JOINT SENATE AND HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE January 29, 1993 9:02 a.m. TAPE HFC 93-14, Side 1, #000 - end. TAPE HFC 93-14, Side 2, #000 - end. CALL TO ORDER Co-Chair Pearce called the Joint House and Senate Finance Committee meeting to order at 9:02 a.m. in the Senate Fiance Committee Room, State Capitol Building. PRESENT HOUSE MEMBERS SENATE MEMBERS Co-Chair Larson Co-Chair Pearce Vice-Chair Hanley Co-Chair Frank Representative Brown Senator Kelly Representative Foster Senator Rieger Representative Hoffman Representative Grussendorf Representative Parnell Representative Therriault The following Senate and House Finance members were not present: Senator Sharp, Senator Kerttula, Senator Jacko, Co-Chair MacLean and Representative Martin and Representative Navarre. ALSO PRESENT Representative Ulmer; Senator Lincoln; Senator Adams; Mike Greany, Director, Legislative Finance Division; Lloyd G. Rupp, Commissioner Designee, Department of Corrections; Charles Cole, Attorney General, Department of Law; Bruce Botelho, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law; William Cotton, Executive Director, Alaska Judicial Council; James V. Gould, Chair, Alaska Sentencing Commission; Philip R. Volland, Vice-Chair, Hon. Beverly W. Cutler, Alaska Sentencing Commission; JoAnn Holmes, Alaska Sentencing Commission; Hon. Warren W. Matthews, Alaska Sentencing Commission; Gigi Pilcher, Alaska Sentencing Commission; Duane S. Udland, Alaska Sentencing Commission; Dean J. Guaneli, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, Department of Law; Alan McKelvie, Staff, Alaska Sentencing Commission. SUMMARY INFORMATION 1 PRESENTATION BY THE ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION Co-Chair Pearce noted that Senator Frank and Representative Ulmer are members of the Alaska Sentencing Commission. The Alaska Sentencing Commission provided members with "Recommendations Concerning Statutory Changes and Agency Budgets" (Attachment 1). The Commission also provided members with "Recommendations Affecting Criminal Justice Agencies" (Attachment 2). JAMES GOULD, CHAIR, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION noted that the Commission began by considering whether there should be major changes in the State's sentencing laws, processes and structures. The Alaska Sentencing Commission concluded that the structure of the sentencing system in the State of Alaska is good. Suggestions were made to the Commission by personnel within the Department of Corrections that some inmates could be safely released. The Commission began to look at alternative punishments or sanctions. The Commission's recommendations do not include specific legislation. DEAN J. GUANELI, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, CRIMINAL DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW discussed the Commission's recommendation that the Alaska criminal justice system increase the use of alternative punishments. He gave examples of alternative sanctions; halfway house, community residential centers (CRC), substance abuse centers and day reporting centers. He emphasized the need to sufficiently fund alternative sanctions. He stressed the need to support rehabilitative programs within the Department of Corrections. He interjected that substance abuse should be the primary rehabilitative program. He asserted that the best investment the State of Alaska can make is in substance abuse programs. He stressed that programs must be designed to meet the needs of Native offenders. Mr. Guaneli emphasized that most Alaskan prisoners will eventually be released. Studies show that prison has harmful affects on individuals unless offenders are given rehabilitative treatment. He noted that rehabilitative programs are among the first to receive budget cuts. He underscored the long term detrimental affects of cuts to rehabilitation. Mr. Guaneli stated that the Alaska Sentencing Commission also recommends the continuation and support of the Village Public Safety Officer (VPSO) program. He emphasized that the VPSO program is an effective law enforcement presence in villages. He noted that continuation of the VPSO program would not result in significant new expenditures. 2 Mr. Guaneli stressed that early and effective intervention with juvenile offenders is crucial. He suggested support for juvenile intervention programs in the Department of Health and Social Service's budget. Mr. Guaneli counseled that the Alaska Judicial Council produce a guide of presumptive sentencing for the general public. Mr. Guaneli briefly discussed data collection. He noted the need for coordinated data collection. Representative Brown asked if a specific plan for a coordinated data base has been designed. Mr. Guaneli replied that a specific plan has been developed. Representative Ulmer spoke about alternatives to incarceration. She began with a brief history of the Alaska Sentencing Commission's creation. She noted that the Legislature has been concerned about prison overcrowding and the high cost of prisons in the State of Alaska. She stressed that the Alaska Sentencing Commission began by looking at sentence length and prison population. She concluded that there is no quick fix or easy answer. The Commission concluded that a small percentage of the prison population could be in an alternative punishment setting. Representative Ulmer noted that alternative punishment programs are costly but emphasized that they are less costly than hard prison beds. A hard prison bed in the State of Alaska costs approximately $100 dollars a day. A community correctional facility (CRC) bed costs $50 dollars a day. Intensive supervision by parole officers cost approximately $20 - $30 dollars a day. She noted that other programs such as alcohol treatment, community service and electron monitoring are less expensive. She stressed that 10 of the 12 prisons in the State of Alaska are at maximum capacity. Representative Ulmer emphasized that the State cannot remain above the prison ratio caps instituted by the Cleary settlement. The State is currently in contempt of court. She stressed that if the State does not find alternatives, or release prisoners mandatory releases could be ordered by the court. She asserted that alternative sanctions will avoid additional prison construction and result in a long- term savings to the State. Representative Ulmer discussed front versus back end alternative sanctions. She clarified that front end alternative sanctions are instigated by the judge at the time of sentencing. Back end alternative sanctions can be instituted by the Department of Corrections once the 3 prisoner is in custody. She noted that in the State of Alaska judges have restricted ability in terms of front end sanctions. She emphasized that the Alaska Sentencing Commission is recommending that judges have more flexibility in placing front end sanctions. DUANE S. UPLAND, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION spoke on the perception that alternative sanctions will indicate that the State of Alaska is soft on crime. He noted that law enforcement agencies generally support long prison terms. He stressed the importance of jail time for a prisoner. He emphasized that jail time is not the only way to sanction adverse behavior. He underscored the importance of the integration of prisoners back into society. He spoke in support of programs at the end of sentence to integrate prisoners back into society. Senator Rieger noted that other industrial countries do not have the same prison population problems as the United States. He asked if the Commission had researched how other countries handle prison populations. Representative Ulmer replied that their data shows a greater rate of incarceration in American than other industrial countries. The United States of America is surpassed only by the Republic of South Africa in the rate of incarceration. She noted that the sanction of choice in Europe is fines. Representative Ulmer discussed day fines. Day fines are a percentage of the daily income of a defendant. The Commission recommends the increased use of day fines. Representative Brown referred to page 8, section 2, Attachment 2. She asked if the Alaska Sentencing Commission recommends that persons in the community correction system pay for the cost of their sanctions. Representative Ulmer noted that the Gastineau shelter in Juneau requires, that those that have the ability to pay their board and room. She emphasized that there is no statutory prohibition for reimbursement of cost by individuals in the community corrections system. Representative Grussendorf referred to page 7, items 19 and 20, Attachment 1. He asked if the Alaska Sentencing Commission has proposals for effective intervention for juvenile offenders. Representative Ulmer replied that the Commission did not concentrate on the juvenile system. The juvenile system is not under the Department of Corrections. JOANN HOLMES, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION addressed recommendations by the Alaska Sentencing Commission concerning Alaskan Natives. She noted that Natives constitute 32 percent of the State's inmate population. 4 Natives compose 16 percent of the entire population. Forty- one percent of Natives incarcerated are interned due to probation or parole violations. She stressed that Alaskan Natives are not receiving appropriate treatment or probation follow-up. Ms. Holmes stressed that the Commission recognizes the connection between alcohol abuse and crime in Alaska. The Commission's first recommendation, in regards to Native offenders, is that the Department of Corrections develop alcohol treatment programs sensitive to the needs of Native offenders. She pointed out that Natives are not generally violent while incarcerated. GIGI PILCHER, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION stressed that village councils, village courts and tribal courts can be used to resolve conflicts. The Commission recommends that the State of Alaska cooperate with tribal and village boards and councils. Ms. Pilcher stressed that VPSO officers have often been the only ones that victims can consult for assistance and help. She noted that the behavioral health aide program has added another alternative. Ms. Pilcher observed that the Alaska Juvenile Justice Advisory Board will be reporting to the Governor on juvenile justice in the State of Alaska. She stressed that many of the Commission's recommendations for adult offenders have been instigated for juvenile offenders in other states. Co-Chair Pearce asked what sanctions are commonly used by tribal courts. Ms. Holmes gave examples of sanctions used by the Metlakatla tribal council. She noted that severe offenses result in expulsion from the community. Restitution, public apologies and community service are also used as sanctions. Mr. Gould noted that presumptive sentencing was initiated in 1978, when the criminal code was revised. Presumptive sentencing was designed to prevent parole eligibility for second or subsequent felonies. The Legislature expanded non-parole eligibility to some first offenses. HONORABLE WARREN W. MATTHEW, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION reiterated that 10 of 12 of the State's prisons are at emergency capacity. He emphasized that the population of the State of Alaska is growing. He stressed that crime increases proportionally to population growth. He asserted that the State must start building new prisons now or change its sentencing structure. 5 Hon. Warren W. Matthews suggested that parole eligibility be granted for class A first offenders, except for manslaughter and sex offenders. The Commission recommends that these prisoners must first serve at least half of their sentence time. If the prisoner has be directed by the court to receive alcohol rehabilitation or other rehabilitation the prisoner must first complete the program or go directly into a program upon release. The Commission estimates that this recommendation would result in a savings to the State of approximately $600.0 -$700.0 thousand dollars a year. He felt that the public safety risk would be minimal. He noted that the rate of repeated offense among those released on a discretionary parole basis is 3 percent for felonies the first year and an additional 3 percent for misdemeanors. Hon. Warren W. Matthews stated that the Commission recommends a system of parole for terminally ill prisoners. He noted that AIDS and an aging prison population will result in increased medical costs. HONORABLE BEVERLY W. CUTLER, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION spoke on the expansion of discretionary parole. The Commission recommends a statutory change to expand immunity for the State of Alaska and state employees relating to parole, probation or release of offenders. She discussed the Neakok case which the State of Alaska settled for $5 million dollars. The Commission emphasizes that this "should help individual officers who currently take an unnecessarily conservative approach to release because of concerns about personal or departmental liability" (Attachment 1). Co-Chair Larson asked if the Governor could not pardon or parole terminally ill prisoners. Hon. Warren W. Matthews replied that he does have the power to parole or pardon prisoners. Co-Chair Larson asked what action could be taken under the Cleary settlement if state prisons remain at over capacity. Hon. Warren W. Matthews stated that the most drastic action is that the courts could order the Department of Corrections to release prisoners because of overcrowding. Hon. Beverly Cutler clarified that prison overcrowding would not be a proper factor in establishing sentencing. She noted that the situation results in the question of whether a early release for a prisoner serving a 15 year sentence should be allowed to make room for an offender serving a 90 day sentence. She noted that an alternative would be for the 90 day prisoner to enter an alternative sanction situation or for prisoners approaching release to be released early into a half way house or other situation. 6 Co-Chair Larson noted that prison costs are increased by allowing rooms with television, access to law libraries, access to families and other privileges. Representative Parnell asked if precedents exist in other states to allow discretionary function exceptions to apply to probation officers' decisions. (Tape Change, HFC 93-14, Side 2) Hon. Beverly Cutler felt that the precedent may exist in the State of Alaska. She added that there are not enough facts to ascertain the answer. She noted that the law states that if a governmental officer is acting in his or her discretionary capacity that they are immune from that decision. Hon. Warren W. Matthews added that no state has been able to define consistently or well what is a discretionary action. He suggested that some states have detailed specific actions that should or should not be the subject of a law suit. Representative Therriault observed that Alaska Statutes, Sec. 28.35.030 (c), require that, "not less than 72 consecutive hours and a fine of not less than $250 dollars" be impossed upon DWI offenders. He noted that a CRC costs $60 dollars a day. He asked if DWI offenders should be paying the cost of their incarceration. He noted that the statute further states that, "The execution of sentence may not be suspended nor may probation be granted except on condition that the minimum imprisonment provided in this section is served." He discussed day fines. He questioned if CRC units could be paid for through day fines. Hon. Beverly Cutler emphasized that the Commission would like to see the concept of day fines studied further and applied. Hon. Warren W. Matthews added that the Commission is not recommending that DWI jail fines be substituted for jail time. Representative Therriault discussed community work service with Hon. Warren W. Matthews. Representative Foster spoke on village self determination. He referred to the Commission's recommendation on page 4, item 3, Attachment 2. In discussing tribal courts, village courts and village councils the Commission states that, "State criminal justice agencies should work more closely with such local organizations to exchange sentencing information and to coordinate enforcement of probation conditions." He asked if the Commission recommends a broader range of authority than villages other than Metlakatla could use in treating their residents. Hon. Beverly Cutler responded that the Commission would promote a broader ranger of authority consistent with peaceful coexistence with tribal courts. 7 Representative Foster referred to page 5, item 5, Attachment 2, regarding Native hire. He asked for statistics on Native employees within the correction system. Statistics were not available. Senator Rieger asked if the Commission is recommending legislation which addresses specific actions as opposed to general qualitative standards. Hon. Warren W. Matthews stated that, as a model, California law does not give specific examples of negligence. California law states that the parole board and state are immune to suits resulting from parole violations. Hon. Beverly Cutler further discussed the Neakok case. She emphasized that the State of Alaska did not try the case. PHILIP R. VOLLAND, ALASKA SENTENCING COMMISSION discussed general recommendations by the Alaska Sentencing Commission. He noted the importance of action. He stressed that declining revenues and increased defendant population are on a collision course. He asserted that the State of Alaska must plan for the impact of five years from now when the situation will most likely be worse. He underscored the need for coordination and creativity by criminal justice agencies. Mr. Volland accentuated that the impact of actions need to be considered for their long term effect. He asked the Legislature to keep in mind the repercussions on the criminal justice system of statutory changes. LLOYD G. RUPP, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS addressed the issue of cost benefits. He stressed that the Legislature has the opportunity to invent the future of the State of Alaska. He observed that it costs the State of Alaska over $100.0 thousand dollars to construct a hard bed. Existing projections indicate the need for between 500 - 700 hard beds by 1996. Commissioner Rupp discussed problems and ramifications of overcrowding of prison populations. He discussed the problem of parole officers in determining when technical parole violations should result in incarceration. He noted that viable alternatives exist as a substitute to reentering an expensive corrections environment. He noted that parole officers are reluctant to utilize alternatives for fear of litigation. Commissioner Rupp commented on the possibility of attaching permanent fund dividend payments of CRC offenders to pay for their maintenance. 8 Co-Chair Larson interjected that the current economy of the State of Alaska contributes to the overcrowding of the state's prisons. Mr. Volland agreed that there is a correlation between criminal offenders and the unemployment rate. Senator Lincoln observed that similar recommendations have been brought before past Legislatures by other Commissions and advisory groups. She emphasized that VPSO's do not exist in every rural community. She spoke in support of the behavioral health aide program. She stressed the need for preventive programs. She emphasized that the majority of Native offenders are easy to control and nonviolent. She concluded that many Native offenders would benefit from alternative sanctions, such as spirit camps or community service. She stressed that abused children are more likely to be offenders. She underscored the importance of employment. She asked how the Department of Corrections is coordinating with other agencies. Commissioner Rupp agreed with Senator Lincoln concerning the importance of prevention programs. He referred to Operation Hope. He noted that five different state agencies are involved. WILLIAM COTTON, DIRECTOR, ALASKA JUDICIAL COUNCIL spoke on data collection. He noted that there has been a lack of information from which the Alaska Sentencing Commission could base policy decisions. He observed that the Department of Corrections, Department of Public Safety, Alaska Court System and Department of Law have data collection systems. He stressed that each agency concentrates on the need of their agency. He interjected that the Alaska Judicial Council is concentrating on compiling a data system that will allow policy making. He discussed the need of data coordination between agencies. Mr. Cotton stated that the Alaska Sentencing Commission recommends that the computer programmer under the Alaska Judicial Council be retained to continue development of a comprehensive data base. The position costs $90.0 thousand dollars per year. Representative Brown expressed her support for a coordinated data base. She suggested that the Legislature mandate a single core entry approach. She observed that once separate incompatible systems are running the task of reconciling the systems is more difficult and expensive. She noted that the Department of Corrections and Alaska Court System are beginning their data systems. 9 Representative Brown asked why the Commission has recommended that the Alaska Judicial Council maintain a separate data base. She expressed her preference for a single data base used by all the agencies. Mr. Cotton replied that the agencies would focus on their individual needs and not the system as a whole. Representative Brown recommended that the House Finance Committee insist that there is a unified plan before further development of data bases within agencies. ALAN MCKELVIE, STAFF, ALASKA JUDICIAL COUNCIL clarified, in response to a question by Senator Rieger, that a personal computer with 500 megabytes is sufficient for maintaining the data base. Members discussed the need to act on the recommendations of the Alaska Sentencing Commission. Senator Kelly spoke in support of the recommendations of the Alaska Sentencing Commission. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:35 a.m. 10