SB 63 DEADLY WEAPON OFFENSES BY JUVENILES SENATOR DONLEY, Sponsor, testified on behalf of the bill. Also testifying were MARGOT KNUTH and BARBARA BRINK. SENATOR DONLEY MOVED SB 63 from committee with individual recommendations. There was discussion concerning fiscal notes. SENATOR DONLEY withdrew and restated his motion to include all previously published fiscal notes and a new Senate Finance Committee fiscal note for the Department of Corrections (indeterminate). SENATOR ADAMS objected. SB 63 was REPORTED OUT of committee by a 6 to 1 vote with previous fiscal notes from the Department of Administration (indeterminate) and the Court System (5.5), a zero fiscal note from the Department of Public Safety, and a new Senate Finance Committee fiscal note for the Department of Corrections (indeterminate). SENATE BILL NO. 63 "An Act providing for automatic waiver of juvenile jurisdiction and prosecution of minors as adults for certain violations of laws by minors who use deadly weapons to commit offenses that are crimes against a person, and relating to the sealing of the records of those minors." SENATOR DONLEY, Sponsor, explained that SB 63 would add to existing provisions for automatic waiver of juveniles to adult court. If someone over sixteen years of age were charged with using a deadly weapon and had previously been adjudicated as a delinquent or convicted as an adult for a similar or more serious crime, they would be waived to adult court. He estimated that between six and eight individuals per year would fall into that category. SENATOR ADAMS gave examples of different scenarios and inquired where a teen would fall under the new provisions. SENATOR DONLEY explained that there were variables, such as if they had been previously charged or convicted, and offered a sequence of events that would determine whether or not they would be waived to adult court. He noted a teen had to be sixteen or older. SENATOR ADAMS asked for the position of the governor's juvenile task force. SENATOR DONLEY responded that they did not support additional automatic waivers under any circumstances. There was discussion about the fiscal notes from the Court System and the Department of Corrections. There was also discussion about plans for additional juvenile incarceration facilities. SENATOR ADAMS inquired about the administration's position. MARGOT KNUTH, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law, spoke on behalf of the Governor's Conference on Youth and Justice. The group had concluded that the age should not be lowered for automatic waiver offenses nor should the level of offenses be lowered. She stated that a problem with SB 63 was that it allowed automatic waiver for the first time for class C and B felony offenses. She noted that studies had shown that kids subjected to automatic waiver re-offend sooner, the level of offense is higher and there was a higher recidivism rate. She gave examples of cases that would fall under the provisions to illustrate the point that they were not the types of people that would be identified as the most serious offenders. The concern was that the automatic waiver put kids in with a group of "teachers" that would provide an opportunity to learn even worse habits. She summarized that the administration was opposed to SB 63. SENATOR DONLEY commented that the testimony did not reflect the fact that there may be a lot of people who would choose not to re-offend if they were warned that they would be going to adult court next time. COCHAIR PEARCE expressed appreciation for the case information provided and felt it was a good example of why the bill was needed. In response to a question from SENATOR ADAMS, MS. KNUTH explained that the automatic waiver law was responsible for 194 of 218 youths currently incarcerated and that it cost more because of increased cases and the need for a separate facility for those people. Addition discussion ensued between MS. KNUTH and SENATOR DONLEY. BARBARA BRINK, Acting Public Defender, Department of Administration, testified that the assumption that the bill would improve public safety and cut crime bears further study. She offered explanation of the fiscal note provided by her agency, noting that processing through the adult court was costlier than the juvenile delinquency arena. In response to a question from SENATOR ADAMS, SENATOR DONLEY explained that there was not a separate juvenile facility within the adult corrections system, but they try to keep teens separated or isolated. COCHAIR SHARP called for further testimony or comments. There being none, he asked for the pleasure of the committee. SENATOR DONLEY MOVED SB 63 from committee with individual recommendations and all fiscal notes except that from the Department of Corrections. SENATOR ADAMS objected. COCHAIR SHARP brought up the fiscal notes and lengthy discussion was had as to whether to include the fiscal note from Corrections because it included costs for new facilities. SENATOR DONLEY withdrew and restated his motion to include all previously published fiscal notes and a new Senate Finance Committee fiscal note for the Department of Corrections (indeterminate). SENATOR ADAMS objected. End SFC-97 #92, Side 1, Begin Side 2 Discussion about the Corrections fiscal note continued. COCHAIR SHARP directed that the Senate Finance Committee fiscal note for the Department of Corrections would be indeterminate with a comment section explaining. SENATOR DONLEY incorporated that as part of his MOTION. The objection was maintained. A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION. IN FAVOR: Parnell, Donley, Phillips, Torgerson, Pearce, Sharp OPPOSED: Adams SB 63 was REPORTED OUT of committee by a 6 to 1 vote with previous fiscal notes from the Department of Administration (indeterminate) and the Court System (5.5), a zero fiscal note from the Department of Public Safety, and a new Senate Finance Committee fiscal note for the Department of Corrections (indeterminate).