Legislature(2009 - 2010)CAPITOL 120
01/30/2009 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview(s): Department of Corrections | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
January 30, 2009
1:44 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jay Ramras, Chair
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom, Vice Chair
Representative John Coghill
Representative Carl Gatto
Representative Bob Lynn
Representative Max Gruenberg
Representative Lindsey Holmes
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
OVERVIEW(S): DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
SAMUEL EDWARDS, Deputy Commissioner
Office of the Commissioner - Anchorage
Department of Corrections (DOC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an overview of the Department of
Corrections (DOC).
BRYAN BRANDENBURG, Deputy Director
Division of Institutions
Department of Corrections (DOC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During overview of the Department of
Corrections, answered questions.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:44:24 PM
CHAIR JAY RAMRAS called the House Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:44 p.m. Representatives Ramras, Gatto,
Holmes, and Coghill were present at the call to order.
Representatives Lynn, Gruenberg, and Dahlstrom arrived as the
meeting was in progress.
^OVERVIEW(S): DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
1:44:46 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS indicated that the only order of business would be
the overview by the Department of Corrections (DOC). He then
made note of the decline in the incarcerated population and
applauded all arms of DOC, law enforcement, and the court system
for that decline.
1:45:50 PM
SAMUEL EDWARDS, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner
- Anchorage, Department of Corrections (DOC), relayed that his
overview will compare where DOC was in the past to where it is
today. In January 2007, the mission statement for DOC was to
protect the public by incarcerating and supervising prisoners.
However, that mission statement has since been altered to
specify that DOC seeks to enhance the safety of Alaska's
communities, provide secure confinement, reformative programs,
and a process of supervised community reintegration. The
aforementioned change in the mission statement was an attempt to
address the department's largest problem, recidivism. He
related that DOC has been a relatively stable department, staff
wise, in the first two years [of the Palin Administration].
MR. EDWARDS highlighted that Alaska is one of only six states
that is unified, which means that DOC operates the jails and the
prisons. Nationwide, most corrections departments deal with
sentenced felons in a prison environment. In state there are 12
correctional institutions with a total population capacity of
3,604 general beds and 3,715 maximum capacity beds. The
aforementioned represents actual beds and is an increase of 500
beds from what was reported to the committee [in the prior
administration]. Approximately, 130 of those beds are located
in the gymnasium in Fairbanks and the Anchorage Complex West.
1:50:02 PM
MR. EDWARDS clarified that when [the Palin Administration]
arrived the population in the institutions was at 108 percent of
capacity and was as high as 117 percent at one point. Using the
old [bed] numbers, today [the population] would be at 102
percent [of capacity]. However, under the new numbers [the
population] is at 93 percent of capacity. Although it might
sound as though there are extra beds in the institutions, that's
not the case. He acknowledged that there are a few beds
available in all the facilities.
1:51:14 PM
[Members briefly listed the DOC facilities they've had an
opportunity to tour.]
CHAIR RAMRAS inquired as to how DOC counts beds and heads in a
typical correctional facility, such as the Fairbanks gymnasium
that has 90 temporary beds, "boats."
1:53:41 PM
MR. EDWARDS explained that prior to January 2007, in Fairbanks,
the department counted the design-capacity beds in the
institution without counting the beds in the gymnasium for a
total of 226 beds. Under the [Palin Administration] the
existing 90 beds in the gymnasium were counted as over the
operational capacity of the institution. He explained that DOC
then counted all real beds, not "boats," but that still included
two gymnasiums. One of those gymnasiums was in Fairbanks and
accounted for 90 beds, which was added to the aforementioned
capacity. When those 90 beds are removed from the count, which
is the intention within the next couple of months, the capacity
in Fairbanks will be reduced by 90. Mr. Edwards specified that
every real bed in any of the 12 facilities was added and is part
of the capacity of the institution. Therefore, when department
staff say, "We're at 100 percent departmentally." that means
there is a real bed for every person in those institutions
without those people being placed in a "boat."
1:55:37 PM
MR. EDWARDS, in response to Chair Ramras, clarified that the 108
percent was departmentwide, and therefore Fairbanks would have
to be reviewed individually with regard to its excess capacity.
CHAIR RAMRAS surmised, then, that the current 93 percent doesn't
include the temporary bed facilities. Therefore, it's been a
significant real reduction.
MR. EDWARDS replied yes.
1:56:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO questioned whether a facility can "cap out"
its space because there isn't enough kitchen space or is
capacity always defined by where a bed can be placed.
MR. EDWARDS confirmed that facilities can "cap out" because the
kitchen, medical, maintenance, or laundry facility isn't able to
support more people not because there isn't more space for beds.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO interjected that the capacity of fire exits
could also be a limitation.
MR. EDWARDS concurred, adding that there are also limits related
to personal space as well as ratios at which it isn't efficient
or safe to operate. In further response to Representative
Gatto, Mr. Edwards explained that the American Correctional
Association accreditation process specifies how much space is
necessary for various things such as per prisoner, plumbing
fixtures, day room space, and etcetera.
1:58:51 PM
MR. EDWARDS turned attention to the Anchorage Complex, which has
a design capacity of 852, although it has consistently reached
to 1,000 in the past. However, today the Anchorage Complex is
15 beds under its capacity. The aforementioned was a major
accomplishment as it evaluated that situation and moved people
to balance institutions.
2:00:02 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS asked Mr. Edwards to comment about what occurs to
those who are incarcerated and the corrections officers when the
facility populations are better managed.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL then asked to hear about the movement of
prisoners, noting that a pre-trial facility has a very different
movement of prisoners than do other facilities.
2:01:14 PM
MR. EDWARDS surmised that in any correctional facility,
regardless of whether it is a pre-trial or sentence facility, as
long as there is sufficient room for prisoners to [have adequate
personal space] and common space for various activities, the
more relaxed the population. The more crowded a facility, the
more tense the atmosphere. The aforementioned applies to the
staff as well. Mr. Edwards explained that DOC has attempted to
gain more space by moving people from the Anchorage Complex who
are pre-trial and place them in an in-take facility. However,
when capacity in an in-take facility is exceeded, those who are
of less risk or have court dates in the future are identified
and moved to another facility in order to not overcrowd the
Anchorage Complex. Mr. Edwards then mentioned that more
correctional officers, a total of 769, are on staff plus 11
staff with start dates in the first part of February, which will
then bring the total to 780.
2:04:12 PM
MR. EDWARDS, in response to Chair Ramras, clarified that
correctional officers and probation officers are not included in
the hiring freeze announced by the administration. He confirmed
that the aforementioned means that if employees are lost, the
department can recruit and replace those employees.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL noted that one issue that has arisen in
the past is in regard to how to allow prisons that don't have
pre-trial [capabilities] to continue a contiguous program of
recovery. He surmised that when capacity is reached and pre-
trial individuals are brought in another morale issue with the
inmates and the officers occurs. He asked if the aforementioned
is a correct assumption. He also asked if there is some way to
work with the aforementioned situation.
MR. EDWARDS concurred that when a short-term person is moved
into a long-term sentence facility, that pre-trial person isn't
settled. Therefore, pre-trial individuals aren't able to get
involved in any long-term program that may be available. For
the long-term prisoners in the facility, they have to become
accustomed to those who are coming and going. That's certainly
disruptive, he remarked.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL related his understanding that long-term
prisoners would be bumped throughout the state due to crowding
related to pre-trial individuals. He recalled hearing
complaints that those [long-term prisoners who are bumped
throughout the state] aren't able to complete programs that
would've provided them credit on their sentence for good time.
2:06:47 PM
BRYAN BRANDENBURG, Deputy Director, Division of Institutions,
Department of Corrections (DOC), said Representative Coghill's
understanding has been true in the past. However, due to the
current administration, and in part thanks to legislative
funding, there will be five different short-term three-month
long intensive outpatient substance abuse programs in place by
the end of February. The aforementioned programs are level two
programs, which meet court requirements. He noted that within
[the aforementioned programs] there is a court-approved anger
management program. Those programs along with existing long-
term level three programs would seem to allow the opportunity
for more of the state's inmates to complete and obtain [good
time] credit from those programs.
CHAIR RAMRAS recalled reading in a Fairbanks newspaper that
because of overcrowding the prison chapel had been moved, made
smaller. He expressed the importance of the option of a faith-
based program for inmates. Chair Ramras then recalled a meeting
in Fairbanks with some Alaska Natives who were very concerned
with regard to cultural events and the ability to receive unique
cultural foods in the prisons, particularly in the Arizona
prison. He requested that Mr. Edwards address the
aforementioned at the appropriate time.
2:10:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES requested an update on the use of
electronic monitoring devices and whether that's helping with
the overcrowding issue.
MR. EDWARDS recalled that in January 2007, electronic monitoring
numbers statewide totaled about 194. Within the first year of
the administration, the staff involved in the electronic
monitoring program was evaluated, specifically in the Anchorage
area. He further recalled that there were five correctional
officers in addition to the compliment of probation officers who
staffed that unit. The correctional officers were on loan, so
to speak, from the [Anchorage] Correctional Complex. At the
time the [Anchorage] Correctional Complex was understaffed and
using a lot of overtime. The [five correctional officers on
loan] were returned to the [Anchorage Correctional Complex],
after which there was a corresponding drop in the use of
electronic monitoring for months. The department sought answers
from the electronic monitoring staff with regard to why there
was a drop in use and how use could be increased.
MR. EDWARDS then reminded members that House Bill 90 also had an
impact on the use of electronic monitoring because those [not
using electronic monitoring] who serve time in a halfway house
or some other 24-hour facility receive good time for the time
served. However, those who used electronic monitoring would not
receive good time for the time served. Still, some were willing
to use electronic monitoring because they could live at home,
and there was practically no disruption of work and family life.
The use of electronic monitoring today totals 184-200, which is
close to the level prior to the aforementioned two occurrences.
2:14:15 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS questioned whether gang activity is occurring in
DOC facilities. He then requested that Mr. Edwards discuss
drugs and contraband inside the facilities as well as what it
would mean to offer death row accommodations. Chair Ramras
informed everyone that the House Judiciary Standing Committee
would introduce legislation regarding obscuring personal
information, including correctional officers' home address, in
an attempt to provide an additional layer of safety for
correctional officers.
2:15:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM inquired as to whether the
accreditation standards, space and activities, are different
depending upon the prisoner's sentence.
CHAIR RAMRAS relayed that the committee is mainly interested in
the policies held by DOC rather than a statistical inventory.
The committee, he said, is interested in what it can do to
enhance the department's policy initiatives.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN interjected interest in hearing any change
in policy suggestions that might help the department address any
problems.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked whether the Arizona prison population
is included in Mr. Edward's statistics.
MR. EDWARDS said that Arizona's population figures are included
in the overall counts of things such as furlough, halfway house
participation, and recidivism. However, Arizona's population
figures wouldn't be included in the capacity percentages. Any
statistics regarding programming or supervision once [inmates
are] released is the same for Arizona's population as that for
the population in Alaska.
2:19:12 PM
MR. EDWARDS, continuing his presentation, informed the committee
that DOC has received authority and funding for three temporary
houses in the Palmer Correctional Center. Those were to have 19
beds each. All are completed and the third house will come on
line February 1, 2009. The aforementioned provides an
additional 57 [beds]. In Fairbanks, space was reconfigured and
ultimately will provide 38 more beds that should be on line
within the next two months. He highlighted that the additional
beds in Anchorage will be permanent beds that won't be removed
at a later date.
MR. EDWARDS remarked that the institutions receive most of the
attention because those are the 24-hour facilities to which the
majority of the budget is directed. He then noted that there
has been significant interest in the Division of Probation and
Parole, which has historically experienced difficulty filling
all the probation officer vacancies. However, at this point
every probation officer position in the division has been filled
with the funding available.
2:21:28 PM
MR. EDWARDS relayed that there were 240 fewer revocations on the
streets in 2008 than in 2007, due in part to the increased
number of probation officers. [More staff] allow officers the
ability to deal with their caseloads versus when there were
vacancies in their offices. Mr. Edwards also attributed the
reduction to education of the officers that one way to protect
the public is to work [offenders] through [the system] so as not
to have to re-incarcerate individuals. He then turned to the
benefit of transitioning a prisoner from a prison/jail setting
through a community residential center prior to that prisoner's
release. Prior to the [Palin Administration] there were 614
residential community residential beds throughout the state
whereas today there are 753 such beds. He highlighted the
ability to fill those beds on any given day whereas at [the
onset of the current administration] there were empty beds, even
at the reduced numbers of beds.
2:23:33 PM
MR. EDWARDS moved on to the facility in Arizona. He related
that when [the Palin Administration] began there were 1,060
prisoners in the Red Rock facility in Arizona. Today, there are
a bit over 880 prisoners in that facility, with funding for 900.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked whether Arizona is still receptive to
receiving Alaskan inmates.
MR. EDWARDS relayed that Arizona's Department of Corrections and
governor are currently discussing what types of prisoners it's
willing to accept. He acknowledged that although there aren't
limitations currently, there may be in the future. In further
response to Representative Gatto, Mr. Edwards said that he
receives information from the company in Arizona, Corrections
Corporation of America, from which the department leases beds.
2:26:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES asked whether DOC has a position as to
whether it would prefer to have enough beds in the state so that
all of Alaska's prisoners would be housed in the state or is
that uneconomic.
MR. EDWARDS reminded the committee that when [the Palin
Administration] arrived there was already a plan in place to
bring all the prisoners being housed out-of-state back to
Alaska. Although that plan has a reduced scope, it remains in
place.
2:27:34 PM
MR. EDWARDS, continuing his presentation, relayed that by the
end of this fiscal year DOC hopes to bring 68 more beds on line
at the Wildwood Correctional Center in Kenai. He explained that
it would be a minimum work release facility that would house
lower risk, minimum custody prisoners while serving a furlough
function for Anchorage as well. Presently, there's not the
ability to furlough an individual in the Kenai area, and
therefore those who are eligible to leave the facility in
furlough are sent to Anchorage, which doesn't provide the
opportunity for such individuals to look for housing and
employment in the community in which they plan on living.
2:29:01 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS complimented Mr. Edwards on the ability to tweak
the system around the 12 facilities in a manner that provides
relief. He then related his understanding that DOC is trying to
keep people in Kenai so that they can find their way back to
work. Furthermore, it seems that electronic monitoring is being
used in a successful manner that is good for the population and
the public.
MR. EDWARDS noted that DOC has an experienced team that knows
the facilities and the issues in the facilities.
2:32:37 PM
MR. EDWARDS related that the commissioner reviewed staff, what
they were budgeted for, and that each position was located in
the appropriate area. The aforementioned has been done, whereas
the department is still reviewing the function and the type of
person being supervised continues. He opined that the hope is
for a continual positive impact on safety, re-entry, and the
recidivism rate. The aforementioned is accomplished, he opined,
by placing individuals in the appropriate facilities to take
advantage of the appropriate programs to prepare themselves for
an upcoming release.
2:34:12 PM
[Chair Ramras passed the gavel over to Vice Chair Dahlstrom.]
MR. EDWARDS recalled hearing a probation officer who spoke about
probation supervision in the field. That probation officer said
that the population could be broken down into thirds, one third
of which will succeed regardless of what occurs in the system,
while another third likely wouldn't succeed regardless of the
system, and the one third in the middle is the population to
which DOC should focus the majority of its resource. The third
in the middle, this probation officer relayed, is the group
through which the 66 percent national recidivism rate could be
addressed.
2:35:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES inquired as to how difficult it is to
identify each third of the incarcerated population.
MR. BRANDENBURG replied that [the department] is in the process
of reviewing its classification system, which is about 20 years
old and tends to over classify the population. Therefore, the
desire is to find a way to review that classification system
such that it allows identification of those who are at higher
risk as well as those who are at lower risk. He specified that
research indicates that only 11 percent of the lower third of
the incarcerated population will recidivate, which is fairly low
when viewed in the context of existing trends. The middle
third, which is the group upon which to focus resources,
recidivates at a rate of 15-45 percent, he related. The upper
end population consists of the long-term inmates for which
research says that resources spent on this population tend to
make them better criminals. A tool that the department is
reviewing for use is the level of service inventory (LSIR),
which provides a risk and needs assessment for each individual.
The department is performing pilot studies with LSIR in order to
determine whether it would be useful as a sentence and custody
tool to determine in which programs the person should be
involved.
2:38:05 PM
MR. BRANDENBURG, in response to an earlier question, related
that 80 percent of the [incarcerated] population will be
released from prison. Only 20 percent of the population will
remain incarcerated and the longer term inmates are housed at
the Red Rock and Spring Creek facilities. The housing for the
aforementioned inmates isn't that different than the rest of the
population. Because so many of the inmates will be released,
the department has begun to develop some re-entry programs
within the halfway house as well as the facilities to help
enhance the opportunities for the inmates once they leave the
facilities. The focus is on job skills, education, treatment,
housing, sobriety support groups, and reunification with
families in an effort to ensure that those inmates don't return.
All of the aforementioned is in its infancy, and just recently a
pilot project was started at Spring Creek in which re-entry and
transitions are the focus.
2:39:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HOLMES expressed appreciation that DOC is placing
an emphasis on re-entry and recidivism.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO questioned whether there as been a study to
determine whether sending a prisoner to Arizona, compared with
keeping the prisoner in Alaska, has an influence on the
recidivism rates.
MR. BRANDENBURG said no such study to differentiate between the
populations in Arizona versus in Alaska has been conducted.
However, he pointed out that there are studies that discuss
visitation and the impact it has on recidivism. The finding is
that in populations in which inmates have contact with their
families, there tends to be a lower recidivism rate. He offered
to make a copy of the aforementioned study available to the
committee.
MR. EDWARDS pointed out that due to the size of our state, the
reality is that a prisoner from rural Alaska who is sent to a
facility in Alaska but outside their hometown/region isn't much
more likely than those prisoners sent to Arizona to receive
visitation by family members. Still, the courts are reviewing
the visitation aspect in relation to whether the state can send
inmates to Arizona. If it's determined that consideration has
to be given regarding whether an inmate has the possibility of
visitation, such would impact rehabilitation as well as the
ability to manage the population.
2:42:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO questioned whether a certain amount of
visitation from members of the clergy, the Salvation Army, or
college students would count. He asked if the aforementioned
visitors would be considered the same as family visitors.
MR. EDWARDS answered that the aforementioned visitation is very
important in helping a person adjust. However, in the instances
in which the court was reviewing visitation it was specific to
family visitation.
2:43:26 PM
MR. EDWARDS reminded the committee that when DOC was before it
last it had a project related to the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) requirements regarding self-
contained breathing apparatus in the institutions. The
department decided to keep the self-contained breathing
apparatus in the facilities as they are a valuable tool.
However, he clarified that the department wasn't asking its
staff to be firefighters, without training, or perform rescue
efforts. Still, the department felt the apparatus would be
important to have during the process of evacuating facilities.
Mr. Edwards related his understanding that the department could
proceed with the apparatus and the FIT testing process. The
equipment to perform the FIT testing should be available by the
end of this month or early February and should begin in the
institutions in February as well.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL inquired as to what the department is
requiring of its staff and what investments the department is
making in those areas in terms of workforce development.
MR. EDWARDS explained that the department went to the National
Institute of Corrections to receive help in identifying
leadership training programs in which the staff could become
involved at mid-level, senior-level, and executive-level
training. The mid-level training was completed and 23
individuals graduated from that program. Aside from creating a
more valuable employee in the department and preparing employees
for advancement, the department identified projects of interest
to the department for the employees to research during the
training. The issues staff worked on included health and diet
for the institutions, the information technology program, the
classification process, as well as facility expansion. While
the staff performed the aforementioned research, they formed
networks that should last several years and provide knowledge as
to the various aspects of the department. Therefore, there
would be people who would be ready to fill [higher level]
positions as needed. For the first time in many years, [the
department] has its own correctional academy. Mr. Edwards noted
that the department has ran more correctional and probation
officer academies than in the past because more staff has been
hired. Even more staff will be brought on as the prison in
Point Mackenzie is closer to completion.
2:50:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL noted that there has been discussion
regarding control of contagious diseases and keeping officers
safe. He acknowledged that a significant portion of the
incarcerated population have mental health issues. He asked
therefore, whether there is good council for staff who aren't
trained in mental health issues. He further asked if there is
staff who helps navigate those incoming inmates who [have mental
health issues].
2:51:10 PM
MR. BRANDENBURG explained that every inmate receives a screening
within the first 24 hours of admission and prior to being placed
in the open population. That screening includes a mental health
assessment. He informed the committee that nine of the
facilities have mental health clinicians who are on staff during
the week to receive referrals and perform assessments. If
necessary, telecommunication with the psychiatrist at the
central office can be utilized. Furthermore, the acute
psychiatric unit is located at the Cook Inlet facility, which is
basically an inpatient hospital for the more severe cases.
There are also mental health staff and a mental health director
who provide ongoing training for correctional officers in order
that they can be aware of and recognize the signs and symptoms
of mental illness and make referrals as appropriate.
2:52:59 PM
MR. EDWARDS noted that training new correctional and probation
officers is still a challenge, but has been helped with the
department's own correctional academy. With regard to training
and retention, Mr. Edwards opined that the management and
leadership training for which the department has partnered with
the National Institute of Corrections will pay dividends in the
long term.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL recalled the debate over 8-hour shifts as
compared to 12-hour shifts, which is a significant morale and
pay issue not to mention that it's a cost issue for the
department. He requested discussion on the aforementioned.
2:54:05 PM
MR. BRANDENBURG opined that the last thing a correctional
officer would ever willingly give up is the 12-hour shift,
especially due to the week off aspect. Officers plan their
lives around the week on week off schedule, which allows them to
do more. Furthermore, he recalled comments that two days aren't
enough to recover from an eight-hour work week whereas the week
off is.
2:55:51 PM
MR. EDWARDS reminded the committee that when he came on staff
the desire was to protect the public and maintain safe
environments in the correctional facilities. One of the primary
ways to achieve the aforementioned, aside from hiring and
retaining staff, was to focus on preparing those in the
institution dealing with any treatment issues to be ready to
enter halfway houses. Two of the primary things one must have
in order to be successful upon release are a place to live and a
way to earn a living. He noted that once the inmate is released
from custody and is under the supervision of probation and
parole, those individuals are supervised so that they have the
best opportunity to succeed. While it can be easy to catch
someone doing something wrong, it's a bit more difficult to get
to know a person in order to work with him/her to reenter
society.
MR. EDWARDS said he wasn't prepared to specify legislation that
would benefit the department. However, having an understanding
of the department's goals and being aware of any new legislation
that will impact DOC is important. With regard to an earlier
reference to the lack of chapel space and overcrowding, Mr.
Edwards didn't recall converting any faith-based space into
something not available to inmates nor would that be the
department's intention. On the issue of cultural foods and
traditions, such as potlatches, those are allowed in the Arizona
facility, although there are always complaints about the ability
to get into the Arizona facility after traveling there and about
the ability to receive cultural foods. Of course, security is
always of concern in regard to allowing cultural foods without
allowing contraband to enter the facility.
2:59:48 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS asked DOC to provide the committee with a status
report addressing the inmates' cultural connection in the
Arizona facility, which he characterized as a significant
matter.
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM suggested that the Alaska Rural Justice
System may be able to provide the committee with many of the
answers.
CHAIR RAMRAS indicated that the committee will provide DOC with
a written request on the aforementioned specific issue.
3:02:41 PM
CHAIR RAMRAS raised the issue of the proposed death penalty
legislation, and inquired as to what would be required were that
legislation to pass. He opined that it would likely require a
certain portion of a facility to be designated as a "death row"
as well as the cost of execution.
MR. EDWARDS answered that DOC is reviewing what the proposed
death penalty legislation would entail. However, he said that
the department doesn't have much information with regard to the
cost or required number of staff. The obvious requirements
would be housing for the executions. He suggested that the
department would either convert an existing facility or
construct a new facility. With regard to housing for death row
inmates, he informed the committee that there is some housing
that would be sufficient for that. However, death row inmates
wouldn't be mixed with the general prison population. The staff
to prisoner ratio would be higher in the death row facilities,
which he opined would place greater stress on that staff than
the average correctional officer experiences, particularly as an
execution date approaches.
3:06:37 PM
MR. EDWARDS, in response to Chair Ramras, specified that there
are relatively small numbers of gangs in Alaska's correctional
facilities. He acknowledged that it appears that on the streets
and news there is more gang activity and more of that activity
is more outrageous and with less regard for consequences.
However, the department hasn't noticed such widespread and
visible outrageous gang activity in Alaska's correctional
facilities. In further response to Chair Ramras, Mr. Edwards
said he didn't believe there had been any increase in drugs or
contraband in Alaska's correctional facilities. However, he
surmised that as long as individuals are incarcerated, there
will always be some level of contraband in the facilities.
Furthermore, there are those visitors whose sole intention is to
bring in contraband to the facilities, and therefore there is a
balance that is sought in regard to how intrusive to be with the
public entering the correctional facilities.
CHAIR RAMRAS asked whether protecting the addresses of
correctional offices and management would be recommended as an
additional safety precaution.
MR. EDWARDS said that's been an issue for as long as he could
remember. He recalled that it has been a problem when the
paperwork for an officer who was called as a witness listed the
officer's home address rather than his/her work address.
Correctional [and law enforcement] staff will always have
concern about their personal information being made public,
particularly to the prison population.
CHAIR RAMRAS surmised that as recidivism is reduced, fewer
crimes are committed. He applauded the strides the department
is making [in terms of lowering recidivism].
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM thanked the department for its work,
and acknowledged that they have 24-hour jobs.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN also thanked the department for its work.
He then noted that at one time he worked as a jailer in Tucson,
Arizona, for a couple of years, and characterized it as a tough
job.
3:15:01 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 3:15 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|