HB 183-CRIMINAL JUSTICE DATA ANALYSIS COMMISSION  1:01:44 PM CHAIR CLAMAN announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 183, "An Act renaming the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission the Alaska Criminal Justice Data Analysis Commission; relating to the membership of the Alaska Criminal Justice Data Analysis Commission; relating to the powers and duties of the Alaska Criminal Justice Data Analysis Commission; extending the termination date of the Alaska Criminal Justice Data Analysis Commission; relating to the duties of the Judicial Council; providing for an effective date by amending the effective date of secs. 41 and 73, ch. 1, 4SSLA 2017; and providing for an effective date by repealing the effective date of sec. 74, ch. 1, 4SSLA 2017." CHAIR CLAMAN, as prime sponsor, stated that the bill would require a modification to reflect the 2021 sunset date of the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission. He spoke about a committee substitute, labeled "32-LS0645\I, Radford, 1/21/22," and stated that there would be an additional committee substitute forthcoming. 1:02:53 PM LIZZIE KUBITZ, Staff to Representative Matt Claman, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Claman, prime sponsor, offered information regarding the aforementioned committee substitute to HB 183 [which was never moved for adoption as a working document]. She stated that the committee substitute before the committee reflected the changes to the termination date of the Alaska Criminal Justice Commission (ACJC) and related statutory changes and would enact the Alaska Criminal Justice Data Analysis Commission (ACJDAC). She explained that Section 4 had been changed to specify that the victims' rights advocate member of the commission be designated by the Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault (ANDVSA). CHAIR CLAMAN recommended against adopting the committee substitute due to a forthcoming, updated committee substitute. 1:05:22 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked the rationale for capitalizing some references to the term "commission" and not to others within the title and body of the bill and whether it would permit there to exist multiple commissions. CHAIR CLAMAN answered that it was likely a matter of drafting style, and the intent was not to create more than one commission. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to page 3 on line 22 referencing the member from the Department of Law. He noted that the Deputy Attorney General would be the designee, rather than the Attorney General, and asked whether that could create conflict [within the Department of Law.] CHAIR CLAMAN answered that the change in the member designation had been made at the suggestion of the ACJC as the deputy is the position directly engaged in criminal prosecutions. He stated that there had been no precedent of a conflict [within the Department of Law.] REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether it had been considered the effects of the retirement of the head of the ACJC and his successor maintaining a differing viewpoint. CHAIR CLAMAN answered that it had not been a point of discussion. 1:09:09 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE referred to Section 6, on page 10, line 22 and asked for information about the project described to study risk factors. CHAIR CLAMAN answered that the issue of risk factors had become prevalent and had been included at the recommendation of the ACJC to develop a working definition of "risk factor." REPRESENTATIVE VANCE stated her understanding of examining data and asked how the project referenced in Section 6 would differ from the data analysis already taking place. 1:11:08 PM SUSANNE DIPIETRO, Executive Director, Alaska Judicial Council, answered that the risk assessment study has been a practice of the ACJC and referred to a report on the Alaska Judicial Commission's website that depicts data analyses including charts with methodology and findings. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether the reference to a "project" in Section 6 would be akin to what Ms. DiPietro had just described. MS. DIPIETRO confirmed that it was. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referred to language in Section 4, on page 4, regarding the appointment of a victims' rights advocate. He noted that current practice would be appointment by the governor and asked whether the proposed bill would designate ANDVSA as the appointing authority. He asked what the rationale was to designate ANDVSA and not the governor as the appointing authority. CHAIR CLAMAN restated that the recommendation had been made by ACJC and had been made to include an individual engaged in working with victims' rights. He added that the appointment would be made after consultation with ANDVSA's members and partner organizations. He deferred to Ms. Stanfill to offer additional information. 1:14:56 PM BRENDA STANFILL, Executive Director, Alaska Network on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, explained that ANDVSA is a membership organization that represents domestic violence and sexual assault programs throughout Alaska and may support victims of other types of crimes. She answered the question posed by Representative Eastman by explaining that a process was established to ensure that diverse [victims' advocate] organizations would be represented on the commission. She noted that partner organizations include the Alaska Native Women's Resource Center, Healing Native Hearts, Alaska Legal Services, and the Alaska Native Justice Center. She noted that a formal process had been established to select the representative member. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether there exists concern on the part of ANDVSA that current or previous governors had not been receptive to concerns expressed by ANDVSA. MS. STANFILL answered that there had not been any consultation with any groups during the selection of the victims' rights representative on the council in the past. CHAIR CLAMAN offered that interest had existed in achieving expanded community involvement rather than solely political involvement in selecting the victims' rights member. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked for an explanation on the rationale of the selection of members in the past. MS. STANFILL answered that she had no insight into the rationale applied in the selection of members by governors. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN sought the answer from other individuals present. CHAIR CLAMAN stated that he had been a long-serving, ex-officio member of the commission and could not offer insight on the process of deciding the appointment by governors but offered that Ms. Stanfill had been a previously appointed member. He explained that Governor Michael Dunleavey had appointed the father of a young girl who had been killed in Kotzebue. He suggested that the latter appointment had suffered a great personal loss; however, discussions had taken place indicating that he may have lacked connection with victims' rights organizations and ANDVSA. He stated his observation that the commission had expressed an interest in victim's organizations being represented. 1:19:23 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE referred to language on page 4, line 13, that listed the commissioner of the Department of Health and Social Services and asked whether that would be a voting member. CHAIR CLAMAN confirmed that it would be. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked for an explanation of the rationale for that decision. CHAIR CLAMAN explained that there had been a period in which the commissioner of the Department of Health and Social Services was a nonvoting member, and that the commission had reached a consensus that that member should have a vote in recognition that the department engaged in services that pertained to issues related to the department's functions. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked, if the commissioner would hold a voting seat, then what would be the rationale for the elected officials listed in Sections 12 and 13 not holding a voting seat. CHAIR CLAMAN offered that, as recommended by Legislative Legal Services, members of the legislature may later be asked to vote on legislative matters pertaining to certain boards and commissions and are customarily nonvoting members. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked for an explanation of the perception he held that the proposed bill would diminish the governor's discretion in favor of ANDVSA. CHAIR CLAMAN allowed that Representative Eastman's perception was his prerogative and explained that public comments had been sought to address the recommendations made by the Legislative Audit Division to focus on data collection and analysis. He referred to "item 15" in the bill and said that the intent was to include an individual with "lived experience" as a convicted person and would be appointed in consultation with the Attorney General's office's designee. He stated his belief that the changes were made to encourage further public engagement with the commission. REPRESENTATIVE KURKA expressed his concern that HB 183 would expand a pattern of naming specific private organizations in statute that may not have accountability to the public. CHAIR CLAMAN answered that most of the groups were listed in the existing statute and included members appointed by the court system, the Alaska Native Justice Center, and the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority (AMHTA.) He stated that the only change would be for the peace officer representative member to be appointed by the Alaska Association of Chiefs of Police and the victims' advocate representative member to be appointed by ANDVSA. REPRESENTATIVE KURKA reiterated that the points made by Chair Claman were his concern as previously expressed and asked whether that matter should be addressed in a separate bill. CHAIR CLAMAN stated that the commission would likely suggest that matter as a policy decision. 1:26:19 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE stated that there existed several fiscal notes and asked for a broad explanation of what would be anticipated in regard to them. MS. DIPIETRO explained that the Alaska Judicial Council staff was concurrently serving as staff to the commission and appropriation had been made for those functions. She stated her determination that the proposed commission would be adequately staffed with current or possibly fewer resources as evidenced by the elimination of one staff member in the negative fiscal note. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked for further clarification of the fiscal notes. MS. DIPIETRO answered that the council had provided only one of the fiscal notes that was before the committee. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked what the total budget impact would be, considering all of the fiscal notes. CHAIR CLAMAN postulated that a forthcoming committee substitute should include a comprehensive, updated fiscal note. He stated that the Department of Public Safety (DPS) has a designated data analysis staff member, and he did not anticipate any increase would be necessary. 1:30:34 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether the other body had a member similarly active to that of Chair Claman's involvement in the commission. CHAIR CLAMAN answered that it had, and it was currently held by Senator Lora Reinbold. 1:31:12 PM KRIS CURTIS, Legislative Auditor, Legislative Audit Division, introduced herself for the record. CHAIR CLAMAN offered his understanding that the Legislative Audit Division had recommended to continue the data collection and analysis functions of the commission and to remove the function of the commission making recommendations and asked Ms. Curtis to explain the recommendations and offer additional background on the rationale for those recommendations. MS. CURTIS stated that the division had determined during its audit that the commission was very active and well-run, meeting deadlines for the completion of studies and providing recommendations for comprehensive criminal justice reform. She stated that the recommendations offered by the commission had been the basis if the "ill-fated" Senate Bill 91 [during the Thirtieth Alaska State Legislature] and additional recommendations had been sought from the commission for proposed amendments to Senate Bill 91. She stated that it had been observed that the changes that were adopted to Senate Bill 91 in 2018 had not been based on the commission's recommendations. She stated that it had been determined that the commission was not effective in making such recommendations and that it should be terminated. She stated that it had been revealed that there was concern that the data collection and analysis duties of the commission would still be necessary. REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER asked the Alaska Native Justice Center (ANJC) to explain how the commission makes a difference for the people represented by the center. 1:34:34 PM ALEX CLEGHORN, Legal and Policy Director, Alaskan Native Justice Center, answered that the commission fills data collection and analysis functions that AJNC is unable to conduct itself. He suggested that the Alaska Native member of the commission provides representation of rural and Native area residents. REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER asked whether AJNC represented victims, defendants, or both. MR. CLEGHORN answered that ANJC is unique in that it represents both because those individuals are typically represented by separate agencies. REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER asked whether the commission was involved in the victim listening sessions conducted by ANJC and how it incorporates input from those sessions. MR. CLEGHORN answered that the listening sessions were summarized in the ANJC annual reports which the commission may take into consideration. He stated that the commission having access to the experiences captured during the listening sessions brings those lived experiences to a broader audience. REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER requested a representative from AMHTA explain who its beneficiaries are and how its interests relate to the commission. 1:39:02 PM STEVE WILLIAMS, Chief Executive Officer, Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority, answered that AMHTA beneficiaries consist of individuals experiencing mental health issues including substance abuse disorders, intellectual development disabilities, Alzheimer and dementia patients, and individuals with traumatic brain injuries. He stated that 40 percent of those incarcerated annually are such beneficiaries. He stated that the beneficiaries consist of both offenders and victims, and AMHTA involvement on the commission brings their perspective to the commission. REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER asked how long Mr. Williams had served on the commission and asked him to offer his opinion on the importance of maintaining the data collection and analysis functions of the commission. MR. WILLIAMS answered that he had been a commissioner for more than five years and had been engaged with the commission since its inception. He offered that the value of the commission was self-explanatory based on its membership, which is representation of all parties involved in the criminal justice system, including law enforcement, corrections, the judiciary, public defenders, the Department of Law, victims, and convicted individuals with lived experience. He suggested that that diversity contributed to the identification of ways in which the system could be improved. 1:43:18 PM REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether individuals who may elect a designee would participate regularly or whether the designee would be the only participant. CHAIR CLAMAN suggested that [meeting] minutes could be consulted to confirm exactly who had participated. He stated his observation that the most frequently designated member had been that of the Attorney General's seat and the ex-officio member from DHSS and that designees were somewhat rare otherwise. MS. DIPIETRO agreed with Chair Claman's suggestion regarding the participation of members compared with that of designees. REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked what the rationale had been to continue the commission within the purview of the governor's office. CHAIR CLAMAN suggested that each commission must exist in one of the three branches of government and may not have been well suited to belong within either the court or the legislature. MS. DIPIETRO agreed with Chair Claman's suggestion and staffing considerations were made at the time of the commission's inception. 1:47:54 PM CHAIR CLAMAN recalled Representative Vance's question regarding fiscal notes and suggested that logic would dictate that there would not occur an increase in cost due to a decrease of [commission] function. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE referred to page 4 which listed the powers and duties of the commission that would permit the commission to contract for data collection and analysis and asked from what source, possibly including from the recidivism reduction fund, any contractual funds would be obtained. CHAIR CLAMAN stated that the contracts were not paid by the Department of Corrections. He asked Ms. DiPietro about how contracts are paid and the parties in them. MS. DIPIETRO answered that the council had not contracted data analysis services. She added that the Alaska Justice Information Center had provided data analysis services and that no payment had been paid for those services. CHAIR CLAMAN added that the Alaska Justice Information Center was part of the University of Alaska, Anchorage (UAA) and, in response to a follow up question from Representative Vance, confirmed that its work would be funded by UAA. REPRESENTATIVE VANCE stated that the commission needed more data and asked for additional explanation of the flow of source data. CHAIR CLAMAN stated that HB 183 would not increase the level of data collection and analysis and postulated that, should the legislature request additional analysis and reporting, the commission would likely request additional resources. 1:51:55 PM REPRESENTATIVE VANCE asked whether the changes proposed in HB 183 would include more rural representation. CHAIR CLAMAN answered that the represented members on the commission were separate from the data collected, and the analysis function would have more diverse representation, should HB 183 pass. MS. DIPIETRO added that the amount of data that the commission collects would be the same and the analysis would be the same, although more could be requested. She added that technical staff will receive and analyze data and provide reports and the commissioners then examine the data to develop questions revealed by the data. 1:55:00 PM CHAIR CLAMAN announced that HB 183 was held over.