime,                                                                    
     the court  may, with the  consent of the  defendant and                                                                    
     the  prosecution and  without  imposing  or entering  a                                                                    
     judgment of guilt, defer  further proceedings and place                                                                    
     the person  on probation.  The period  of probation may                                                                    
     not  exceed   the  applicable  terms  set   out  in  AS                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   KOPP   offered   that   certain   offenses   are                                                               
disqualified from  that, but  Alaska law  has recognized  for 50-                                                               
years that there are certain  cases where the interest of justice                                                               
is served.   Representative Millett brought up  good questions as                                                               
to structuring sentences  where people have an  opportunity to be                                                               
out on  probation or parole  earlier, and  Mr. Razo would  be the                                                               
person to ask.   He pointed out that "we've  had things like this                                                               
in  the statute  book" that  had nothing  to do  with any  recent                                                               
reform  wherein  legislatures  long-ago  set up  these  types  of                                                               
opportunities in several different [statutes].                                                                                  
CHAIR CLAMAN  offered that the  suspended imposition  of sentence                                                               
has  been on  the books  for  a long  time, and  there have  been                                                               
awkward  issues involving  the suspended  imposition of  sentence                                                               
because technically  a person  is found  guilty with  a suspended                                                               
imposition  of sentence  and  they do  not  technically impose  a                                                               
sentence.   The criminal justice  reform, he offered, adds  a new                                                               
process called the suspended entry  of judgment which essentially                                                               
happens  before a  finding  of  guilt, with  the  consent of  all                                                               
parties,   in  addressing   the  issue   of  someone   with  good                                                               
rehabilitation potential.   The thought was that  for that person                                                               
to   have  an   opportunity   to   successfully  complete   their                                                               
rehabilitation  and be  able to  say  they have  a clear  record,                                                               
which is  "murky" on the  suspended imposition of sentence.   The                                                               
principle  of trying  to make  it  possible to  clear a  person's                                                               
record has been part of Alaska's criminal justice for decades.                                                                  
7:03:24 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT referred  to the  three phases  of Senate                                                               
Bill  91, and  asked whether  the  state would  have been  better                                                               
served to  implement phase one after  phases two and three.   She                                                               
asked Attorney  General Lindemuth's thoughts about  repealing the                                                               
revisions  of  the  classification  of  the  criminal  code,  and                                                               
stopping   provisions   such   as,  the   reclassifications   and                                                               
sentencing  reductions, administrative  parole, the  redefinition                                                               
of a mere  drug possession, and the  recidivist amendment wherein                                                               
the misdemeanors continue on and on, and never get to a felony.                                                                 
ATTORNEY GENERAL LINDEMUTH responded  that the classification and                                                               
sentencing is  a critical  component because  it is  how criminal                                                               
justice reform programs  are paid.  The  pretrial services office                                                               
and the  adding of 16 new  police officers has not  yet come into                                                               
effect,  but it  is an  expensive  piece being  paid by  reducing                                                               
sentences and  having certain people not  in jail so much  of the                                                               
time.   There  is  a  whole cost  component  with sentencing  and                                                               
classification.    Secondly,  she  pointed out,  as  far  as  the                                                               
timing, it is a  little too late.  She offered  that in a perfect                                                               
world, it  would have been  better to have the  pretrial services                                                               
piece in  place before  moving forward  and interacting  with the                                                               
folks not  spending as  much time  incarcerated pretrial.   Also,                                                               
she stressed, the  bail schedule was not part of  Senate Bill 91,                                                               
and  its timing  exacerbated the  issues.   As  of January  2018,                                                               
those pretrial officers  will be on the ground  and things should                                                               
start getting better on that front, she said.                                                                                   
7:05:46 PM                                                                                                                    
ATTORNEY GENERAL LINDEMUTH referred  to vehicle theft, especially                                                               
in Anchorage,  and offered that  it is a  Class C felony  and the                                                               
fixes in SB  54 will largely address that particular  issue.  She                                                               
advised that her former Anchorage  district attorney advised her,                                                               
as  far  as   resources  go,  that  the   Anchorage  office  must                                                               
prioritize  the  violent  felonies.   She  said  that  given  the                                                               
limited  resources   in  Anchorage  and  the   record  number  of                                                               
homicides over  the last  two-years, let alone  all of  the other                                                               
violent crimes, [vehicle  theft] type cases are  not receiving as                                                               
much  attention as  they should  if  DOL was  better funded,  she                                                               
7:06:58 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MILLETT  referred to Attorney  General Lindemuth's                                                               
statement  regarding  reinvestment and  cost  to  the state,  and                                                               
asked about the  costs to society in letting these  people out of                                                               
jail by lowering  sentencing.  She related  that constituents are                                                               
upset about people frequently breaking  in and stealing cars, and                                                               
that  societal   costs  must  be   balanced  with  the   cost  of                                                               
ATTORNEY  GENERAL  LINDEMUTH  reiterated that  pretrial  services                                                               
will begin  in January, and the  pieces believed to be  misses in                                                               
Senate Bill 91 are addressed in  SB 54, such as Class C felonies,                                                               
recidivist theft, and  violations of conditions of  release.  The                                                               
big thing that  had been seen from law enforcement  on the ground                                                               
was its  lack of the ability  to put someone in  jail pending the                                                               
next bail hearing with the judge.   Those issues are addressed in                                                               
SB 54, she reiterated.   She stressed that the recommendations in                                                               
Senate Bill  91 are based  on science, including evidence  from a                                                               
number  of   other  jurisdictions  undertaking  these   types  of                                                               
reforms, that  it works.  There  are small tweaks to  be taken in                                                               
SB  54, she  acknowledged, but  the big  picture is  the evidence                                                               
supporting it  in the  longer run.   Once the  state gets  up and                                                               
running,  this actually  should  improve public  safety, and  she                                                               
related  that "right  now,  we  have to  go  with  what the  best                                                               
evidence is, and that's where we're at."                                                                                        
7:09:51 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   LEDOUX   noted  Attorney   General   Lindemuth's                                                               
scenario of  a perfect world  wherein phases two and  three would                                                               
have come before  phase one.  She asked, why  not implement phase                                                               
one after phases two and three are fully implemented.                                                                           
ATTORNEY  GENERAL LINDEMUTH  reiterated that  this October  2017,                                                               
and everything  begins as of  January 1,  2018.  She  referred to                                                               
the cost of  the system and educating all of  the prosecutors and                                                               
law enforcement,  and said  that putting  a pause  on it  at this                                                               
particular juncture,  the timing is  that "we're there  and we'll                                                               
see what --  what this does when we have  those pretrial officers                                                               
on the ground in January."                                                                                                      
7:10:44 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX  commented  that alcohol  and  drug  abuse                                                               
treatment services are still not available.                                                                                     
ATTORNEY  GENERAL LINDEMUTH  clarified that  within the  last 18-                                                               
months, additional  resources have been  put into the  system and                                                               
more needs  to be done.   In the event  there was a  fiscal plan,                                                               
her recommendation would  be to put a significant  amount of more                                                               
money  into those  treatment  options, more  than  what has  been                                                               
planned  under   the  $99  million   over  a  six-year   type  of                                                               
investments.    Put  more  money in  there  now,  she  expressed,                                                               
especially  given  the  opioid epidemic  and  the  demands  being                                                               
experienced on  those issues,  and accelerate  that piece  of the                                                               
reinvestment.    That  does  not  mean  the  state  should  pause                                                               
everything else, she pointed out.                                                                                               
7:11:41 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  noted that the  bottom line is  that there                                                               
is not  a fiscal  plan currently, it  is what it  is.   She asked                                                               
whether  the [legislature]  should want  those services  in place                                                               
before letting  people out  of jail  knowing they  cannot receive                                                               
the anticipated treatment.                                                                                                      
ATTORNEY GENERAL LINDEMUTH  responded that it is all  a matter of                                                               
degree, and "we  just have to keep working toward  this."  At the                                                               
same time, she pointed out, that  does not mean the whole package                                                               
is flawed  or that  the state cannot  move forward  with criminal                                                               
justice reform.   The Departments  of Law and Public  Safety have                                                               
looked at this and believe the  tweaks that needed to be made are                                                               
in  SB  54,  she  reiterated.     The  commission  will  continue                                                               
discussing  these  issues  and   additional  evidence  will  come                                                               
forward,  especially with  the  additional  reinvestment that  is                                                               
needed for substance abuse treatment  and getting those resources                                                               
online.  At  this juncture, she advised, until  there are further                                                               
issues  vetted at  the commission  level, no  further legislative                                                               
recommendations are being made to the legislature.                                                                              
7:13:07 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX asked  whether SB  54 incorporates  all of                                                               
DOL's  recommendations to  the commission,  and if  not, what  is                                                               
ATTORNEY  GENERAL  LINDEMUTH explained  that  in  looking at  the                                                               
January  2017,   memorandum  directed  to  the   Alaska  Criminal                                                               
Commission  from  the  Departments  of  Law  and  Public  Safety,                                                               
everything listed in the memorandum  is addressed somewhere in SB
54, but it may not be in the exact form as the recommendation.                                                                  
7:13:59 PM                                                                                                                    
The committee took an at-ease from 7:13 p.m. to 7:17 p.m.                                                                       
7:17:24 PM                                                                                                                    
ATTORNEY  GENERAL  LINDEMUTH   referred  to  the  above-mentioned                                                               
memorandum and  reiterated that everything in  the memorandum was                                                               
addressed in some  manner in SB 54, but possibly  not in the same                                                               
form  as offered  in the  memorandum.   Except, Number  7 at  the                                                               
bottom  of  page  4,  "Align  Discretion  of  Bail  and  Pretrial                                                               
Services Officers  to make Recommendations with  Judge Discretion                                                               
to Impose Bail."   She then turned to page 5,  and pointed to the                                                               
two-colored  charts, one  is pretrial  service  officers and  the                                                               
other is  the courts.   She  advised that  the discussion  at the                                                               
commission level  was that this part  of the statute had  not yet                                                               
gone into  effect, and to wait  and see how it  works in practice                                                               
as to  whether a fix  is necessary.  The  thought of some  of the                                                               
commissioners was  that judges  are smart  enough to  figure this                                                               
out, so a fix may not be necessary.   Number 7 was the only thing                                                               
hanging  out there  and  it is  really  for future  consideration                                                               
after it goes into effect, she said.                                                                                            
7:19:02 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER  referred to  first-time Class  C felonies                                                               
and  aggravators, and  asked  the attorney  general  to walk  the                                                               
committee  through typical  aggravators, and  whether aggravators                                                               
are  typically attached  to crimes,  or  whether aggravators  are                                                               
MS.  SCHROEDER responded  that  aggravators are  not  run of  the                                                               
mill; however, there  are many aggravators in statute.   She said                                                               
she could  not say that there  is always an aggravator  that will                                                               
apply,  but when  they  do apply  they can  be  pursued, and  the                                                               
person  can  be  sentenced  above the  presumptive  range.    For                                                               
example, a  crime directed  at a law  enforcement officer  has an                                                               
aggravator, and many aggravators are  located at AS 12.55.155, as                                                               
follows: a  crime committed in  a domestic violence  situation; a                                                               
person  commits  another  felony  while on  bail  release  for  a                                                               
felony; and those types of crimes.                                                                                              
7:20:39 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER  noted that  the pretrial  services office                                                               
begins  January  2018,  but in  some  districts,  the  post-trial                                                               
probation is  nowhere close to sufficient.   He asked how  DOL is                                                               
looking  to  address this  issue,  and  why  are there  only  two                                                               
probation officers in Bethel for "seven spots?"                                                                                 
ATTORNEY  GENERAL  LINDEMUTH  commented that  the  Department  of                                                               
Corrections  (DOC) could  better  address  that question  because                                                               
probation  runs through  DOC.   In  looking at  the big  picture,                                                               
there is  more that should, and  can, be done with  probation and                                                               
she is  working with other  departments to put together  a Public                                                               
Safety Action  Plan for  Governor Walker  to take  concrete steps                                                               
and increase resources  for probation.  She  advised that putting                                                               
them  in  the community  and  having  more community  involvement                                                               
makes  better   sense  than  having   the  state   provide  those                                                               
7:22:14 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER noted the focus  has been on many specific                                                               
crimes,  and asked  why not  reclassify certain  crimes and  move                                                               
them out  of a Class  C felony up  to a  Class B felony,  or move                                                               
them to  a more  appropriate location  to get  the sentence.   He                                                               
also asked  whether that  would be a  more tactical  and surgical                                                               
manner  to accomplish  what "we're  trying to  accomplish" rather                                                               
than changing the whole Class of felonies.                                                                                      
ATTORNEY  GENERAL   LINDEMUTH  answered   that  that  is   not  a                                                               
recommendation the  Department of Law (DOL)  is currently making,                                                               
but it is  certainly a legislative prerogative.   The legislature                                                               
can always look at offenses  and decide the appropriate sentence,                                                               
putting aside the whole Senate Bill 91 issue, she said.                                                                         
7:23:34 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE FANSLER  related that there  is a chicken  and the                                                               
egg situation here  where these services need to be  paid and the                                                               
choice was made to take money  from the state's prison system and                                                               
turn  it into  rehabilitation.   He  surmised that  if the  state                                                               
wants these  programs to be successful,  it needs money to  do it                                                               
and it  needs to  figure out a  way.  Under  Senate Bill  91, the                                                               
legislature  chose to  take the  money out  of the  Department of                                                               
Corrections (DOC),  which is why  this certain order  was chosen,                                                               
and at this point the [state] is committed, he stated.                                                                          
ATTORNEY  GENERAL LINDEMUTH  agreed with  Representative Fansler,                                                               
and she  said that was  a critical  piece, and also  stopping the                                                               
projection of where  the state was headed and  adding new prisons                                                               
in the future.   She offered that  a lot of the  cost savings was                                                               
just  avoiding those  additional  costs that  the projection  was                                                               
moving toward.  Also, she added,  being smart about how the state                                                               
uses its corrections in putting  certain people in jail, and that                                                               
sometimes if  folks can stay  out of  prison, keep their  job and                                                               
their life in  order, they may have a better  success in the long                                                               
run.   Reinvesting the  saving and is  not enough,  she stressed,                                                               
the state  really does need  to front-load the  treatment options                                                               
and put more money in upfront to have the successes anticipated.                                                                
7:26:38 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP reiterated the  issues raised by constituents                                                               
over  vehicle theft,  the presumptive  range for  first offenders                                                               
being just probation,  low-level thefts, and the  seeming lack of                                                               
law  enforcement ability  to issue  any  repercussion, and  asked                                                               
whether SB 54 fixes those problems.                                                                                             
ATTORNEY  GENERAL   LINDEMUTH  answered   that  as  far   as  the                                                               
sentencing and  legal structures that  need to be tweaked  by the                                                               
legislature, all  are addressed  by SB  54.   The other  piece is                                                               
resources and  making sure  there are  enough prosecutors  on the                                                               
ground to  actually prosecute the  crimes being referred  to DOL,                                                               
and those two  issues go hand-on-hand.  As far  as Anchorage, the                                                               
police department added 40 new  positions over the last two years                                                               
generally, and it expects to  add more people throughout the next                                                               
year.  As more Anchorage law  enforcement is added on the ground,                                                               
she pointed  out that  more crimes  are referred  to DOL,  and in                                                               
Anchorage,  DOL  handles the  felonies  and  the Municipality  of                                                               
Anchorage  attorney  handles  the misdemeanors.    Although,  she                                                               
advised, as far  as the felonies go, DOL will  have to prioritize                                                               
those because it does not  have enough prosecutors on the ground.                                                               
After the passage of SB 54,  funding and resources issues are the                                                               
second piece that needs to be addressed, she advised.                                                                           
7:28:29 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT   referred  to  misconduct   involving  a                                                               
controlled substance and mere drug  possession, and asked whether                                                               
the  legislature got  it right  and how  it helps  the first-time                                                               
misdemeanant heroin user.                                                                                                       
ATTORNEY GENERAL  LINDEMUTH responded that  she does not  know if                                                               
the  legislature  got  it  right, time  will  tell  whether  this                                                               
experiment works.  The fundamental  question is whether the state                                                               
wants  to   criminalize  and   institutionalize  the   people  in                                                               
corrections who have substance abuse  treatment issues, or try to                                                               
get those people into treatment.   Statewide, she said, DOL deals                                                               
with   misdemeanors,  other   than  the   Juneau  and   Anchorage                                                               
municipalities,  and the  state needs  to have  resources to  put                                                               
toward  misdemeanors, noting  that  the department  will have  to                                                               
prioritize   felonies,   especially   violent  felonies.      The                                                               
department does  not have enough people  on the ground to  do the                                                               
type  of misdemeanor  prosecution  that is  needed to  effectuate                                                               
that piece of the puzzle,  she expressed, and simply changing the                                                               
consequence  by  making the  sentence  longer  will not  fix  the                                                               
issue.   Resources are needed  in order  to have those  cases run                                                               
through the  system regardless of  whatever the sentence  is that                                                               
is being imposed, she said.                                                                                                     
7:31:46 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  CLAMAN noted  that Representative  Millett had  asked what                                                               
this legislation is doing for the  heroin user, and a heroin user                                                               
having  the  choice  between being  convicted  of  a  misdemeanor                                                               
versus convicted of a felony  would probably choose a misdemeanor                                                               
because their odds  of a decent life, after  treatment, is better                                                               
without  a  felony on  their  record.   Representative  Millett's                                                               
question was whether  it was a societal matter,  he asked whether                                                               
the  state  will get  more  people  into  treatment if  they  are                                                               
convicted of felonies with the  state spending a bunch more money                                                               
to put them in prison.                                                                                                          
7:32:43 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT commented  that  her point  was that  the                                                               
state is  releasing people with  mere drug possession  and hoping                                                               
they  get  into  treatment,  while  the  legislature  knows  that                                                               
treatment  is  not available.    Again,  she  remarked, it  is  a                                                               
representation  of putting  the cart  before the  horse, and  the                                                               
state is lessening sentences,  lessening opportunity, and sending                                                               
people out  into the world  with a  false hope that  somehow this                                                               
bill  will save  them  when  it actually  impacts  society in  an                                                               
adverse manner.                                                                                                                 
CHAIR  CLAMAN noted  that Representative  Millett did  not ask  a                                                               
7:33:15 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS  noted  that an  Anchorage  Police                                                               
Officer shared  that 440 officers  have been cut to  340 officers                                                               
over  the last  five-years  and the  Anchorage Police  Department                                                               
(APD) is  currently looking  to increase  that amount,  but those                                                               
officers  are  not yet  on  the  street.    He asked  whether  he                                                               
approximately  understood  the  level  of  the  Anchorage  Police                                                               
Department's  resources,  and  to  what  degree  law  enforcement                                                               
refers crimes for prosecution to  DOL, and whether she was seeing                                                               
a  prosecutorial resource  shortfall, particularly  if these  new                                                               
officers come  onto the  street and more  crimes are  referred to                                                               
ATTORNEY  GENERAL LINDEMUTH  commented  that as  far  as the  APD                                                               
officer  level, she  did not  know  where it  was previously  and                                                               
opined  that  Representative   Kreiss-Tomkins  was  approximately                                                               
correct wherein they  had a high in  the 400s and now  are in the                                                               
CHAIR CLAMAN offered  that in 2009 the count was  414, in 2014 it                                                               
was   approximately   328,   and  currently   approximately   408                                                               
7:35:34 PM                                                                                                                    
ATTORNEY  GENERAL   LINDEMUTH  noted   that  there  had   been  a                                                               
significant amount of  people on the street in the  last 1.5 to 2                                                               
years,  and  that  those  officers   on  the  ground  are  making                                                               
referrals  to  the  DOL.   She  reminded  Representative  Kreiss-                                                               
Tomkins  that she  began her  testimony today  advising that  DOL                                                               
does  not  have  sufficient   prosecutorial  resources,  and  she                                                               
reiterated  that if  anything, the  department has  been cut  too                                                               
deeply  which  impacts  its ability  to  provide  core  services,                                                               
including prosecuting crime.  She  remarked that while the number                                                               
of  crimes the  department is  pushing through  have not  changed                                                               
much, the  type of level  the department is prosecuting  has gone                                                               
up, homicides are up, violent  assaults are up considerably which                                                               
requires  DOL to  prioritize.   The most  serious crimes  receive                                                               
attention, which  means the lesser  offenses of  misdemeanors and                                                               
non-violent  vehicle thefts  do  not receive  the attention  they                                                               
need.  She expressed that if  DOL had more resources she was sure                                                               
more crimes would be prosecuted.                                                                                                
7:36:48 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  KREISS-TOMKINS offered  that when  the state  had                                                               
surpluses, the  department had more  resources and  asked whether                                                               
vehicle thefts were being prosecuted.                                                                                           
ATTORNEY GENERAL LINDEMUTH responded  that certainly more vehicle                                                               
thefts were prosecuted than the current amount.                                                                                 
7:37:06 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX   reiterated  the  public's   outrage  and                                                               
society's  condemnation, noting  that Attorney  General Lindemuth                                                               
said  SB  54   fixes  the  problem  with   respect  to  low-level                                                               
misdemeanors so  that people can  no longer think they  are going                                                               
to simply get  away with this without any punishment.   She asked                                                               
whether  it   actually  fixes   it  for   first-time  misdemeanor                                                               
shoplifting, for example, or if those  folks still have a get out                                                               
of jail free card.                                                                                                              
ATTORNEY  GENERAL LINDEMUTH  answered that  Representative LeDoux                                                               
was correct,  those repeat offenders were  the problem complained                                                               
about  from Fred  Meyer, and  other  folks who  testified at  the                                                               
commission  and  legislative  levels.    She  asked  whether  the                                                               
legislature was  going to put  a first-time  shoplifting teen-age                                                               
offender in  jail, and opined  that this was not  happening prior                                                               
to the  enactment of Senate  Bill 91,  even with the  ability for                                                               
jailtime.  She said she does not look  at it as a get out of jail                                                               
free card, it is prosecutors  and courts using discretion to deal                                                               
with someone  who may have made  one small mistake, and  does not                                                               
have a  life of crime behind  them.  The issue,  she remarked, is                                                               
the recidivist issue and those with repeat offenses.                                                                            
7:39:03 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX noted  that  in reality,  prior to  Senate                                                               
Bill  91,  the  first-time  shoplifter probably  would  not  have                                                               
received jailtime,  but with jail  hanging over their  heads, the                                                               
state had more  ability to "scare the hell out"  of the teen-ager                                                               
when  they  thought  about   committing  a  shoplifting  offense.                                                               
Currently, that does not exist, she comments.                                                                                   
CHAIR CLAMAN asked, under present statute or under SB 54.                                                                       
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX answered under both.                                                                                      
ATTORNEY  GENERAL LINDEMUTH  responded that  the state  no longer                                                               
has the  tool of  scaring someone with  jailtime for  a low-level                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX  commented that if  the tool was  not being                                                               
used  to incarcerate  the teen-age  who had  made a  mistake, the                                                               
parents or  judge could use it  to scare that person,  so why not                                                               
keep the tool.                                                                                                                  
ATTORNEY  GENERAL  LINDEMUTH answered  that  it  is important  to                                                               
return to the  evidence presented to the  commission resulting in                                                               
the passage  of Senate Bill 91.   There is good  evidence to show                                                               
that jailtime in those kinds  of situations can actually create a                                                               
problem versus  solve a  problem, and it  is important  to review                                                               
the evidence  in those  types of  issues, especially  a low-level                                                               
theft of less than $250, she said.                                                                                              
7:41:19 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX argued that  Attorney General Lindemuth had                                                               
said that, in reality, the  first-time offender for the low-level                                                               
petty crime did not  actually end up in jail.   She asked why the                                                               
legislature had  to fix a problem  that did not exist  and remove                                                               
the tool that could scare someone.                                                                                              
CHAIR  CLAMAN  related  that  during  recent  conversations  with                                                               
police  officers, he  asked what  happened  with low-level  theft                                                               
offenses prior  to criminal  justice reform,  and the  answer was                                                               
that they  looked at the offender  and the circumstance.   In the                                                               
event they had some 18-year old  student in college and if it was                                                               
their  first shoplifting  offense, they  would write  a citation,                                                               
send them home, and never take them  down to the station.  By the                                                               
same token, he said,  if it was a 26-year old  with a long string                                                               
of  other crimes  but never  arrested for  a theft  offense, they                                                               
would take  them to the  station.  Generally, he  commented, when                                                               
they  had  people with  no  prior  record,  the people  were  not                                                               
threatened with jail at any point in time.                                                                                      
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX said that Chair Claman proved her point.                                                                  
7:42:52 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX   commented  that,  generally   there  are                                                               
decent, fair-minded people  on both sides of issues,  and she had                                                               
noticed, "in this hearing, at  least" all of the folks supporting                                                               
SB 54  do not want to  see it strengthened, and  certainly do not                                                               
want  a repeal  of Senate  Bill 91.   Representative  LeDoux said                                                               
that  in speaking  as the  attorney  general of  this state  "you                                                               
probably know  lots of  attorneys, lots of  folks" and  asked the                                                               
name of  a bright and  articulate person who would  disagree with                                                               
her analysis.                                                                                                                   
ATTORNEY  GENERAL  LINDEMUTH  answered  that she  does  not  know                                                               
anyone who  has really looked at  this issue and come  out strong                                                               
in repealing Senate  Bill 91, or criminal justice  reform.  Those                                                               
folks  who  have looked  at  this  issue,  including all  of  the                                                               
commissioners  on the  commission  representing criminal  justice                                                               
agencies, judges  at every level, mental  health authorities, and                                                               
everyone involved, believe the state  should continue on and make                                                               
these changes that the commission  recommends, but not go further                                                               
and  not  do  a  complete  reverse  and  end  up  with  something                                                               
completely different.                                                                                                           
7:44:52 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX questioned,  "So, you  know nobody  in the                                                               
entire legal  community that you have  any respect for.   I mean,                                                               
what  about  Mr.  Campion [former  Anchorage  District  Attorney,                                                               
Clint Campion] who might have a different opinion."                                                                             
ATTORNEY  GENERAL  LINDEMUTH  advised  that she  spoke  with  Mr.                                                               
Campion about this  very issue, and his view is  aligned with the                                                               
Department of  Law's view.   She  stated that  he believes  SB 54                                                               
should pass  and that there  may be  future tweaks needed  in the                                                               
future, but he  is ... "I mean  I see you shaking  your head, but                                                               
I've had  that discussion with him,  and you are welcome  to call                                                               
him  and ask  him to  testify."   She related  that she  does not                                                               
believe  Mr. Campion  was arguing  for something  that goes  much                                                               
further than what  has been put forth, and  Mr. Campion's biggest                                                               
concern  is to  give  DOL  the resources  it  needs to  prosecute                                                               
7:45:46 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  LEDOUX said  she thought  one of  the reasons  he                                                               
resigned was that  he said how difficult it was  in light of both                                                               
the lack of resources and Senate Bill 91.                                                                                       
CHAIR  CLAMAN  said  that  rather   than  arguing  about  hearsay                                                               
statements reported  in the newspaper,  he would endeavor  to see                                                               
whether Mr. Campion was available.                                                                                              
ATTORNEY  GENERAL  LINDEMUTH  commented  that  that  is  not  her                                                               
understanding of  why Mr.  Campion left, and  opined that  he had                                                               
another opportunity he wished to pursue.                                                                                        
7:46:53 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  EASTMAN  referred  to how  the  state  calculates                                                               
recidivism,  and offered  a scenario  of  someone committing  two                                                               
crimes, wherein they  shoplifted to the point  they received some                                                               
jailtime, and they are then released  and do it again.  He opined                                                               
that would count  against the state's recidivism goals.   He said                                                               
that post Senate  Bill 91, if that same  individual commits those                                                               
same crimes but  not put in jail, whether they  count against the                                                               
state's recidivism,  or has recidivism  been reduced "and  we can                                                               
declare victory."                                                                                                               
ATTORNEY  GENERAL  LINDEMUTH  surmised  that a  recidivist  is  a                                                               
person  who  has a  conviction  and  receives another  conviction                                                               
within  a certain  period  of  time.   It  does  not depend  upon                                                               
whether  there  was  actual  jailtime  served,  it  depends  upon                                                               
whether there was another conviction, she explained.                                                                            
7:48:10 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   EASTMAN  noted   that   legislators  have   been                                                               
encouraged to  let the  process work with  regard to  Senate Bill                                                               
91,  and  absent  public  support for  these  reforms,  he  asked                                                               
whether it can work.                                                                                                            
ATTORNEY GENERAL  LINDEMUTH commented  that obviously  the public                                                               
needs to generally  buy into the system and feel  that the system                                                               
works,  and  part  of  that  system  is  an  education  piece  to                                                               
understand how the  system works.  She pointed out  that a lot of                                                               
blame has  been put upon  Senate Bill 91  that had nothing  to do                                                               
with Senate  Bill 91.  She  suggested educating the public  as to                                                               
what is  being fixed in  SB 54  versus resource issues,  and that                                                               
DOL is not prosecuting certain  types of offenses because it does                                                               
not  have  enough  prosecutors.    The State  of  Alaska  had  an                                                               
unworkable system,  it was not  functional and would have  cost a                                                               
lot  of money  going forward  as a  state, and  the state  needed                                                               
better outcomes, she said.                                                                                                      
7:50:00 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN surmised that a  degree of buy-in from the                                                               
public is necessary in order for it  to work, and "those of us on                                                               
the ground" are  sensing that the buy-in may not  be present, and                                                               
asked whether the  department has a plan as to  how that could be                                                               
ATTORNEY  GENERAL  LINDEMUTH  reiterated  that a  lot  of  it  is                                                               
education and outreach, having these  types of hearings available                                                               
to the  public is  helpful, and  she said she  has been  on radio                                                               
show programs, as  have others, discussing these  issues, such as                                                               
what are  criminal reform issues,  what is a resource  issue, how                                                               
those  things  fit  together,  and   how  is  the  opioid  crisis                                                               
generally  impacting society.   Governor  Walker tasked  her with                                                               
putting  together a  Public Safety  Action Plan  where the  state                                                               
could  take concrete  steps  to improve  public  safety, and  she                                                               
pointed out that SB 54 is just  the first fix, the public is owed                                                               
a  plan as  to how  the state  is going  to tackle  public safety                                                               
moving forward.   Rolling back  Senate Bill 91 altogether  is not                                                               
what she is  recommending.  There are many other  things to do as                                                               
a  state and  she hopes  to roll  that plan  out shortly,  so the                                                               
public  may buy-in  and know  that something  is happening.   She                                                               
referred  to   her  press  conference  with   the  United  States                                                               
Attorney's Office last  week, and advised that  the Department of                                                               
Law (DOL) is  partnering with its federal  law enforcement agency                                                               
partners  to  take   on  violent  crime,  do   more  with  better                                                               
corroboration  and cooperation,  and  super-charge those  efforts                                                               
focused on  the most  violent criminals in  Alaska.   She advised                                                               
that things are taking place to  improve public safety, but it is                                                               
a matter  of educating  all of  Alaska about  where the  state is                                                               
going, what is  being done, and not being reactive  to a public's                                                               
opinion that may be uninformed.                                                                                                 
7:52:14 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE KOPP  noted that  for 23-years  he took  people to                                                               
jail almost every day and  have arrested "many thousands," and he                                                               
has seen  multi-generations of family members  repeating the same                                                               
particular  offense patterns.    He  said he  would  like DOL  to                                                               
review the issue of, how to keep  a tail over people who have had                                                               
a drug  possession offense, how  to keep them honest,  clean, and                                                               
in treatment doing what they should  do, and not make a felon out                                                               
of  them   because  that  question,   literally,  has   not  been                                                               
discussed.   He asked whether  the state  has to "make  someone a                                                               
felon  before we  can  help  them."   Thanks  to CourtView,  that                                                               
arrest, even  if it is  dismissed and  goes away can  keep people                                                               
unemployable for  the rest of  their lives for even  a first-time                                                               
offense, he said.  It is  true, he commented, police officers are                                                               
frustrated when they  do not see a good result  come out of their                                                               
work effort and  risk, there is a saying, "You  can beat the rap,                                                               
but you  can't beat  the ride."   Although, he  acknowledged that                                                               
may make  a police officer  feel good for the  moment, ultimately                                                               
everyone wants to  see a long-term change  in someone's behavior,                                                               
and to  especially not  pass it  on to the  next generation.   He                                                               
suggested finding a  way to allow DOL prosecution to  have a hold                                                               
on someone  without that  hold turning into  a showing  that they                                                               
were arrested for  a first-time felony, even if it  was pled down                                                               
to a misdemeanor.  The  focus is not allowing youthful first-time                                                               
offenders to  become felons for  life, even when they  were never                                                               
convicted because it  will be on CourtView for the  rest of their                                                               
lives.  That is a real  challenge, he expressed.  There have been                                                               
discussions  about   the  huge   cost  to  all   Alaskans  around                                                               
unemployability and  public assistance, and for  every person out                                                               
there who  becomes a felon, "we  carry that as a  society for the                                                               
rest of their  lives."  In the event a  person deserves a felony,                                                               
they  should receive  a  felony,  he pointed  out,  but "for  our                                                               
first-time, in particular, our youthful  offenders, to be able to                                                               
prevent that,  we are  literally saving  the next  generation" by                                                               
keeping them  in the work  pool, keeping them alive,  and keeping                                                               
them successful.                                                                                                                
7:56:04 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MILLETT  countered   that  accountability  is  an                                                               
established  belief with  prison time  as a  deterrent, and  more                                                               
people  will commit  crimes when  lessening the  penalties.   She                                                               
asked  whether Attorney  General  Lindemuth had  read an  article                                                               
from  a group  of  police chiefs  who believe  the  cart was  put                                                               
before the  horse, and asked  whether the legislature  should not                                                               
listen to the experts and people  on the ground who are trying to                                                               
protect the public yet taking away their tools.                                                                                 
ATTORNEY  GENERAL  LINDEMUTH  responded  that she  had  read  the                                                               
article  and pointed  out that  the first  recommendation in  the                                                               
article was  to pass SB  54, which  would be her  starting point.                                                               
The testimonies  of law enforcement  and prosecutors lead  to the                                                               
recommendations, and then  the vote by the  commission, and those                                                               
recommendations lead to  SB 54.  She  acknowledged frustration at                                                               
the law  enforcement level that  may go  further than SB  54, and                                                               
she invited law enforcement to  testify before the commission, so                                                               
it  can  continue  vetting  these issues.    She  explained  that                                                               
whatever is passed  now is not written in stone,  and it does not                                                               
mean the  various entities cannot  continue considering  where to                                                               
move  forward.   For  example, she  advised,  law enforcement  is                                                               
struggling with the Title 47  holds and intoxicated folks, noting                                                               
there is a  line between intoxication and  incapacitation and how                                                               
that plays  out will be  further vetted  by the commission.   She                                                               
said she disagrees  if what is being recommended is  to walk away                                                               
from what has taken place  because the commission is committed to                                                               
the process and hearing from law enforcement.                                                                                   
8:00:08 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   KOPP   stressed   that    he   wanted   to   let                                                               
Representative Millett  know that  she misunderstood what  he had                                                               
stated.   He explained to  her that he had  asked DOL to  look at                                                               
just first-time drug possession  offenses for youthful offenders,                                                               
and he did not  speak to any other felonies.  He  said, "I am not                                                               
about  to advocate  lightening felony  sentencing  for all  those                                                               
other categories.  I want to look  at what are we doing with kids                                                               
on the first-time drug offense,  how do we keep them accountable,                                                               
and get that first felony rap."                                                                                                 
CHAIR CLAMAN advised that his point was well taken.                                                                             
[Chair Claman returned the committee to public testimony.]                                                                      
8:01:31 PM                                                                                                                    
TARA RICH,  Legal and Policy  Director, American  Civil Liberties                                                               
Union of Alaska, advised that  the American Civil Liberties Union                                                               
of  Alaska (ACLU)  is calling  on the  legislature to  take quick                                                               
action on  SB 54,  and opined that  the committee  has absolutely                                                               
identified  that there  has been  a confluence  of circumstances.                                                               
Originally, she explained, ACLU's perspective  was that it is too                                                               
early to start  picking apart Senate Bill 91  and making changes,                                                               
except  with  the state's  economic  crisis,  an opioid  epidemic                                                               
exploding in  the state,  and vehicle  theft exploding,  the ACLU                                                               
understands that  this may be a  needed a change.   She responded                                                               
to a  couple of suggestions  made during  this hearing as  to the                                                               
danger in  basing further substantive  changes to Senate  Bill 91                                                               
on fear or  anecdotal testimony and not research  and data, while                                                               
pointing out that DOL had mentioned  last week that a full repeal                                                               
of  Senate Bill  91  would be  dangerous.   She  referred to  the                                                               
suggestion  of  pausing  phase  one,  and  remarked  that  it  is                                                               
important  to  think  about  what that  means,  such  that,  when                                                               
advising to either  repeal or put a pause on  phase one of Senate                                                               
Bill  91, the  discussion is  about sending  more people  back to                                                               
jail or  incarcerating further people.   She pointed out  that it                                                               
comes back to the question, "How  should we spend the money," and                                                               
Alaska does not  have infinite resources and  the legislature has                                                               
to choose.  She said it reminds  her of the adage, "Don't tell me                                                               
what your  values are,  show me  your budgets  and I'll  tell you                                                               
what your values  are."  She asked whether  the legislature wants                                                               
to take  action and  go through  the continuum  of care  that Mr.                                                               
Razo had discussed, such as  preparing for release before someone                                                               
is released,  assisting in  reentry, reinvestment,  and diverting                                                               
people away from the criminal justice system versus continuing                                                                  
to use jails as warehouses for the mentally ill as a catch-all.                                                                 
8:04:09 PM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR CLAMAN advised public testimony would continue during the                                                                 
October 24, 2017 meeting, at 6:00 p.m.                                                                                          
8:06:21 PM                                                                                                                    
There being no further business before the committee, the House                                                                 
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 8:06 p.m.                                                                 

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
SB54 ver N 10.23.17.PDF HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/26/2017 9:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Sponsor Statement ver N 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Sectional Summary ver N 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Summary of Changes (ver. A to ver. N) 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Bill Contents ver N 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 ACJC Recommendations 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Alaska Criminal Justice Commission Annual Report 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Supporting Document-Letters of Support 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Supporting Document-Letter ACLU 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Opposing Document-Letter CUSP 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Bill Presentation 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 ACJC Presentation 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Fiscal Note DPS-DET 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Fiscal Note LAW-CRIM 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Fiscal Note DHSS-PS 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Fiscal Note JUD-ACS 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54
SB54 Fiscal Note DOC-IDO 10.23.17.pdf HJUD 10/23/2017 1:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/24/2017 9:00:00 AM
HJUD 10/24/2017 6:00:00 PM
HJUD 10/25/2017 8:00:00 AM
SB 54