HB 278 - SEX OFFENDER PROBATION CONDITIONS 1:21:40 PM VICE CHAIR THOMPSON announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 278, "An Act allowing as a condition of probation for a defendant convicted of certain sex offenses a prohibition against the defendant's residing at a residence where outdoor recreational equipment suitable for use by children under 16 years of age is located on the property." 1:22:12 PM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 278, Version 27-LS1197\M, Gardner, 2/23/12, as the working document. REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT objected for the purpose of discussion. 1:22:35 PM REPRESENTATIVE PETE PETERSEN, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, explained that by altering the statute pertaining to conditions of probation - AS 12.55.100 - HB 278 would provide the court with the discretionary authority to set, as an additional condition of probation for those convicted of certain sex offenses, a prohibition pertaining to outdoor recreational equipment suitable for use by children under 16 years of age. This bill was engendered by a situation [that occurred in Anchorage] in which a man sexually abused three children after luring them onto his property with such equipment. The intent of HB 278 is to prevent such situations from occurring. According to some national statistics from the Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM) - [some of which are] included in members' packets - one in four girls and one in seven boys have been sexually assaulted; 67 percent of all people who've been sexually assaulted are children 17 years of age and younger; 86 percent of all children who are sexually assaulted are female; previously-convicted perpetrators are much more likely to reoffend; and child molesters - over a four- to five-year period - have a recidivism rate of 12.7 percent. Sex offenders - as a group - are very heterogeneous, and so it's important to treat each case uniquely and individually, he remarked, indicating that HB 278 would provide for just that type of treatment, giving Alaska courts another tool with which to tailor a sex offender's probation. Again, the bill would only apply in situations involving certain sex offenses, and the proposed additional condition of probation would be discretionary, rather than mandatory. House Bill 278, he relayed in conclusion, is supported by Victims for Justice (VFJ), the Alaska Peace Officers Association (APOA), and the Alaska Association of Chiefs of Police, Inc. (AACOP). VICE CHAIR THOMPSON said he supports the concept of HB 278, but remarked that the bill itself seems pretty broad. 1:26:30 PM MONICA SOUTHWORTH, Staff, Representative Pete Petersen, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of the sponsor, Representative Petersen, in response to questions, offered her understanding that no other state has a condition of probation like the one HB 278 is proposing, but pointed out that some of Alaska's existing conditions of probation already address the private property of certain convicted sex offenders; for example, there are conditions pertaining to [residing on property near school grounds,] to possessing or using a computer, and to using or creating an Internet site. VICE CHAIR THOMPSON questioned whether snow machines or basketballs would qualify as "outdoor recreational equipment" for purposes of the bill. MS. SOUTHWORTH said, "I suppose." VICE CHAIR THOMPSON again remarked on the seeming broadness of the bill. REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT expressed concern that such broadness could potentially violate the constitutional rights of convicted sex offenders. REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN offered his belief that by applying only to the behavior of installing outdoor recreational equipment on one's property or at one's residence - rather than to the behavior of residing at a residence where such equipment is located - Version M would address such concerns. REPRESENTATIVE LYNN characterized the intent of the bill as good, but questioned whether the court already has the authority to provide for such a condition of probation. REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN offered his belief that the court does have that authority now. However, specifying it in statute would ensure that the court itself knows it has that authority, particularly in light of the aforementioned Anchorage situation. In response to other questions, he ventured that if a convicted sex offender already had such equipment on his/her property or at his/her residence, then, depending on the specific facts of the case, the court could order the person to dismantle the equipment, or to relocate, or to ask the actual property owner to dismantle the equipment, as a condition of probation. VICE CHAIR THOMPSON questioned whether such would constitute a taking by the state. REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN said he didn't know. In response to other questions, he indicated that the bill's proposed prohibition would only apply while the convicted sex offender is on probation; and reiterated that depending on the specific facts of the case, a convicted sex offender could be ordered to relocate or to [work with] the actual property owner regarding installing/dismantling such equipment. 1:35:59 PM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG expressed a preference for the original version of the bill, and suggested, therefore, that his motion to adopt Version M as the work draft be tabled. The committee took a brief at-ease. REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT removed his objection to the motion to adopt Version M as the work draft. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made a motion to table his motion to adopt proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 278, Version 27- LS1197\M, Gardner, 2/23/12, as the work draft. There being no objection, it was so ordered. 1:39:21 PM JEFFREY A. MITTMAN, Executive Director, American Civil Liberties Union of Alaska (ACLU of Alaska), after mentioning that he'd provided written testimony detailing the ACLU of Alaska's concerns with HB 278, pointed out that a convicted sex offender's inability to find housing once released from prison can lead to him/her reoffending. He suggested, therefore, that HB 278 be changed such that the proposed condition of probation would instead be a prohibition on "creating" an attraction for children, rather than a prohibition on either "residing" or "installing". 1:41:11 PM CARMEN GUTIERREZ, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner - Anchorage, Department of Corrections (DOC) - after briefly describing how the DOC currently treats those convicted of sex offenses against children under its sex offender containment model, and providing some statistics regarding the resulting recidivism rates - explained that research indicates that HB 278 would not provide Alaska's probation officers with a useful tool. She, too, noted that a convicted sex offender's inability to find housing once he/she is released from prison can lead to him/her reoffending, and that the court already has the authority to provide for special conditions of probation such as the one proposed by the bill regarding outdoor recreational equipment. She added that probation officers, if they find anything inappropriate at a probationer's home, already have the authority to require him/her to change his/her living situation. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG questioned the constitutionality of existing AS 12.55.100(e)(2)(A)-(C). MR. MITTMAN and MS. GUTIERREZ agreed to research that issue further. MS. GUTIERREZ, in response to another question, reiterated that a convicted sex offender's inability to find housing once he/she is released from prison can lead to him/her reoffending. 1:54:08 PM NANCY MEADE, General Counsel, Administrative Staff, Office of the Administrative Director, Alaska Court System (ACS), said that the ACS has no position on HB 278. She, too, noted that the court already has the authority to provide for special conditions of probation when they are reasonably related to the initial offense, adding that it's the DOC that makes recommendations regarding what conditions ought to be imposed. 1:55:21 PM SUSAN SULLIVAN, Executive Director, Victims for Justice (VFJ), said that the board of directors of the VFJ shares the sponsor's concern for victims and potential victims of pedophiles, and believes HB 278's proposed condition of probation to be reasonable, not burdensome, particularly given its discretionary nature. 1:56:52 PM TRACEY WOLLENBERG, Deputy Public Defender, Appellate Division, Central Office, Public Defender Agency (PDA), Department of Administration (DOA), expressed concern that the language of HB 278's proposed discretionary condition of probation is over- broad and vague, and thus could leave a convicted sex offender out on probation without any housing options. For example, the term, "outdoor recreation equipment" is not yet defined in the bill, and so could refer to a broad range of items commonly found in people's homes, and the word, "property" could refer to an apartment building, over which a tenant who is a convicted sex offender would have no control. Convicted sex offenders out on probation are already severely limited with regard to where they can live, and HB 278 would only increase those limitations and perhaps create more problems than it would solve. The perceived problem, she posited, can already be addressed without the bill, because the court has the authority to impose conditions of probation that are reasonably related to the initial offense. In conclusion, she, too, agreed to research the constitutionality of existing AS 12.55.100(e)(2)(A)-(C). REPRESENTATIVE PETERSEN, in response to comments, indicated that he would continue to work on addressing the concerns raised. VICE CHAIR THOMPSON relayed that HB 278 would be held over [with the motion to adopt Version M as the work draft having been tabled].