04/02/2024 03:00 PM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB330 | |
| HB228 | |
| HB190 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 330 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 228 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 190 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 2, 2024
3:05 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Laddie Shaw, Chair
Representative Stanley Wright, Vice Chair
Representative Ben Carpenter
Representative Ashley Carrick
Representative Andi Story
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Jamie Allard
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 330
"An Act relating to the use and possession of electronic devices
by prisoners."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 228
"An Act establishing the Alaska mental health and psychedelic
medicine task force; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 228(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 190
"An Act establishing a violation for hindering the Alaska Sunset
Commission; relating to the duties of the legislature;
establishing the Alaska Sunset Commission to review and make
recommendations on discontinuation of or changes to state
entities; relating to the powers and duties of the Alaska Sunset
Commission; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 330
SHORT TITLE: RESTRICT PRISONER ACCESS DIGITAL DEVICES
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) VANCE
02/15/24 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/15/24 (H) STA
03/26/24 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/26/24 (H) -- Testimony <Invitation Only> --
04/02/24 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 228
SHORT TITLE: MENTAL HEALTH/PSYCHEDELIC MED. TASK FORCE
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) ARMSTRONG
01/16/24 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/8/24
01/16/24 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/24 (H) HSS, STA, FIN
02/02/24 (H) MLV REPLACES HSS REFERRAL
02/02/24 (H) BILL REPRINTED
02/13/24 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
02/13/24 (H) Heard & Held
02/13/24 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
02/29/24 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
02/29/24 (H) Heard & Held
02/29/24 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
03/05/24 (H) MLV AT 1:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/05/24 (H) Moved CSHB 228(MLV) Out of Committee
03/05/24 (H) MINUTE(MLV)
03/06/24 (H) MLV RPT CS(MLV) 1DNP 4NR 1AM
03/06/24 (H) DNP: SADDLER
03/06/24 (H) NR: GROH, CARPENTER, SHAW, WRIGHT
03/06/24 (H) AM: GRAY
03/13/24 (H) FIN REFERRAL REMOVED
03/14/24 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/14/24 (H) Heard & Held
03/14/24 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/02/24 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 190
SHORT TITLE: ALASKA SUNSET COMMISSION
SPONSOR(s): WAYS & MEANS
05/03/23 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
05/03/23 (H) W&M, STA, FIN
05/08/23 (H) W&M AT 6:00 PM DAVIS 106
05/08/23 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
05/09/23 (H) W&M AT 6:00 PM DAVIS 106
05/09/23 (H) Heard & Held
05/09/23 (H) MINUTE(W&M)
01/24/24 (H) W&M AT 6:00 PM DAVIS 106
01/24/24 (H) Heard & Held
01/24/24 (H) MINUTE(W&M)
01/31/24 (H) W&M AT 6:00 PM DAVIS 106
01/31/24 (H) Heard & Held
01/31/24 (H) MINUTE(W&M)
02/14/24 (H) W&M AT 6:00 PM DAVIS 106
02/14/24 (H) Moved CSHB 190(W&M) Out of Committee
02/14/24 (H) MINUTE(W&M)
02/19/24 (H) W&M RPT CS(W&M) NEW TITLE 4DP 2NR
02/19/24 (H) DP: MCKAY, MCCABE, TILTON, CARPENTER
02/19/24 (H) NR: GRAY, GROH
03/12/24 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/12/24 (H) Heard & Held
03/12/24 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/26/24 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/26/24 (H) -- Invited & Public Testimony --
04/02/24 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE SARAH VANCE
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, presented HB 330.
BOB BALLINGER, Staff
Representative Sarah Vance
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a video during the presentation on
HB 330, on behalf of Representative Vance, prime sponsor.
PHILIP LICHT, President and CEO
Set Free Alaska
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony during the
hearing on HB 330.
JOHN PILCHER, Associate Vice President of Sales and Engineering
ViaPath Technologies
(No address provided)
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony during the
hearing on HB 330.
PELICIA HALL, Senior Vice President
ViaPath Technologies
Madison, Mississippi
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony during the
hearing on HB 330.
APRIL WILKERSON, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Corrections
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
330.
MICHAEL DEMOLINA, PhD, President
Wisdom Traditions
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 228.
REPRESENTATIVE JENNIFER ARMSTRONG
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
228, as prime sponsor.
REPRESENTATIVE BEN CARPENTER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 190, on behalf of the House
Special Committee on Ways and Means, prime sponsor, on which he
serves as chair.
ERIC BEVERLY, Executive Director
Texas Sunset Advisory Commission
Austin, Texas
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony during the
hearing on HB 190.
EMILY JOHNSON, Deputy Director for Reviews,
Texas Sunset Advisory Commission
Austin, Texas
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
190.
DONNA ARDUIN, Staff
Representative Ben Carpenter
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
190, on behalf of Representative Carpenter, prime sponsor.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:05:39 PM
CHAIR SHAW called the House State Affairs Standing Committee
meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. Representatives Carpenter,
Carrick, Story, Wright and Shaw were present at the call to
order.
HB 330-RESTRICT PRISONER ACCESS DIGITAL DEVICES
3:06:45 PM
CHAIR SHAW announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 330, "An Act relating to the use and possession
of electronic devices by prisoners."
3:07:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SARAH VANCE, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, introduced HB 330. She provided a sponsor statement,
[included in the committee packet], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
House Bill 330 embodies a common-sense and impactful
approach to correctional reform. By authorizing
institutions to provide prisoners with restricted
access to tablets for education, reentry, and
essential life purposes, this legislation extends
opportunity and a path toward successfully
reintegrating into society without the likelihood of
future criminal activity. This strategy for preparing
prisoners for successful reentry isn't primarily
rooted in compassion; it's also a strategic public
safety measure.
Recognizing the pivotal role education plays in
breaking the criminal cycle, HB 330 enables access to
limitless educational and programming resources
through tablets. By acknowledging the transformative
influence of learning in the rehabilitation process,
the bill prioritizes the State's long-term goal of
reintegrating individuals into society as productive
and law-abiding citizens, thereby preventing future
crimes and avoiding any future victims.
Allowing inmates restricted access to tablets does not
constitute a luxury or reward. To the contrary, in our
digital era, investing in education and rehabilitation
through technology isn't about being soft on crime;
it's about tackling the underlying causes of criminal
behavior, thereby reducing recidivism rates and
preventing new crimes.
Research consistently underscores how effective
education is in reducing the likelihood of an
individual committing a new crime. By equipping
individuals with the knowledge and skills required for
a constructive life, HB 330 not only enhances public
safety but also alleviates the financial strain linked
with incarcerating repeat offenders. The resultant
cost savings could potentially rescue the state
millions of dollars in the long run, rendering this
legislation a prudent investment in societal well-
being.
3:10:10 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
3:10:32 PM
BOB BALLINGER, Staff, Representative Sarah Vance, Alaska State
Legislature, provided a video during the presentation of HB 330,
on behalf of Representative Vance, prime sponsor. The video,
titled "DC jails and AWS CPC," described a partnership with
American Prison Data Systems and Amazon Webservices to help
provide cloud certification programs for incarcerated people.
3:14:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE provided a PowerPoint presentation, titled
"HB 330 Restrict Digital Access to Prisoners" [hard copy
included in the committee packet]. She stated that
participation in correctional education programs significantly
reduced the risk of recidivism. She moved to slide 4 and said
that those who are enrolled in post-secondary education programs
while incarcerated were 48 percent less likely to be
reincarcerated than those who do not pursue further education.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE moved to slide 5, titled "Path to
Employment," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Formerly incarcerated people are unemployed at a rate
of over 27 percent - higher than the total U.S.
unemployment rate during any historical period,
including the Great Depression
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE moved to slide 6, titled "Barriers to
Participation," which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Among the 57% of people in state prisons who had never
participated in education programming; 18% cite never
being offered the opportunity.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that research indicates that gainful
employment post-release significantly decreases the likelihood
of recidivism. Investing in skills developed during
incarceration is beneficial to individuals and the community.
She noted the barriers to educational opportunities due to
funding issues.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE moved to slide 7, titled "Educational
Aspirations of Prisoners," which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
70%
Want to participate in education
29%
Of the 70%, 29% want earn a certificate from a college
or trade school
18%
Of the 70%, 18% want to earn a certificate from a high
school diploma/GED or an Associate's degree
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE moved to slide 8, titled "Return on
Investment in Correctional Education," which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
For every dollar spent on correctional education, $5
is saved in three-year re-incarceration costs
- a 400% ROI
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that HB 330 enhances public safety and
results in cost savings. She made note of the attached zero
fiscal note. She explained that the bill also offers the
opportunity for incarcerated individuals to connect with their
legal counsel and families.
3:18:54 PM
PHILIP LICHT, President and CEO, Set Free Alaska, described
services offered to those who are reentering the community after
incarceration. He described that in his experience, the more
disconnected from their family and communities people become,
the more difficult it is to reintegrate them, and thus are more
likely to commit new crimes, which perpetuates the cycle.
MR. LICHT said he is a strong proponent of educational
opportunities for incarcerated individuals. Rehabilitation will
help with reintegration. He mentioned it can be a challenge to
provide services to incarcerated individuals due to
technological limitations within institutions. He mentioned
that his younger brother currently is incarcerated in Arizona
and has access to a tablet. He described the benefits for
incarcerated individuals to be able to communicate with family
members and participate in educational programs on the tablet.
He explained that families of people who are incarcerated pay
for the ability to text and contact the person through a third-
party program. He expressed his opinion that HB 330 could
benefit incarcerated individuals in Alaska.
3:23:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE passed around an example tablet on behalf
of the invited testimony from ViaPath Technologies.
3:24:15 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
3:24:41 PM
JOHN PILCHER, Associate Vice President of Sales and Engineering,
ViaPath Technologies, provided a demonstration of the purpose-
built tablet for corrections facilities and explained that each
offender would utilize their unique pin which is paired with a
photo for added security. He explained how the tablets were
designed with security in mind.
MR. PILCHER showed an inmate handbook that needs to be
acknowledged by the user before proceeding to use the tablet.
He showed a profile page, which has educational content
available to the offenders. He mentioned that offenders can
continue to access their educational accounts after
incarceration as they reintegrate into the community.
MR. PILCHER showed the education application and said that
teachers are given access to assign work. He discussed
electronic communication on the tablet, which provides a secure
environment for inmates to communicate with their families. No
apps or Internet access is available on the tablets other than
Department of Corrections (DOC) approved secured content.
MR. PILCHER explained that video visitation can be utilized on
tablets and has a secure internal system that can be monitored
and recorded by the facility.
3:29:45 PM
PELICIA HALL, Senior Vice President, ViaPath Technologies,
emphasized educational, vocational, family reunification
services, and substance abuse and mental health treatment
programs that are available through the program. She explained
that the tablets serve as a force multiplier for correctional
systems. She noted a lack of adequate staff in corrections
facilities across the country. Devices provide services at the
fingertips of incarcerated people. Communication services help
to ensure a pathway of rehabilitation and reentry. She
highlighted the stringent security of the devices.
3:32:11 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT asked for more information about how
incarcerated individuals can contact friends and family
utilizing the tablets.
MR. PILCHER explained that friends and family can request
contact with an offender and then DOC staff can approve or
disapprove the communication. The communications offered
include messaging and video calls.
3:33:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked about the fiscal note and whether
tablets already exist in the facilities.
REPRESENTATIVE VANCE said that the cost of the tablets would not
be incurred by the state. She explained that there are a
variety of third-party opportunities as well as payment by the
families of inmates for tablets.
3:34:14 PM
APRIL WILKERSON, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Corrections,
said that there is currently a pilot program that is limited and
is approved for attorney-client meetings. She said DOC is
working with the Parole Board to utilize ViaPath Technologies to
reduce the travel costs associated with parole hearings. She
said DOC is working with courts to undergo court hearings on the
tablets. She said there is currently a limited number of
tablets at the Goose Creek Correctional Center for video court
hearings.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY expressed her excitement about the bill.
She asked what HB 330 will mean to DOC.
MS. WILKERSON expressed the hope to increase efficiency and
expand program capabilities. The department hopes to deploy
telemedicine through tablets. She reported that in 2023, just
over 5,000 individuals were transported outside the institution
for medical purposes. Through preventative telemedicine,
medical costs for the incarcerated can be significantly reduced.
The implementation of tablets creates an opportunity to offset
manual processes like paper mail. She explained that requests
for information currently involve handwritten requests and
responses. Converting to an electronic process would generate
efficiency and alleviate manual processes.
3:38:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked if any security issues have arisen
within the pilot project.
MS. WILKERSON explained that there are currently only six active
tablets and about 300 are expected to be deployed by the end of
month. A slow roll-out will help to ensure security is
maintained within the institution.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked for more information about security.
MR. PILCHER explained that the tablet software is custom-built
for corrections. He described the internal wireless
infrastructure, which is installed by ViaPath Technologies and
is accessible only by ViaPath Technologies tablets.
3:40:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked who provides instruction for the
educational components of the software.
MS. HALL explained that ViaPath Technologies is partnered with
third parties who provide educational content. ViaPath
Technologies has its own learning management system that
provides thousands of courses with evidence-based programming.
There is a catalog of programming available for vocational
services and a myriad of other topics. Educational programs are
carefully vetted for robust educational services.
3:42:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK asked if visitation at DOC is back to
pre-COVID-19 pandemic standards.
MS. WILKERSON answered, yes.
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK asked if the current methods for
visitation are in person or over the phone.
MS. WILKERSON answered, yes. She described the different types
of visitations.
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK asked about cost of phone calls within
corrections facilities.
MS. WILKERSON answered that currently inmates pay for phone
calls. Currently, four free phone calls are provided per week.
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK asked if there is a cost for in-person
visitation.
MS. WILKERSON answered that in-person visitation incurs no cost
to incarcerated individuals or their families.
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK mentioned that she supports the proposed
legislation. She expressed her concern with the sponsor
statement's reference to cost-savings.
MS. WILKERSON offered her reassurance that the department will
continue to maintain in-person visitation. She stated the HB
330 is an enhancement not replacement of current operations.
3:45:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked who would own the devices.
MS. WILKERSON said they are owned by ViaPath Technologies and
made available through a lease program.
MR. PILCHER confirmed that the tablets are provided and owned by
ViaPath Technologies.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked about the payment models utilized
to pay for tablet leases.
MS. WILKERSON explained that the model will depend on the
legislation and request for proposal among contractors. Under
the current pilot program, DOC is not responsible for costs.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked if costs would shift to families.
MS. WILKERSON answered that the costs would depend on the
outcome of negotiations through procurement and contactors. She
said that she envisions a certain level of free use and then
costs may be shifted to families or incarcerated individuals.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked about device maintenance and
whether DOC will need to pay to have employees trained to
maintain the devices.
MS. WILKERSON said the intent of DOC is to ensure that the
provider maintains the equipment. Viapath Technologies has
provided its own infrastructure and is responsible for
maintenance. She said DOC may be responsible for only a small
amount of troubleshooting.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked about software upgrades.
3:49:41 PM
MR. PILCHER stated that software updates are carried out
remotely.
MS. HALL explained that it is not the desire of ViaPath
Technologies to implement a model where families or incarcerated
individuals pay for the devices.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked about communication recordings
and how attorney-client privileged conversations remain private.
MR. PILCHER explained that there is a provision in the
technology to mark someone as a "professional visitor" and those
conversations would not be recorded. For conversations with
friends and families, a notification is utilized to inform those
parties that they will be recorded.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER asked if the department would need to
upgrade the Wi-Fi.
MS. WILKERSON responded that the DOC infrastructure is old and
has worked with ViaPath Technologies to install a new network.
3:52:33 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked how ViaPath Technologies was chosen.
MS. WILKERSON answered that she is aware of about five
businesses with similar corrections-grade tablets. The
department coordinated with the National Association of State
Procurement Officials (NASPO) and initiated a contract with
ViaPath Technologies.
3:54:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SHAW announced that HB 330 was held over.
HB 228-MENTAL HEALTH/PSYCHEDELIC MED. TASK FORCE
3:54:20 PM
CHAIR SHAW announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 228, "An Act establishing the Alaska mental
health and psychedelic medicine task force; and providing for an
effective date." [Before the committee was CSHB 228(MLV).]
3:54:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK moved to adopt Amendment 1 to HB 228,
labeled 33-LS0976\P.1, Bergerud, 3/20/24, which read as follows:
Page 1, line 1:
Delete "mental health and psychedelic medicine
task force"
Insert "task force for the regulation of
psychedelic medicines approved by the United States
Food and Drug Administration"
Page 1, line 6:
Delete "MENTAL HEALTH AND PSYCHEDELIC MEDICINE
TASK FORCE"
Insert "TASK FORCE FOR THE REGULATION OF
PSYCHEDELIC MEDICINES APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION"
Page 1, line 7:
Delete "mental health and psychedelic medicine
task force"
Insert "task force for the regulation of
psychedelic medicines approved by the United States
Food and Drug Administration"
Page 3, lines 16 - 17:
Delete "mental health and psychedelic medicine
task force"
Insert "task force for the regulation of
psychedelic medicines approved by the United States
Food and Drug Administration"
3:54:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT objected.
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK explained that Amendment 1 to HB 228
changes the name of the task force to provide clarity about what
the task force will do. She emphasized that the task force will
not take a position on the legalization, decriminalization, or
medicalization of psychedelic drugs. She said the new title
accurately describes the task force as being responsible for
making statutory and regulatory recommendations to the Alaska
State Legislature should the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
approve psychedelic medicine.
3:55:35 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
3:56:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT removed his objection.
CHAIR SHAW announced that there being no further objection,
Amendment 1 was adopted.
3:56:34 PM
CHAIR SHAW opened public testimony on HB 228.
3:56:46 PM
MICHAEL DEMOLINA, PhD, President, Wisdom Traditions, provided
his personal background as a veteran and behavioral science
specialist. He provided information about the California
Institute of Integral Studies program, which is likely to become
the program the FDA will approve if psychedelic medicine is
approved. He explained that he is in support of HB 228 because
it puts Alaska ahead of the curve, if the FDA medicalizes
psychedelic medicine, which may occur as soon as August 2024.
He noted his experience and expertise on traumatic stress
disorders and the potential opportunities for trauma treatment.
He explained that, without a task force, Alaska would lack
necessary guidelines.
3:59:23 PM
CHAIR SHAW, after ascertaining that no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 228.
3:59:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JENNIFER ARMSTRONG, Alaska State Legislature, as
prime sponsor, provided wrap up comments for HB 228. She noted
that many medical treatments can be controversial. The creation
of the task force is not intended to promote or take a position
on psychedelic medicines. The reason for the task force is to
ensure a thorough conversation around licensing in the state.
4:01:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY expressed her appreciation and asked about
the makeup of the task force.
REPRESENTATIVE ARMSTRONG answered that there would be 16 slots
on the task force, which include a commissioner or designee from
the Departments of Health, Military and Veteran's Affairs, and
Commerce, Community, and Economic Development. There would be
spots on the task force for people who represent mental health
issues in the state, members from the Alaska Native Health
Board, a psychiatrist, a member who represents health care needs
of survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault, and
medical professionals. Finally, the task force would include
members from the Alaska State Senate, House of Representatives,
and three members selected by the task force once assembled.
4:03:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT moved to report CSHB 228(MLV) out of
committee, as amended, with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB
228(STA) was reported from the House State Affairs Standing
Committee.
4:04:07 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 4:04 p.m. to 4:06 p.m.
HB 190-ALASKA SUNSET COMMISSION
4:06:07 PM
CHAIR SHAW announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 190, "An Act establishing a violation for
hindering the Alaska Sunset Commission; relating to the duties
of the legislature; establishing the Alaska Sunset Commission to
review and make recommendations on discontinuation of or changes
to state entities; relating to the powers and duties of the
Alaska Sunset Commission; and providing for an effective date."
[Before the committee was CSHB 190(W&M).]
4:06:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BEN CARPENTER, Alaska State Legislature,
presented CSHB190(W&M) on behalf of the sponsor, the House
Special Committee on Ways and Means, on which he serves as
chair. He stated the purpose of HB 190 is to improve state
government. Through HB 190, a third-party review would be
created under the lieutenant governor called the Sunset
Commission, which is modeled after the Texas Sunset Advisory
Commission.
4:08:44 PM
ERIC BEVERLY, Executive Director, Texas Sunset Advisory
Commission, provided information about the commission and how it
utilizes objective analysis to improve state government. State
agencies in Texas undergo sunset review about every 12 years.
Agencies are evaluated to determine if they are achieving
statutory objectives, operating efficiently and cost-
effectively, and encouraging public participation.
MR. BEVERLY explained that since the Texas Sunset Commission
began its work in the 1970s, 95 agencies have been abolished, or
have transferred some functions to new agencies. The Texas
Sunset Advisory Commission has garnered $1 billion dollars; $16
has been gained for every $1 appropriated to the commission
since 1985. The sunset process shines a light on an agency to
determine if it conforms to best practices. The sunset process
has led to major improvements in nearly every area of Texas
state government. Unnecessary state agencies and programs have
been abolished; state laws have been modernized; state
expenditures have been reduced; public participation in
government accountability has increased; and duplication among
state agencies and programs has been eliminated.
4:12:12 PM
MR. BEVERLY discussed the improvements made to the monitoring of
highway contracts, strengthened internal controls, and a more
integrated and understandable transportation planning process,
because of the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission. He described
improvements for the Public Utility Commission, environmental
regulators, and oil and gas regulators of Texas. He discussed
the reorganization and streamlining of the Departments of Health
and Human Services of Texas. He said that generally, the Texas
Sunset Advisory Commission generates cost-savings; however,
occasionally the commission requires a fiscal impact remedy. He
further emphasized the importance of public participation in the
sun setting process.
4:17:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK asked if an agency-wide audit process
existed prior to the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission.
MR. BEVERLY said in Texas there is a state auditor's office and
Legislative Budget Board, which predate the sunset commission.
4:18:05 PM
EMILY JOHNSON, Deputy Director for Reviews, Texas Sunset
Advisory Commission, explained that the Texas Sunset Advisory
Commission was built into the Legislative Budget Board for some
time. Currently, the commission is separate.
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK asked if the legislative audit process in
Texas involved an agency-wide audit prior to the implementation
of the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission.
MR. BEVERLY answered that he was unsure.
4:19:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked about the makeup of the Texas Sunset
Advisory Commission.
MR. BEVERLY explained that the lieutenant governor appoints five
senators and one public member, and the speaker of the House
appoints five state representatives and another public member,
for a total of twelve members. The legislative members serve
four-year terms, and the public members serve two-year terms.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked why the commission utilizes state
lawmakers as members of the commission. She explained that the
proposed legislation calls for the commission to be made up of
private industry representatives.
MS. JOHNSON explained that there is a piece of legislation that
comes out of the sunset process, in Texas, which indicates why
legislative members make up the commission.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked whether the Texas University system
is examined by the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission.
MR. BEVERLY replied that the commission reviews are limited to
executive branch agencies. Universities and courts are exempt
from review in Texas. However, the Texas Higher Education
Coordinating Board is reviewed.
MS. JOHNSON made note of components that are under special
review within the higher education system.
4:22:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked why the commission is made up of
members outside the government.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER said he thought it was important to
keep the commission apolitical for continuity between election
cycles. He emphasized his preference for members with subject-
matter expertise to examine budgets, accounting, and the
management of various government agencies.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked about the intent to include the
University of Alaska (UA) system in the list of agencies the
Alaska Sunset Commission would examine.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER opined that UA should stand on its own
and rely less on state government. Because they are currently
funded like any another department within state government, he
stated the intention to utilize the proposed Alaska Sunset
Commission to ensure that the universities operate as
efficiently as possible with respect to the state's budget.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY noted the legal privileges and potential
power to commissioners and whether Representative Carpenter
foresees any legal liabilities.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER answered, no. He said that CSHB
190(W&M) creates statute for commissioner authority. If there
are concerns, the bill could be amended, which would reduce the
authority of the Alaska Sunset Commission. The goal of the bill
is to grant subject matter experts the opportunity to help
improve state government.
4:26:23 PM
DONNA ARDUIN, Staff, Representative Ben Carpenter, explained
that the only authority the Alaska Sunset Commission would have
would be to provide a report and draft legislation to the
legislature regarding agency sunsets.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER expressed that his intent in bringing
HB 190 forward is not to abolish departments, but to create a
method to increase government efficiency by requiring government
action and attention to the commission's findings.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY referenced page 5, lines 3-7, of CSHB
190(W&M), which read as follows:
(c) In carrying out its functions under AS
44.99.700 - 44.99.759, the commission or designated
staff may attend any meetings and proceedings of any
entity of the state, including any meeting or
proceeding of a governing body of a state entity that
is closed to the public, and may inspect the records,
documents, and files of any entity of the state,
including any record, document, or file that is
REPRESENTATIVE STORY made note that the broad access granted to
the commission for the inspection of government entities gives
her pause.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER commented that legislative auditors and
staff have a similar level of authority regarding state audits.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY pointed to the great expense in the fiscal
note involved with investing in the Alaska Sunset Commission.
She asked if improvements could be made to the state auditing
process as an alternative.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER said that he sees the creation of the
Alaska Sunset Commission as an improvement not a replacement to
the state auditor. He explained that the Alaska Sunset
Commission would do a "deep dive" on state agencies, while the
state auditor has other responsibilities.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY emphasized the importance of the current
auditing process.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER expressed his frustration that audits
have little to no impact on the effectiveness of state agencies.
MS. ARDUIN said that the state auditor conducts financial
audits. Since 2013, in statute, auditors could contract out for
performance review audits. That legislation sunset last year
due to underutilization. The Alaska Sunset Commission was
proposed in response.
4:31:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK moved to adopt Amendment 1 to CSHB
190(W&M), labeled 33-LS0685\S.1, Wallace, 3/20/24, which read as
follows:
Page 4, line 29:
Delete "and draft legislation"
Page 7, lines 13 - 16:
Delete "The commission shall include in the
report draft legislation to implement the
recommendations of the commission. Draft legislation
must be submitted to the rules committee of each house
with a request to introduce the legislation to
implement the recommendations of the commission."
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT objected for the purpose of discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK noted that she appreciated the bill
discussion. She commented that performance review audits are a
valuable resource. The data collection that would be achieved
by the Alaska Sunset Commission would be largely similar to the
legislative audit findings if performance review measures were
included. She explained that the amendment deletes references
to drafting legislation. A report would be prepared in lieu of
legislation. She emphasized that legislative audit findings
should be taken seriously.
4:34:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT asked to hear from the bill sponsor
regarding Amendment 1.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER reiterated that the purpose of creating
the Alaska Sunset Commission would be to hire subject matter
experts to take a close look at state agencies to find
improvements to state government. He opined that generating
recommended bill language through the commission would be an
efficient way to act on commission recommendations.
4:35:58 PM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY commented that she finds it unrealistic to
expect industry representatives to draft legislation. She
offered her support of Amendment 1.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER said that the individuals with subject
matter expertise would have staff to help with report writing to
draft legislation.
4:37:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT maintained his objection.
4:37:20 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 4:37 p.m. to 4:38 p.m.
4:38:22 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Carrick and Story
voted in favor of Amendment 1 to CSHB 190(W&M). Representatives
Carpenter, Wright, and Shaw voted against it. Therefore,
Amendment 2 failed to be adopted by a vote of 2-3.
4:38:56 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK moved to adopt Amendment 2 to CSHB
190(W&M), labeled 33-LS0685\S.2, Wallace 3/20/24, which read as
follows:
Page 3, line 27:
Delete "and"
Page 3, line 28, following "representatives":
Insert ", and four members appointed by the
commissioner of the department being reviewed under
AS 44.99.730 or the president of the University of
Alaska if the University of Alaska is being reviewed
under AS 44.99.730. Members appointed by the
commissioner or president of the University of Alaska
under this subsection must be employees of the
department or the University of Alaska that is under
review under AS 44.99.730"
Page 3, following line 31:
Insert a new paragraph to read:
"(1) by the governor, the president of the
senate, or the speaker of the house of
representatives"
Page 4, line 1:
Delete "(1)"
Insert "(A)"
Page 4, line 3:
Delete "(2)"
Insert "(B)"
Page 4, line 3, following "reappointed":
Insert "; and
(2) by the commissioner or president of the
University of Alaska serve until the review of that
department or the University of Alaska is complete
under AS 44.99.730"
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT objected for the purpose of discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK provided an example of how employees of
agencies are fit to report serious inefficiency issues,
challenges, and needs. She explained that Amendment 2 adds four
additional seats on the commission for department or agency
representatives to create an inside perspective on the
operations of each department.
4:41:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT asked to hear from bill sponsor.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER explained that the legislative auditor
can complete their audits without input from the administration.
He commented that Amendment 2 would create complications.
MS. ARDUIN added that the agency under review can create a
report for the commission. By starting with self-reporting,
problems can be highlighted early in the auditing process.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER commented that the intent of the
proposed Alaska Sunset Commission is to be interactive with
departments. He highlighted that department workers are aware
of what is broken but lack the ability to fix issues due to
time, personnel, and budget constraints. Department input is
essential to the process, and the bill includes the solicitation
of that input at the start of the agency audit. He commented
that he is not in favor of Amendment 2.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY emphasized the importance of Amendment 2.
She compared the proposed commission to the Texas Sunset
Advisory Commission and made note of departmental involvement.
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK said that Amendment 2 ensures that
departmental involvement is represented throughout the entire
process and not just in the initial report. She emphasized the
importance of including departmental representatives in
providing efficiency recommendations.
4:44:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT maintained his objection.
4:44:08 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Carrick and Story
voted in favor of Amendment 2 to CSHB 190(W&M). Representatives
Wright, Carpenter, and Shaw voted against it. Therefore,
Amendment 2 failed to be adopted by a vote of 2-3.
4:44:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK moved to adopt Amendment 3 to CSHB
190(W&M), labeled 33-LS0685\S.3, Wallace, 3/20/24, which read as
follows:
Page 5, lines 30 - 31:
Delete "at least"
Page 6, line 1:
Delete "each"
Insert "every other year"
Page 7, line 11:
Delete "a"
Insert "the first regular"
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT objected.
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK explained that Amendment 3 changes the
frequency of agency review to every other year to allow more
time for the legislature to act on recommendations. She offered
that by changing the frequency, the potential for politicization
would be reduced. She made note of the complexity of auditing
large departments, which may involve significant changes to act
upon and lengthy policy discussions.
4:46:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT commented that Amendment 3 takes away from
the spirit of the bill. He asked to hear from the bill sponsor.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER commented that the legislature "has the
time and lacks the will." He argued that reducing the frequency
of agency review prolongs difficult conversations that are
necessary to increase government efficiency. With a focused
team, 12 months is plenty of time to provide recommendations to
the legislature, he opined.
MS. ARDUIN commented that the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission
reviews one department every year, and therefore every 12 years
a given agency is reviewed. If Amendment 3 was adopted, the
time between agency reviews would double. She commented that HB
190 was amended by House Special Committee on Ways and Means to
change the bill language to include the words "at least" to
allow for the possibility that multiple smaller agencies could
be reviewed in the same year.
REPRESENTATIVE CARRICK commented that regarding board and
commission sunsets, adequate consideration of audits by the
legislature has not been practiced. She explained that
Amendment 3 would help to provide more time for the legislature
to address recommendations that come forth.
REPRESENTATIVE WRIGHT maintained his objection.
4:51:15 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Story and Carrick
voted in favor of Amendment 3 to CSHB 190(W&M). Representatives
Wright, Carpenter, Carrick, and Shaw voted against it.
Therefore, Amendment 3 190 failed to be adopted by a vote of 2-
3.
4:51:48 PM
CHAIR SHAW opened public testimony on HB 190. After
ascertaining that no one wished to testify, he closed public
testimony.
4:51:57 PM
CHAIR SHAW announced that CSHB 190(W&M) was held over.
4:52:19 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 4:52
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 330 Supporting Document - Improving Public Safety.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/16/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 330 |
| HB 330 Supporting Document - Inspire_Tablet_Program_Write_Up.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/16/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 330 |
| HB 330 Supporting Document - Not a luxury.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/16/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 330 |
| HB 330 Supporting Document - RAND.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/16/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 330 |
| HB 330 Supporting Document - Research in Support of Digital Access (2).pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/16/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 330 |
| HB 330 Version H Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/16/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 330 |
| HB 330 Version H Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/16/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 330 |
| HB 330 Version H.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/16/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 330 |
| HB228 Version A 02022024.pdf |
HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 228 |
| HB228 Sponsor Statement 02012024.pdf |
HMLV 2/13/2024 1:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 228 |
| HB228 Sectional Analysis 02012024.pdf |
HMLV 2/13/2024 1:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 228 |
| HB228 Version R 02022024.pdf |
HMLV 2/13/2024 1:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 228 |
| HB228 Presentation - STA.pdf |
HSTA 3/14/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 228 |
| HB 228 Sectional Analysis Version P.pdf |
HSTA 3/14/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 228 |
| HB228 Fiscal Note - DCCED.pdf |
HSTA 3/14/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 228 |
| HB 228 Sectional Analysis Version P.pdf |
HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 228 |
| HB 228 Sponsor Statement Version P.pdf |
HSTA 3/14/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 228 |
| HB0190B.pdf |
HSTA 3/12/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 190 |
| HB190 Alaska Sunset Commission Presentation.pdf |
HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/9/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 190 |
| List of Divisions and Corporations Under Each Department (for presentation).pdf |
HSTA 3/12/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
|
| HB190 Alaska Sunset Commission Presentation 3.12.2024.pdf |
HSTA 3/12/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/16/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 190 |
| HB 190 - Amendment 1 Carrick HSTA.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 190 |
| HB 190 - Amendment 2 Carrick HSTA.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 190 |
| HB 190 - Amendment 3 Carrick HSTA.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 190 |
| CS for HB 190 Summary of Changes Version B to S.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/9/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/11/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 190 |
| CSHB 190 Sectional Analysis Version S.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/11/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 190 |
| HB 190 - Sponsor Statement Version S.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/9/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/11/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/16/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 190 |
| HB 190 Verison S.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/11/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/16/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 190 |
| HB 190 Fiscal Note - Office of Gov.pdf |
HSTA 3/26/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/2/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/9/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/11/2024 3:00:00 PM HSTA 4/16/2024 3:00:00 PM |
HB 190 |