Legislature(2023 - 2024)BUTROVICH 205
03/24/2023 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation(s): Alaska Victimization Survey Results | |
| SB104 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 104 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 53 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE
March 24, 2023
1:30 p.m.
DRAFT
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Matt Claman, Chair
Senator Jesse Kiehl, Vice Chair
Senator James Kaufman
Senator Cathy Giessel
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Löki Tobin
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION: ALASKA VICTIMIZATION SURVEY RESULTS
- HEARD
SENATE BILL NO. 104
"An Act relating to appropriations to the civil legal services
fund."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE BILL NO. 53
"An Act relating to involuntary civil commitments."
- BILL HEARING CANCELED
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 104
SHORT TITLE: CIVIL LEGAL SERVICES FUND
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) DUNBAR
03/15/23 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/15/23 (S) JUD, FIN
03/20/23 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/20/23 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/24/23 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
DR. INGRID JOHNSON, Assistant Professor
University of Alaska
Anchorage Justice Center
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the results from the 2020 Alaska
Victimization Survey.
Senator Dunbar, District J
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 104.
Arielle Wiggin, Staff
Senator Dunbar
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sectional analysis for SB 104.
Nikole Nelson, Executive Director
Alaska Legal Services Corporation
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony on SB 104.
PATRICK REINHART, Director
Governor's Council on Disability and Special Education
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 104.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:30:57 PM
CHAIR MATT CLAMAN called the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. Present at the call to order were
Senators Kiehl, Giessel, Kaufman and Chair Claman.
^PRESENTATION(S): Alaska Victimization Survey Results
PRESENTATION: Alaska Victimization Survey Results
1:31:49 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN announced the consideration of the Alaska
Victimization Survey Results presented by Dr. Ingrid Johnson,
PhD.
1:32:01 PM
DR. INGRID JOHNSON, Assistant Professor, University of Alaska,
Anchorage Justice Center, Anchorage, Alaska, shared her research
with the committee.
1:32:55 PM
DR. JOHNSON moved to slide 2, "Overview and history of AVS."
• Provides estimates for the lifetime and annual
prevalence of rape and physical intimate partner
violence against women in Alaska.
o Documents the scope of the problem over time.
o Increases awareness about the problem and fosters
the collective movement to address these types of
violence.
o Validates the experiences of the victim-survivors
and lets them know they are not alone, not
unseen, and not forgotten.
• Conducted statewide surveys in 2010, 2015, and 2020
with the goal of conducting survey every five years.
o 13 regional surveys were conducted 2011 2015
o Overall, almost 13,000 women in Alaska have
participated in these surveys
• Joint effort between the Alaska Council on Domestic
Violence and Sexual Assault (CDVSA; funders) and the
University of Alaska Anchorage Justice Center
(research implementation).
1:36:11 PM
DR. JOHNSON continued with slide 3, "AVS Methodology."
• General methodology (all iterations)
o General population survey of adult women residing in
Alaska.
o Respondents randomly selected and contacted by
landlines and cell phones.
o Survey modeled after the National Intimate Partner and
Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) administered by the
U.S. CDC.
o Questions about victimization are "behaviorally
specific" and include a wide range of violence against
women beyond just rape and physical intimate partner
violence
o Survey procedures are designed to maximize the safety
and confidentiality of respondents.
• 2020 Survey data collection methods
o Washington state survey team
o Phone surveys conducted from July November 2020
o 2100 participants
o Each case was weighted to match proportions in general
adult Alaska female population (265,572) using three
strata: Geographic region, race/ethnicity, and age
1:38:42 PM
DR. JOHNSON moved to slide 4, "Lifetime and past year estimates
of physical intimate partner violence and rape." She detailed
the graph depicting types of violence in the past year and over
a lifetime. She pointed out two of the main types of violence
studied, physical intimate partner violence and rape. She
clarified that rape was referred to as sexual violence in the
past. Sexual violence is a broad term used to encompass sexual
harassment, sexual assault without penetration and other
unwanted sexual activity or innuendo. She remarked on the
importance of precise vocabulary related to victimization. When
an Alaska Victimization Survey (AVS) report refers to sexual
violence, it pertains to alcohol or drug involved sexual
penetration or forcible sexual penetration.
DR. JOHNSON stated that 48 percent of adult Alaskan women
reported physical intimate partner violence in their lifetime.
She added that 7 percent of adult Alaskan women experienced
physical intimate partner violence in the past year. She stated
that 40.5 percent of adult Alaskan women experienced rape in
their lifetime while 3.4 percent of adult Alaskan women
experienced rape in the past year. The final column on slide 4
displayed adult Alaskan women who experienced intimate personal
violence, rape or both with 57.7 percent reporting the composite
in their lifetime, and 8.1 percent reporting the composite in
the past year.
1:40:41 PM
DR. JOHNSON moved to slide 5, "Changes over time: 2010-2020."
The slide depicts various experiences over a lifetime and in the
past year. She stated that the lifetime rates of physical
intimate partner violence and rape were similar in 2010 and
2020. She clarified that approximately 50-60 percent of adult
Alaskan women experienced intimate partner violence and or rape
in their lifetime. She added that reports over the past year
decreased slightly. From 2010 to 2015, they remain static at 8.1
percent of adult Alaskan women reporting interpersonal violence,
rape or both. She recalled past questions about the difference
between lifetime rates and past-year data. She stated that a
spike in incidents within the five-year reporting period led to
the increase in lifetime rates. She noted that similar results
are observed in national victimization data, which is obtained
on an annual basis.
1:42:48 PM
DR. JOHNSON continued with slide 6, "Comparing Alaska's
prevalence to national prevalence." She spoke further about
national data comparisons. She explained that data is collected
annually through the National Intimate Partner and Sexual
Violence Survey (NISVS). The table compared AVS rates to NISVS
rates for physical intimate partner violence and rape in both
lifetime and past year categories for 2010 and 2015. She pointed
to the green-shaded column displaying the proportional
difference between Alaska and the nation. Alaska's prevalence
for physical intimate partner violence is 1.4 times greater than
the nations over a womans lifetime and 2.4 times greater in
the past year. The lifetime incidence of rape in Alaska in 2010
is 2.0 times higher than the national average, while the past
year data is 3.9 times greater. The rates displayed for 2015 are
similar.
DR. JOHNSON clarified that several groups conduct the surveys
nationally. She stated that the AVS and the NISVS are similar,
but not exactly the same.
1:45:27 PM
DR. JOHNSON continued with slide 7, "New results: Experience and
self-labels and help-seeking behaviors."
Primary prevention (preventing from happening in first
place) is "the ideal."
However, secondary and tertiary prevention (addressing
VAW once it has happened to prevent it from happening
again and to alleviate its impacts) are unfortunate
but pertinent concerns.
Secondary and tertiary prevention usually require
those who have experienced Violence Against Women
(VAW) to disclose or seek help
?which usually requires them to label or define the
experience as a problem and/or themselves as victims.
1:47:47 PM
DR. JOHNSON moved to slide 8, "Research questions."
1. What percent of Alaskan women who have experienced
violence label those experiences using violence
against women (VAW) labels?
2. What percent of Alaskan women who have experienced
violence label themselves as victims or other
victimization-related identity in relation to those
experiences?
3. Is the use of experience- or self-labels related to
perceiving a need for services and/or talking to the
police?
1:48:33 PM
DR. JOHNSON moved to slide 9, "Experience and self-labels."
If survey participants indicated that they had
experienced one of the many forms of victimization in
the survey (including partner psychological aggression
and sexual harassment), they were given the following
prompt and questions:
Before we conclude the survey, we want to ask a few
final questions about how you define the things that
you told me have happened to you and how you think
about yourself in relation to those experiences.
• Do you use any specific terms to define those things
that happened to you?
• If needed: For example, do you use terms like? rape,
stalking, or violence?
• Do you use any specific terms to define yourself in
relation to those things that happened to you?
• If needed: For example, do you use terms like? victim,
survivor, person who has been harmed?
1:50:21 PM
DR. JOHNSON continued with slide 10, "Intimate partner violence
(IPV) label prevalence." She described the table beginning with
the different forms of IPV: physical aggression, psychological
aggression, coercive control and entrapment. She explained that
women might be categorized in multiple samples. She clarified
that people experiencing one type of violence are often
experiencing other types of violence victimization, known as
poly-victimization.
DR. JOHNSON called attention to the purple outlined box on slide
10. She stated that 17 percent of women used the term domestic
abuse or violence and only 4.4 percent used the term intimate
partner abuse or violence. She continued with the green box
displaying 25 percent of women using no specific terms to label
abusive experience. She noted that the rate was higher for those
experiencing psychological aggression or coercive control and
entrapment.
DR. JOHNSON continued with slide 10 and self-labels. She pointed
to the red outlined box with the terms victim or survivor.
She stated that only 6.7 percent of women experiencing physical
aggression use the term victim while 29.2 percent use the term
survivor. She concluded that the blue box depicts the
percentage of people using no specific terms to label
themselves, which was higher than those using terms to label
experiences.
1:52:58 PM
DR. JOHNSON moved to slide 11, "Stalking label prevalence."
• Experience labels
o 9.6% labeled their experiences as stalking
o 9.3% labeled their experiences as sexual
harassment
o 23.4% did not use any specific terms to label
their experiences
• Self-labeling
o 11.6% used the label victim
o 26.6% used the label survivor
o 8.9% used the label victim-survivor
o 42.3% did not use any specific terms to label
themselves
1:53:58 PM
DR. JOHNSON moved to slide 12, "Sexual violence label
prevalence." The table detailed sexual violence measures. She
stated that sexual violence includes a wide range of behaviors
including unwanted or uninvited sexual situations such as sexual
harassment or non-consensual flashing. She added that alcohol or
drug involved rape, forceable rape and sexual experiences
involving pressure or coercion also fall into the category of
sexual assault. She highlighted the purple box depicting low
results for women who use the terms sexual assault and sexual
violence. She moved to the green box depicting no specific
terms to label experiences that range from 18.6 percent up to 30
percent. She pointed out the blue box categorizing up to 51
percent of women using no specific terms to label themselves.
She added that the term survivor was the preferred label
chosen by women experiencing sexual violence.
1:55:51 PM
DR. JOHNSON moved to slide 13, "Summary of Results."
• Experience-labels
square4 Minimal agreement on terms used to label
experiences
square4 Most common experience label: ~1/4 of women
who had experienced alcohol-or drug-involved
rape used term rape
square4 Even among those who experienced physical
partner aggression, ~1/6 used term abuse and
~1/6 used domestic abuse/violence
square4 ~1/4 of IPV victims, 1/4 of stalking
victims, and 1/5 to 1/4 of sexual violence
victims did not use any specific terms to
label their experiences.
• Self-labels
square4 Most common self-label was survivor, with
1/4 to 1/3 endorsing this label
square4 Roughly 1/10 used the self-label victim
across all subsamples
square4 ~2/5 to 1/2 of IPV victims, 2/5 of stalking
victims, and 1/3 to 1/2 of sexual violence
victims did not use any specific terms to
label themselves
1:56:44 PM
DR. JOHNSON moved to slide 14, "Experience and self-labels and
perceiving a need for services and/or talking to the police.
Both applying some kind of label to one's experiences
with VAW and applying a label to oneself in relation
to those experiences approximately doubled the odds of
perceiving a need for formal services.
The significance of self-labels seemed to be driven by
the "survivor" label, as using a "victim" label was
not related to need perceptions, but a "survivor"
label doubled (or even tripled) the odds of perceiving
a need for formal services.
Applying some kind of label to one's experiences with
VAW almost doubled the odds of talking to the police,
and, again, use of the "survivor" self-label
significantly increased the odds of talking to the
police.
1:57:51 PM
DR. JOHNSON continued with slide 14, "Is the use of experience
or self labels related to perceiving a need for services and or
talking to the police." She remarked that her research showed
that applying a label to ones experiences and applying a label
to oneself doubled the odds of perceiving a need for formal
services. If labels are used to identify experiences or self,
women were twice as likely to perceive a need for formal
services. She theorized that the significance of the self-label
was driven by the survivor label, which doubled the odds of
perceiving the need for formal services. She added that applying
a label to experiences doubles the odds of talking to police.
Using the survivor self-label also increased the odds of talking
to the police. She stressed the relationship between labeling
and perceiving a need for services and talking to the police.
1:59:00 PM
DR. JOHNSON concluded her presentation and offered to respond to
questions or comments.
1:59:09 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN asked about labels. He wondered if the label or
personality type led to the perceived need for services or
police intervention. He wondered about the benefits of coaching
a person to label experiences or self.
DR. JOHNSON responded that causality was difficult to prove. She
stated that the survivor identity is strengthened by seeking
help. She wondered about different conclusions drawn from those
identifying as survivors. She remarked that labeling abuse is
not necessarily empowering. She stated the clear link between
experience labels and seeking help. Establishing causality with
the results is impossible because of the nature in which the
questions were asked. She acknowledged the difficulty in
providing legislative recommendations. She spoke about
qualitative work linking self-labeling to seeking help. She
reported talking with a woman who was sexually assaulted by her
husband who did not recognize the crime until she watched a
television show about sexual assault. She stated that
qualitative evidence suggests that the label precedes reporting
or help seeking.
2:02:08 PM
SENATOR KIEHL noticed that the categories failed to sum to 100
on slide 10.
2:02:45 PM
DR. JOHNSON replied that respondents can select several labels.
She mentioned other labels that were discarded because there
were too few respondents who used them. The answers with too few
respondents were not included in the material presented. She
stated that 25 percent did not use specific terms, while the
other 75 percent did, but some terms were used by so few people
that they were discarded from the presentation and therefore the
sum total.
2:03:47 PM
SENATOR KIEHL sought guidance for policy within the survey. He
asked about variations among age groups, ethnic groups or
regions that might provide additional guidance.
2:04:35 PM
DR. JOHNSON replied that the data were from 2020 and largely
from Anchorage. She stated that she was unable to provide
region-specific data. She offered to separate the data by age
breakdown. She offered to search different demographic variables
and the relation to label use.
CHAIR CLAMAN asked if she was able to provide the information
during todays meeting.
DR. JOHNSON replied that she would send the information to
Senator Clamans office.
2:05:39 PM
SENATOR KIEHL expressed intrigue about the data. He shared the
value of prevention. He appreciated Dr. Johnsons guidance about
the best legislative effort to address the problem of intimate
partner violence and rape.
2:06:10 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN asked about slide 5 and the drop in lifetime
reporting of IPV, rape or both in 2015. He interpreted the drop
as a positive trend but noticed an increase again in 2020. He
asked if the committee could draw optimistic conclusions from
the drop noted in 2015.
DR. JOHNSON responded that she became the principal investigator
in 2019. She stated that she was not as involved in the 2010 and
2015 data collection. She revealed that the 2010 survey compiled
a smaller sample than the 2015 and 2020 surveys. She noted that
the largest sample was in 2015, which led to more reliable
estimates. In regard to optimism, she opined that the problems
are not worse. She acknowledged the many factors that influence
crime and victimization levels. She interpreted possible
improvement but noted the downsides to collecting data only once
every five years.
2:08:50 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN referred to a recent crime statistics presentation
offered by Troy Payne with the University of Alaska Anchorage
Justice Center that illustrated that sexual assault data
remained consistent over the last 50 years. He asked if Dr.
Johnsons paper was available for committee review.
DR. JOHNSON remarked about her research stating the prevalence
of labels published in February 2023. Another paper related to
labels and their influence on help-seeking is under review. She
offered to share the published paper with the committee.
CHAIR CLAMAN asked about the research and concrete steps for the
legislature to improve sexual violence statistics.
2:10:18 PM
DR. JOHNSON replied that primary prevention against women has
thin research. She explained the difficulty involved in
publishing high-quality studies on prevention efforts. She spoke
about federal funding for research prevention efforts that focus
on community and societal level solutions. She spoke about
bystander intervention programs and individual prevention
efforts. The efforts impact those people engaging in the
programs. She suggested efforts to make changes on a community
or societal level.
DR. JOHNSON revealed that she is developing research related to
nightlife and sexual violence. Sexual assault is highly
correlated with alcohol. She plans to focus on certain forms of
sexual violence. She admitted that researchers hesitate to make
recommendations in areas where research is thin. She spoke about
secondary and tertiary prevention that involve investing in
currently existing victim services. The services offer free
counseling and other mental health aid including trauma therapy.
She stated her best recommendation was to check in with the
victim service providers to learn more about their needs.
2:13:13 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN wondered if language shifts related to victim
versus survivor terminology might enable greater reporting of
sexual abuse and harassment.
DR. JOHNSON found the comment interesting.
CHAIR CLAMAN interpreted that the survey findings suggested
consideration of terminology changes.
DR. JOHNSON agreed that the survey findings suggest rethinking
the terminology used when labeling self or experiences related
to abuse. She added that victim services advocates utilize the
newer terminology while many victims are unaware of the
advantages of labeling self or experiences related to abuse. She
pointed to the public awareness aspect of the language
terminology issue. She wondered if community awareness might
help society recognize violence as violence. She acknowledged
that intimate personal violence is difficult for victims to
label. She wondered if repeated messaging about labels of
violence might help people recognize abuse.
CHAIR CLAMAN thanked Dr. Johnson for the presentation. He
appreciated the repetition when it comes to the subject of
violence against women in Alaska.
SB 104-CIVIL LEGAL SERVICES FUND
2:16:03 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 104
"An Act relating to appropriations to the civil legal services
fund."
2:16:30 PM
Senator Dunbar, District J, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau,
Alaska presented SB 104, which increases funding for the Alaska
Legal Services Corporation (ALSC). He shared his story about
interning with ALSC while attending law school. During his time
with the corporation, he witnessed the work offered to people
unable to afford civil legal representation or services. He
compared Alaska Legal Services Corporation to a public defender
for civil law. The services include elder advocacy, public
benefits, consumer protection, family law and housing advocacy.
He added that ALSC is the states largest provider of free civil
legal services for survivors of domestic violence.
SENATOR DUNBAR mentioned a child custody case he worked on as an
intern with the corporation. He shared that he considered the
case the most important legal work he participated in. He noted
that the corporation sees increased demands for time and
services while the funding is lower than it was 40 years ago. He
remarked that state investment in the corporation decreased over
time. He explained that SB 104 takes a percentage of court
filing fees and directs it toward ALSC. The initial contribution
involved 25 percent of court filing fees, which was negotiated
down to 10 percent with the agreement that the fee percentage
would be revisited. He stated that 10 percent of court filing
fees provides insufficient contributions to ALSC for support of
Alaskans in need of legal aid.
CHAIR CLAMAN stated that Ms. Nelson and Ms. Meade were present
to respond to questions.
2:19:10 PM
Arielle Wiggin, Staff, Senator Dunbar, Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska provided the sectional analysis for SB 104.
Section 1: amends AS 37.05.590 Civil Legal Services
Fund so that up to twenty-five percent, instead of ten
percent, of Court System filing fees can be
appropriated by the Legislature to the existing Civil
Legal Services Fund each year.
CHAIR CLAMAN stated that he was a member of the legislature when
the initial bill addressing state contribution to ALSC was
passed.
2:19:51 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN wondered why the court filing fee percentage was
negotiated down to 10 percent.
SENATOR DUNBAR deferred the question to Ms. Nelson.
CHAIR CLAMAN asked Ms. Nelson to answer the question before she
provides invited testimony.
2:20:27 PM
Nikole Nelson, Executive Director, Alaska Legal Services
Corporation, Alaska informed the committee that the change in
filing fee contribution from 25 to 10 percent was negotiated in
an attempt to stabilize the funding source, with a commitment to
revisit the issue if 10 percent was inadequate. She acknowledged
that Senator Claman carried the bill during his time serving as
a House Representative to explore whether 10 percent of court
filing fees was an adequate contribution to ALSC. She stated
that 10 percent is an adequate contribution to provide legal
services to eligible Alaskans.
2:21:20 PM
SENATOR KIEHL requested a better orientation to the total
funding picture.
MS. NELSON replied that the state appropriation is not ALSCs
only source of revenue. The total budget for ALSC is $7.5
million obtained from various sources. She noted that the
corporation receives federal funding, local contributions,
fundraising contributions, private donations and the state
contribution. She clarified that the state contribution derived
from court filing fees represents a small portion of the total
organization funding. She pointed to the criticality of the
state contribution for meeting community needs.
MS. NELSON furthered that the state appropriation is divided
into two sources, a general fund appropriation from the
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
(DCCED) of $400 thousand and 10 percent of court filing fees.
Together the state contributes less than 10 percent of ALSCs
total funding picture.
2:24:33 PM
SENATOR KIEHL understood that the additional state contribution
helps ALSC better serve communities. He asked how the additional
resources serve communities.
MS. NELSON pointed to a study by the Alaska Mental Health Trust
Authority showing that for every dollar invested in ALSC, a
five-to-one return to state and local economies was seen.
Efforts to help people avoid homelessness and domestic violence
provide cost savings to state and local communities. The study
also showed that for every $100 thousand investment (2012
dollars), ALSC can serve another 182 individuals. She stated
that greater inflation increases programmatic costs, so a boost
in state dollars helps meet the increased costs. She reminded
the committee about the Community Justice Worker Program
discussed in a recent Senate Judiciary Standing Committee
presentation. She stated that the program was the first of its
kind in the nation. She reminded the committee that the program
trains new lawyers to provide limited-scope legal assistance to
those in need. She explained that additional funding would allow
ALSC to actualize the new program.
2:27:24 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN moved to invited testimony.
MS. NELSON provided invited testimony related to SB 104. She
explained the civil justice crisis in Alaska. She noted that the
state and federal constitutions guarantee due process and
protection under the law. The civil justice system is facing a
crisis due to the gap between people able to receive civil legal
help and those who cannot. She explained that the gap reached a
crisis level because existing funding has not kept pace with
community needs.
MS. NELSON continued that ALSC is a nonprofit organization with
the mission to ensure fairness for all in the justice system
irrespective of a persons income or distance from the
courthouse. She noted that ALSC provides legal help for people
seeking aid with health, safety and family needs. The
corporation provides individual legal advice and form drafting.
She added that the corporation provides community education and
clinics. She spoke about the variety of people seeking legal
services from ALSC. She added that veterans are regularly helped
when benefits are denied.
2:31:07 PM
MS. NELSON continued to describe the program and all of the
services. She added that ALSC helps people keep their homes and
ensures that access to justice does not only happen on the road
system. She stated that the study showed successful outcomes and
eighty percent of cases do not go to court. She stated that ALSC
is forced to turn 50 percent of qualified applicants away
because of lack of staffing and resources.
MS. NELSON continued that ALSC is on the forefront of fighting
the epidemic of domestic violence by serving over 1000 survivors
of domestic violence. She added that ALSC helped over 2500
seniors and veterans by protecting them from financial and
physical abuse and assisting them with processes like wills,
probate and powers of attorney. She noted that ALSC helped over
700 families avoid losing their homes. The corporation ensures
that access to justice exists off and on the road system.
MS. NELSON revisited the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority
study referenced earlier, which showed that ALSC achieves
successful outcomes for clients 86 percent of the time. She
added that 80 percent of cases resolve without going to court,
which saves system resources. She repeated that ALSC turns 50
percent of eligible people seeking legal assistance away. She
stated that the target population grows each year while funding
remains the same. She noted that ALSC received funding of $1.2
million in 1984 to serve a target population of 40 thousand. In
2022, ALSC received funding of $681 thousand to serve a
population that tripled to 128 thousand.
2:34:16 PM
MS. NELSON furthered that the state spent $81 dollars per person
in 1984 and $5 per person in 2023. She noted that the
legislature amended ALSC in 2018 with widespread bipartisan
support. She remarked that ALSC is grateful for the state
appropriation, but the amount available fluctuates wildly from
zero to $360 thousand. She acknowledged that economic times are
challenging, but passage of SB 104 ensures the priority of
justice for all.
2:35:43 PM
SENATOR KAUFMAN asked how client eligibility for legal aid is
established.
MS. NELSON replied that income information is gathered to
determine eligibility. She mentioned that the Federal Legal
Services Organization regulates the comprehensive screening
process. The income data is documented and audited annually to
comply with regulations.
CHAIR CLAMAN stated that Senator Dunbar referenced the large
number of survivors of domestic violence represented by ALSC. He
recalled a statistic related to access to legal services
increasing chances that a person will leave an abusive
relationship. He wondered about additional studies with similar
findings.
2:37:31 PM
MS. NELSON replied that multiple studies support the benefits of
providing an attorney to a survivor of domestic violence. Legal
assistance is one of the most effective ways to end the cycle of
abuse. She mentioned that the Attorney General of Alaska
supported the creation of a large group of pro bono attorneys to
help address the epidemic of sexual assault and domestic
violence.
CHAIR CLAMAN requested the seminal research mentioned by Ms.
Nelson. He shared that while domestic relations cases were
challenging, he personally found one to be the most rewarding
case in his career.
2:39:28 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN opened public testimony.
2:39:56 PM
PATRICK REINHART, Director, Governor's Council on Disability and
Special Education, Homer, Alaska, testified in support of SB
104. He stated that people with intellectual and developmental
disabilities are often victims of domestic violence and sexual
assault. He spoke about an "I have rights campaign to teach
people with intellectual and developmental disabilities how they
can report elements of harm. The council refers people to ALSC
and the disability law center of Alaska for support. He stated
that both organizations struggle to keep qualified attorneys. He
appreciated the committee for hearing the bill and Senator
Dunbar for his sponsorship.
2:41:18 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN closed public testimony.
2:41:38 PM
SENATOR GIESSEL remarked that her mother was an attorney who
offered pro bono work to seniors. She expressed concern about
the fiscal note and the difficulties ahead with the finance
committee. She wondered if offering the funding through the
finance subcommittee might be a better option.
SENATOR DUNBAR replied that he was not a member of the finance
subcommittee. He asked finance committee members listening to
the meeting to fund ALSC. He recognized the significance of the
fiscal note but believed that the bill provides an appropriate
use of court fees. He stated that using fees from the legal
system to provide access to the system was appropriate.
CHAIR CLAMAN clarified that the Senate Judiciary Committee
requested the fiscal note, and the chair of the Senate Judiciary
Finance Subcommittee was Senator Kiehl.
SENATOR GIESSEL wondered if the fiscal note could be a zero
fiscal note since the court already collects the filing fees.
CHAIR CLAMAN responded that all fees collected go to the general
fund.
2:44:00 PM
SENATOR KIEHL agreed with Senator Claman about collected fees
and the general fund. He added that the civil legal services
fund appropriation is a language appropriation, which is not
appropriate for finance subcommittee consideration.
2:44:27 PM
CHAIR CLAMAN requested amendments to SB 104 by 5:00 p.m. March
26, 2023.
2:45:04 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Claman adjourned the Senate Judiciary Standing Committee
meeting at 2:45 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Presentation on 2020 Alaska Victimization Survey Results to Senate Judiciary 3.24.2023.pdf |
SJUD 3/24/2023 1:30:00 PM |
|
| SB 104 version A 3.15.2023.PDF |
SJUD 3/20/2023 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/24/2023 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/27/2023 1:30:00 PM |
SB 104 |
| SB 104 Sponsor Statement version A 3.17.2023.pdf |
SFIN 4/12/2023 1:00:00 PM SJUD 3/20/2023 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/24/2023 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/27/2023 1:30:00 PM |
SB 104 |
| SB 104 Sectional Analysis version A 3.17.2023.pdf |
SFIN 4/12/2023 1:00:00 PM SJUD 3/20/2023 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/24/2023 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/27/2023 1:30:00 PM |
SB 104 |
| SB 104 Supporting Document - ALSC Civil Legal Services Fund Fact Sheet 3.17.2023.pdf |
SFIN 4/12/2023 1:00:00 PM SJUD 3/20/2023 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/24/2023 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/27/2023 1:30:00 PM |
SB 104 |
| SB 104 Supporting Testimony - Received as of 3.23.2023.pdf |
SJUD 3/24/2023 1:30:00 PM |
SB 104 |
| SB 104 Opposing Testimony - Received as of 3.20.2023.pdf |
SJUD 3/20/2023 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/24/2023 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/27/2023 1:30:00 PM |
SB 104 |
| SB 104 Fiscal Note DCCED-DCRA 3.17.2023.pdf |
SJUD 3/20/2023 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/24/2023 1:30:00 PM SJUD 3/27/2023 1:30:00 PM |
SB 104 |