CSSB 321 - FINGERPRINTING AND CRIME RECORDS CHAIRMAN PORTER: "The next bill to be considered, and we'll be considering this, not moving it, is CS for SB 321." Rep. James asked if a similar bill had not already been passed. Chairman Porter acknowledged this and recognized DEAN J. GUANELI, DEPARTMENT OF LAW, to speak on SB 321 and its origins, but first he presented some background himself. CHAIRMAN PORTER: "Let me see if I can track why we're hearing this bill, for the information of the committee. Dean, if I am misspeaking, or this doesn't sound correct to you, let me know. The bill that we heard had part of this bill in it, and part of this bill was not in it. This bill basically contains two sections: (1) addressing the fingerprint part of the criminal records bill that we heard; (2) participation by the state in a VICAP (Violent Criminals Apprehension Program) program which I'm sure Dean will tell us about. The portion that we are in effect rehearing was deleted from the bill that we sent to the Senate for some reason. Consequently, this bill with the new section and the other bill as it now remains if both passed would meet and surpass the goals of the original bill we have heard." REP. NORDLUND: "It would surpass? It wouldn't be equal to the original bill?" CHAIRMAN PORTER: "It would be more than the bill that we heard originally because within this is this participation in the VICAP program which isn't in that other bill and wasn't in that other bill. Was that fair?" DEAN J. GUANELI, Chief, Legal Services Section, Assistant Attorney General, testified regarding CS HB 321. He said, "Almost. The bill that passed the House, I think it was close to unanimously, if not unanimously, is working its way through the Senate and it still is intact. The fingerprint provision (is) in this bill, because of Senator Halford's fear that the APSIN bill would not make it all the way through the Senate, and it was his feeling, and I agree, that kind of the linch pin of that whole program is the mandatory fingerprinting provision. And so he said, `Well, I'll throw that into this bill, as well, so that we can make sure that if nothing else happens, at least the mandatory fingerprinting provision will get through.' "I believe that the House bill has a good chance of making it through the Senate. And, if it does, then we will have the fingerprinting provision in that, as well. But that's the reason why you have it in here. The fingerprinting provision was stripped out of the Senate's version of the APSIN bill, which I think is still working its way through the Senate. I know it's a little confusing, but that's the situation. "In any event, the other portion of this bill makes the state law enforcement agencies a participant in what's known as the VICAP program: it's the Violent Criminals Apprehension Program in conjunction with the FBI. What that does is, it collects information about solved and even unsolved murders in states. The FBI compiles that information and they keep track of serial killers in that way. They've found it very helpful in tracking these people as they move through the states and trying to put together little pieces of investigations - an agency in one state will do an investigation, an agency in another state will do an investigation, and the FBI will sort of meld those together, find out that there are similarities and try to apprehend the person before he kills again. So, this requires, then, the police agencies in Alaska to submit reports to the FBI, and if the FBI says, `Yes, that's the report we're interested in,' then some additional information goes to the FBI that then can help us solve, perhaps, some unsolved killings. That's what the second part of the bill does. So I hope that that answers the questions about this procedurally and substantively." CHAIRMAN PORTER: "Is there anyone else that wishes to testify on SB 321? Any other questions for Dean? Seeing none, what is the wish of the committee?" REP. JAMES: "I thought we don't want to do this." CHAIRMAN PORTER: "I'm sorry, that's right. We're going to hold the bill for right now. Are there any other questions about the bill before we put it away?" REP. CLIFF DAVIDSON: "Are we waiting for something on the bill?" CHAIRMAN PORTER: "Yes." REP. DAVIDSON: "Politics?" CHAIRMAN PORTER: "Politics." REP. NORDLUND: "Somebody wants to kill the other bill in the Senate, is basically what we're saying here, and this one is hedging our bets; at least, providing for the important part of the other bill." CHAIRMAN PORTER: "Fair enough." REP. NORDLUND: "You couldn't say that, but I can say that."