CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 64(FIN) "An Act relating to theft and property offenses; relating to the definition of 'prior convictions' for certain theft offenses; establishing the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission and providing an expiration date; relating to the crime of custodial interference; relating to the duties of the Alaska Judicial Council; relating to jail-time credit for offenders in court-ordered treatment programs; relating to conditions of release, probation, and parole; relating to duties of the commissioner of corrections and board of parole; establishing a fund for reducing recidivism in the Department of Health and Social Services; requiring the commissioner of health and social services to establish programs for persons on conditions of release or probation that require testing for controlled substances and alcoholic beverages; requiring the board of parole to establish programs for persons on parole that require testing for controlled substances and alcoholic beverages; relating to the duties of the Department of Health and Social Services; and providing for an effective date." 5:02:25 PM Co-Chair Stoltze noted that the administration was largely responsible for the CS. Vice-Chair Neuman MOVED to ADOPT the proposed committee substitute for CSSB 64(FIN), Work Draft 28-LS0116\Q (Gardner, 4/19/14). Representative Holmes OBJECTED for discussion. Co-Chair Stoltze noted that his staff would discuss the changes in the CS. SENATOR JOHN COGHILL, SPONSOR, commented that his staff was alert to any changes in the bill. Co-Chair Stoltze concurred. DANIEL GEORGE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE, explained the changes in the CS. He discussed items that had been removed from the bill including the reduction of penalties for offenders successfully completing court ordered treatment programs for persons convicted of driving under the influence relating to termination of a revocation of a person's driver's license. Limitations of driver's licenses and restoration of a driver's license were also addressed in the CS. He added changes related to confidentiality of certain records of criminal cases and the reduced recidivism item, which was changed from a fund to a program. Mr. George noted that the former section 1 of the bill had been removed. The section included a provision in SB 108. He moved to former sections 28, 29, 30 and 31, which had been removed. Senator Coghill asked about the provisions that had been removed. Mr. George replied that the provisions related to the limited licenses and confidentiality report records. Co-Chair Stoltze noted that the changes were before the committee as individual amendments. Mr. George pointed to section 27, page 16, line 30 addressing electronic monitoring for individuals in a private residence or community residential center. He discussed the removal of a section related to driver's license revocation. He pointed out section 31, page 21, lines 13 and 14 addressing the report to the legislature by electronic means. He continued with section 32, page 22 including the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission's membership and staff. Item 7 was changed to Commissioner of Corrections or their designee. Item 8 was changed to Commissioner of Public Safety or designee and item 9 was changed to an active duty member of a municipal law enforcement agency. The commission included 13 individuals with 11 voting members and previously included 11 individuals with 9 voting members. 5:08:09 PM Mr. George continued to address changes in the legislation. He pointed to page 23, line 15 related to the powers and duties of the commission. He pointed to item 7, which was changed and new item 10. Senator Coghill relayed that the item was under the powers and duties of the commission. He expressed agreement with the items. Mr. George moved to page 24, items K and L on lines 25 through 28. He noted the removal of a previous item related to the over-classification of prisoners. He stated that the word efficacy replaced the word effects on line 26 of page 24. He pointed to section 33, page 25, lines 5-7 addressing the criminal justice commission's establishment of date and staffing from the judicial council. 5:11:27 PM Mr. George moved to page 26, lines 10 through 20 and language relating to the recidivism reduction program. He noted that references to the creation of the fund were removed. He stated that language that allowed the commissioner to enter into contracts to provide for programs in the section was added as seen on lines 17 through 20. Senator Coghill provided comments on the changes. He stated that he could understand the removal of the drivers licenses provisions; it had been difficult to arrive at a solution. He believed the policy was straightforward. He stated that he liked the idea of a private attorney on the commission. He understood the change to police force. Co-Chair Stoltze explained that a private attorney was rarely a prosecutor. Senator Coghill replied that he sought a candidate that was not employed by the state. He agreed with the solution of the police force. Co-Chair Stoltze stated that he had considered a union member because of the unfettered opinion. Senator Coghill opted for a small commission. Co-Chair Stoltze stated that he would not recommend a larger commission. Senator Coghill stated the difficulty increasing beyond the $750 felony level. 5:15:07 PM Representative Gara pointed to page 28, line 3 of the bill and wondered if a typo was missed. He wished to verify that "prosecutions" meant cases that were charged "on or after" as interpreted by the Courts. Co-Chair Stoltze replied that the language would be clarified before the bill was moved. Representative Gara pointed to another area where he thought words may be missing. Co-Chair Stoltze directed staff to review the language. He commented that the committee was waiting on a draft CS of the capital budget. Co-Chair Stoltze WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO further OBJECTION, the Work Draft 28-LS0116\Q was ADOPTED. Co-Chair Stoltze appreciated that an alcohol provision had been removed from the bill. 5:18:48 PM RECESSED 8:43:02 PM RECONVENED Co-Chair Stoltze brought the meeting back to order. JORDAN SHILLING, STAFF, SENATOR JOHN COGHILL offered to detail the bill. Co-Chair Stoltze replied that the committee understood the bill. He initiated the amendment process. Representative Holmes MOVED to ADOPT conceptual Amendment 1. Page 18, following line 20: Insert a new bill section to read: "* Sec. 30. AS 28.15.201(d) is amended to read: (d) A court revoking a driver's license, privilege to drive, or privilege to obtain a license under AS 28.15.181(c), or the department when revoking a driver's license, privilege to drive, or privilege to obtain a license under AS 28.15.165(c), may grant limited license privileges if (1) the revocation was for a misdemeanor conviction under AS 28.35.030 or a similar municipal ordinance and not for a violation of AS 28.35.032; (2) [THE PERSON (A) HAS NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY CONVICTED AND THE LIMITED LICENSE IS NOT GRANTED DURING THE FIRST 30 DAYS OF THE PERIOD OF REVOCATION; OR (B) HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY CONVICTED AND THE LIMITED LICENSE IS NOT GRANTED DURING THE FIRST 90 DAYS OF THE PERIOD OF REVOCATION; (3)] the court or department requires that the person either (A) [TO] use an ignition interlock device during the period of the limited license whenever the person operates a motor vehicle in a community not included in the list published by the department under AS 28.22.011(b) and, when applicable, [(A)] the person provides proof of installation of the ignition interlock device on every vehicle the person operates; or (B) submit to daily testing as required under AS 47.38.020 in place of the use of the ignition interlock device; use of daily testing in place of an ignition interlock device under this subparagraph is conditioned upon the person's not violating the requirements of the program established in AS 47.38.020; if the person violates those requirements, the court or the department shall (i) revoke the person's limited license; or (ii) require the use of an ignition interlock device as provided in (A) of this paragraph and shall require the person to continue to submit to daily testing as required under AS 47.38.020 [THE PERSON SIGNS AN AFFIDAVIT ACKNOWLEDGING THAT (i) OPERATION BY THE PERSON OF A VEHICLE THAT IS NOT EQUIPPED WITH AN IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE IS SUBJECT TO PENALTIES FOR DRIVING WITH A REVOKED LICENSE; (ii) CIRCUMVENTING OR TAMPERING WITH THE IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE IS A CLASS A MISDEMEANOR; AND (iii) THE PERSON IS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN THE IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE THROUGHOUT THE PERIOD OF THE LIMITED LICENSE, TO KEEP UP-TO-DATE RECORDS IN EACH VEHICLE SHOWING THAT ANY REQUIRED SERVICE AND CALIBRATION IS CURRENT, AND TO PRODUCE THOSE RECORDS IMMEDIATELY ON REQUEST]; (3) [(4)] the person is enrolled in and is in compliance with or has successfully completed the alcoholism screening, evaluation, referral, and program requirements of the Department of Health and Social Services under AS 28.35.030(h); (4) [(5)] the person provides proof of insurance as required by AS 28.20.230 and 28.20.240; and (5) [(6)] the person has not previously been convicted of violating the limitations of an ignition interlock limited license or been convicted of violating the provisions of AS 28.35.030 or 28.35.032 while on probation for a violation of those sections." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Page 19, following line 30: Insert a new subsection to read: "(i) A person granted a limited license and required to use an ignition interlock device under (d)(2)(A) of this section shall sign an affidavit acknowledging that (1) operation by the person of a vehicle that is not equipped with an ignition interlock device is subject to penalties for driving with a revoked license; (2) circumventing or tampering with the ignition interlock device is a class A misdemeanor; and (3) the person is required to maintain the ignition interlock device throughout the period of the limited license, to keep up-to-date records in each vehicle showing that any required service and calibration is current, and to produce those records immediately on request." Page 22, following line 17: Insert a new bill section to read: "* Sec. 35. AS 28.35.030(t) is amended to read: (t) Notwithstanding (b) or (n) of this section, the court (1) shall waive the requirement of the use of an ignition interlock device when a person operates a motor vehicle in a community included on the list published by the department under AS 28.22.011(b); (2) may waive the requirement of the use of an ignition interlock device when the person regains the privilege to operate a motor vehicle if the court requires that a person convicted under this section submit to daily testing as required under AS 47.38.020 in place of the use of the ignition interlock device; use of daily testing in place of an ignition interlock device under this subsection is conditioned upon the person's not violating the requirements of the program established in AS 47.38.020; if the person violates those requirements, the court shall (i) revoke the person's license, privilege to drive, or privilege to obtain a license for the remainder of the period the person is required to use an ignition interlock device as provided in (b) or (n) of this section; or (ii) require the use of an ignition interlock device as provided in (A) of this paragraph and shall require the person to continue to submit to daily testing as required under AS 47.38.020." Renumber the following bill sections accordingly. Page 30, line 4: Delete "or" Following "probation": Delete "," Page 30, line 5, following "beverages": Insert ", a person granted a limited license as provided by AS 28.15.201(d), or a person required to comply with this section as provided by AS 28.35.030(t)" Page 30, following line 22: Insert a new subsection to read: "(d) If a person is required to comply with the program provided in this section as a condition of a limited license under AS 28.15.201(d) or when required by AS 28.35.030(t), the commissioner shall adopt regulations that provide a means to ensure that the division of motor vehicles and the court receive notice if the person fails to appear for an appointment as required by the program or tests positive for the use of controlled substances or alcoholic beverages." Reletter the following subsection accordingly. Page 32, lines 12 - 13: Delete "29 - 36, and 38 - 44" Insert "29 - 38, and 40 - 46" Page 32, line 14, following "Act,": Insert "AS 28.15.201(d), as amended by sec. 30 of this Act," Page 32, line 15: Delete "AS 28.15.201(g) and (h)" Insert "AS 28.15.201(g) - (i)" Delete "sec. 30" Insert "sec. 31" Page 32, lines 15 - 16: Delete "sec. 31" Insert "sec. 32" Page 32, line 16: Delete "sec. 32" Insert "sec. 33" Page 32, line 17: Delete "sec. 33" Insert "sec. 34" Page 32, line 17, following the first occurrence of "Act,": Insert "AS 28.35.030(t), as amended by sec. 35 of this Act," Page 32, line 17: Delete "sec. 34" Insert "sec. 36" Page 32, line 18: Delete "sec. 35" Insert "sec. 37" Page 32, lines 18 - 19: Delete "sec. 36" Insert "sec. 38" Page 32, line 19: Delete "sec. 40" Insert "sec. 42" Page 32, line 20: Delete "29 - 36, and 38 - 44" Insert "29 - 38, and 40 - 46" Page 32, lines 21 - 22: Delete "29 - 36, and 38 - 44" Insert "29 - 38, and 40 - 46" Page 33, line 23: Delete "sec. 38" Insert "sec. 40" Page 33, line 25: Delete "sec. 38" Insert "sec. 40" Page 33, line 30: Delete "sec. 34" Insert "sec. 36" Page 34, line 2: Delete "sec. 35" Insert "sec. 37" Delete "sec. 36" Insert "sec. 38" Page 34, line 5: Delete "sec. 40" Insert "sec. 42" Page 34, line 9: Delete "Section 37" Insert "Section 39" Page 34, line 10: Delete "Section 45" Insert "Section 47" Page 34, line 11: Delete "29 - 36, and 38 - 44" Insert "29 - 38, and 40 - 46" Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for discussion. Representative Holmes explained that the amendment addressed misdemeanor offenders for driving under the influence (DUI) offenses. She stated that existing law allowed reinstatement of the license over time with enrollment in the ASAP program, obtaining of a high risk insurance plan and utilizing an interlock device. The amendment would allow the option of twice-a-day testing versus the interlock device. She noted the efforts in both bodies on the issue, but recognized that the proper balance had not been achieved so she would withdraw the amendment. Representative Holmes WITHDREW Amendment 1. 8:47:00 PM AT EASE 8:50:56 PM RECONVENED Representative Wilson had questions about the fiscal notes. Representative Costello pointed to the fiscal notes including previously published notes: zero impact from the Department of Administration, zero impact from the Department of Administration, fiscal impact note from the Department of Corrections. 8:53:26 PM Representative Wilson asked about the Department of Corrections fiscal note. She thought that most of the programs would be paid by the offender. She asked for detailed information on the note. RON TAYLOR, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, replied that the PACE and risk assessment programs would not be paid for by the offenders. He explained that the 24/7 program would be paid for by offenders. The PACE and risk assessment programs added probation officer positions to administer the programs. Representative Wilson asked if the positions were all filled and how difficult it would be to fill 14 more positions. Mr. Taylor replied that the positions were new. The PACE program was operational with a couple of positions in Anchorage, Palmer and Fairbanks. The goal was expansion to a statewide basis. Representative Wilson asked if the PACE pilot program's positions were filled. Mr. Taylor affirmed that the positions were filled. Representative Wilson was unhappy with the cost listed in the fiscal note. Representative Edgmon believed that the fiscal impact would be offset by the savings achieved by the electronic monitoring program. Mr. Taylor concurred. Representative Wilson wondered if the offenders could be placed on electronic monitoring without the 14 additional positions. Mr. Taylor explained that the PACE program did not involve electronic monitoring. 8:56:53 PM Representative Wilson asked for the savings resulting from the PACE program. Mr. Taylor answered that there was not a projected savings for the PACE program. He explained that the program was designed to target high-risk technical violators for probation and parole that would revisit the system repeatedly. The program would ensure expedited attention and increased supervision monitoring through the program and through the court. Mr. Shilling clarified that the 27/7 sobriety program was paid for by offenders, while the PACE program was an intensive form of probation that would lead to fewer days in jail. He agreed that the intent of the program was for cost savings resulting from less jail time. He pointed out that states enacting similar programs experienced cost savings. He agreed that electronic monitoring was significantly less expensive than housing prisoners, but the PACE program required new personnel to achieve the savings. 8:58:32 PM Representative Wilson understood, but the program was currently operating. She wondered if it was working. Mr. Taylor answered that the program was very limited in terms of the number of participants. Representative Wilson noted that 120 people were participating. She thought more documentation should be provided regarding the program's success. Mr. Shilling answered that the judicial council had compiled a comprehensive study on the PACE pilot program. He offered to provide the results to the representative's office. He stated that the results mirrored those positive savings seen in other state's participating in similar programs. Representative Wilson believed that more time was needed before 25 additional people were hired. Mr. Shilling answered that 14 personnel were required for the PACE program and the additional requests were for the risk needs assessments program. Representative Edgmon believed that the bill spoke to the state's high recidivism numbers. He spoke to the high cost of housing inmates and believed that the initial spending would save state money in the long run. Mr. Shilling agreed. He stated that probationers were a large cost driver for the department. He stated that PACE was intended to repair the damaged system. 9:01:19 PM Representative Costello continued to discuss the fiscal notes. She clarified the Department of Corrections note allowed for 25 positions. Additional fiscal notes included a previously published fiscal impact note from Department of Corrections and a previously published fiscal impact note from the Department of Health and Social Services. Representative Wilson asked about the Department of Health and Social Services 24/7 program. She wondered where the funds would be repaid by offenders. Mr. Shilling noted that the fiscal impact was due to the 24/7 program's indigency waiver attached. If the offender had an inability to pay, the state would pay for the cost of testing. He explained that the fiscal note assumed that one third of the people on 24/7 sobriety would be unable to pay. He opined that the estimate was overly cautious and provided a high estimate. 9:04:01 PM Co-Chair Stoltze wondered how high the estimate was. Mr. Shilling deferred to an expert from another state utilizing a similar program. Co-Chair Stoltze commented that the money would not be returned to the general fund once the bill passed with the accompanying fiscal note. Representative Wilson replied that the question had been asked earlier in the day. She thought the offenders would pay for the program. She asked for a clarification on the program. Mr. Shilling replied that the fiscal note separated costs for electronic monitoring and in-person testing. He estimated that the in-person testing would cost $5 per day, while the electronic monitoring would cost $10 per day. He wished to hear more about the department's estimate. Representative Wilson commented that the program was active and vendors were already performing the service. She believed that the estimates would be simple to obtain. Co-Chair Stoltze welcomed a suggestion for a reduction. He suggested a 25 percent reduction. Representative Wilson suggested reducing the fiscal note to $500,000, removing the portion for offenders that could not pay. 9:06:54 PM Mr. Shilling asked DOC to elaborate on a current program. Mr. Taylor relayed that indigent people accounted for 20 percent of the people with electronic monitoring systems. He clarified that the program was separate from the 24/7 program. Representative Wilson had been informed by the department that those criminals utilizing ankle bracelets could afford to pay the cost. Vice-Chair Neuman asked if the department had the ability to take Permanent Fund Dividends to cover the cost. Mr. Taylor replied yes. Co-Chair Stoltze asked if there was an objection to reducing the fiscal note to $500,000. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Representative Gara OBJECTED and stated that the savings of the jail bed cost was not reflected in the fiscal note. He was worried that the savings would be unraveled. Co-Chair Stoltze asked Representative Gara if he wished to have a roll call. Representative Gara responded that he did not wish to have a roll call if he was alone in his opinion. Co-Chair Stoltze stated that the fiscal note was reduced to $500,000 and the revised fiscal note was ADOPTED. Representative Costello discussed the remaining fiscal notes including one fiscal impact note from Department of Health and Social Services, one indeterminate note from the Department of Law, one zero impact note from the Office of the Governor, one zero impact note from the Alaska Court System, and one fiscal impact note from the Alaska Court System. 9:11:53 PM AT EASE 9:12:18 PM RECONVENED Co-Chair Stoltze MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2, 28-LS0116\Q.7, Gardner, 4/19/14, (copy on file). Page 16, line 31, through page 17, line 3: Delete "by electronic monitoring at a private residence, or at a community residential center. If electronic monitoring at a private residence or [OR, IF] a community residential center: Insert "at a community residential center or by electronic monitoring at a private residence. If [,IF] a community residential center or electronic monitoring at a private residence" Representative Holmes OBJECTED for discussion. DANIEL GEORGE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE BILL STOLTZE, explained that the amendment was brought to the committee by the Department of Corrections. The language read that an individual could serve their incarceration by electronic monitoring at a private residence or a community residential center, which might be confusing to a person interpreting the law in the future. The intent was not that electronic monitoring would be required at a community residential center. By changing the language the legislature would provide clear instruction. Co-Chair Stoltze clarified that the amendment applied to the finance version of the bill rather than the judiciary. Mr. Taylor agreed that the amendment provided clarification. Representative Holmes WITHDREW her OBJECTION. There being NO further OBJECTION, it was so ordered. Amendment 2 was ADOPTED. Vice-Chair Neuman MOVED to REPORT HCS CSSB 64(FIN) out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. Co-Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for discussion. Representative Wilson expressed disappointment in the lack of statistics available for the programs seeking funding through the bill. She requested semiannual reports from the department to help the legislature determine the best use of funds in the future. She valued current statistics when making large item budget decisions. 9:16:14 PM Representative Holmes stated that recidivism was a large problem and she did not wish to see another project akin to Goose Creek Correctional Center. She credited the sponsor and staff for their hard work on the legislation. Co-Chair Stoltze commented on the section related to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Representative Gara appreciated the section. Representative Edgmon stressed that the legislation's expense would grow if the strategies in the bill were not employed. He supported the bill and posited that the programs worked well in other states. Representative Gara noted that one cost was not measured in the legislation. He stated that fewer victims would suffer if criminals were monitored 24 hours a day. He stated that a price for the safety was impossible to calculate. 9:19:05 PM Vice-Chair Neuman discussed victims in Alaska. He hoped that a reduction in recidivism would result in fewer victims. He mentioned the efforts in the Mat-Su valley to educate community members about crime in the area. He spoke about the troopers involved in investigations related to low-level drug crimes and robberies. He stated that the legislature must help ensure that the department reports on the spending to determine which programs were most effective. 9:20:50 PM AT EASE 9:21:32 PM RECONVENED Representative Gara spoke to the PTSD component of the bill. He appreciated Co-Chair Stoltze's support of the item. He discussed that the disorder had increased due to numerous wars. He explained that PTSD was triggered and those people who could not escape their trigger endured great suffering. He stated that incarcerated prisoners were susceptible to inescapable triggers in their jail cells. He pointed out the bill's sentence mitigator provided to the accused if combat-related PTSD or traumatic brain injury was a substantial cause for committing the crime. A similar mitigator was allowed for fetal alcohol syndrome. Representative Holmes addressed the 24/7 license provisions. She understood the public's concerns about drinking alcohol and driving. She argued in favor of a limited license following a driving while intoxicated infraction. She advocated for the ignition interlocks. She stated that the 24/7 program allowed for testing every 12 hours, which she deemed optimal. 9:25:57 PM Co-Chair Stoltze appreciated the work done by Mr. Shilling. He appreciated the work done by his staff Mr. George. He spoke to the significant work done on the bill. The committee applauded for the work done by Mr. Shilling and Mr. George. Co-Chair Stoltze WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. HCSCSSB 64(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with one new zero fiscal note from the Alaska Court System, one new indeterminate fiscal note from the Department of Law, one new fiscal impact note from the Alaska Court System, one new fiscal impact note from the Department of Corrections, one new fiscal impact note from the House Finance Committee for the Department of Health and Social Services, three previously published zero fiscal notes, FN8 (ADM), FN10 (ADM) and FN13 (GOV), two previously published fiscal impact notes: FN14 (DHS) and FN16 (COR). 9:28:31 PM AT EASE 11:23:45 PM RECONVENED