ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 16, 2022
10:06 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, Chair
Representative Matt Claman, Vice Chair
Representative Geran Tarr
Representative Andi Story
Representative Sarah Vance (via teleconference)
Representative James Kaufman (via teleconference)
Representative David Eastman
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
State Board of Parole
Richard "Ole" Larson - Wasilla
- CONFIRMATION(S) ADVANCED
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 182(JUD)
"An Act establishing the crime of interference with emergency
communications."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 316
"An Act providing for a standardized improvement tracking system
for state agencies."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 256
"An Act relating to the Alaska Police Standards Council;
relating to municipal correctional officers and municipal
correctional employees; making municipal police officers subject
to police standards; requiring the Department of Public Safety
to submit a yearly use-of-force report to the legislature;
requiring a municipality that employs a person as a municipal
police officer or in a municipal correctional facility, the
Department of Corrections, or the Department of Public Safety to
report to the Federal Bureau of Investigation incidents of use
of force by state and municipal police, probation, parole, and
correctional officers and municipal correctional facility
employees; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 156(HSS)
"An Act relating to COVID-19 immunization rights; relating to
objection to the administration of a COVID-19 vaccine; relating
to COVID-19 vaccination status and eligibility for health care
insurance; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 182
SHORT TITLE: INTERFERENCE WITH EMERGENCY SERVICES
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) WILSON
02/08/22 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/08/22 (S) JUD
02/16/22 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/16/22 (S) Heard & Held
02/16/22 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/25/22 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/25/22 (S) Heard & Held
02/25/22 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
02/28/22 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/28/22 (S) <Bill Hearing Rescheduled to 03/02/22>
03/02/22 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/02/22 (S) Moved CSSB 182(JUD) Out of Committee
03/02/22 (S) MINUTE(JUD)
03/04/22 (S) JUD RPT CS 3DP 2NR SAME TITLE
03/04/22 (S) DP: HOLLAND, MYERS, HUGHES
03/04/22 (S) NR: SHOWER, KIEHL
03/04/22 (S) JUD AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/04/22 (S) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
03/09/22 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/09/22 (S) VERSION: CSSB 182(JUD)
03/14/22 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/14/22 (H) STA, JUD
04/12/22 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
04/12/22 (H) Heard & Held
04/12/22 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/16/22 (H) STA AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 316
SHORT TITLE: STANDARDIZED IMPROVEMENT TRACKING SYSTEM
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) KAUFMAN
02/11/22 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/11/22 (H) STA, FIN
03/15/22 (H) STA AT 3:00 PM GRUENBERG 120
03/15/22 (H) Heard & Held
03/15/22 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/16/22 (H) STA AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: HB 256
SHORT TITLE: LAW ENFORCEMENT: REGISTRY; USE OF FORCE
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) TARR
01/18/22 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/22
01/18/22 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/22 (H) CRA, STA, FIN
03/08/22 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
03/08/22 (H) Heard & Held
03/08/22 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
03/15/22 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
03/15/22 (H) Heard & Held
03/15/22 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
03/17/22 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
03/17/22 (H) Moved CSHB 256(CRA) Out of Committee
03/17/22 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
03/18/22 (H) CRA RPT CS(CRA) NEW TITLE 3DP 2NR
03/18/22 (H) DP: DRUMMOND, SCHRAGE, HANNAN
03/18/22 (H) NR: MCCARTY, MCCABE
04/16/22 (H) STA AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
BILL: SB 156
SHORT TITLE: PROHIBIT COVID-19 VACCINE DISCRIMINATION
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) REINBOLD
01/18/22 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/22
01/18/22 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/18/22 (S) STA, HSS
02/03/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/03/22 (S) Heard & Held
02/03/22 (S) MINUTE(STA)
02/08/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/08/22 (S) Heard & Held
02/08/22 (S) MINUTE(STA)
02/10/22 (S) STA AT 3:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/10/22 (S) Moved SB 156 Out of Committee
02/10/22 (S) MINUTE(STA)
02/11/22 (S) STA RPT 2DP 1AM
02/11/22 (S) DP: SHOWER, REINBOLD
02/11/22 (S) AM: HOLLAND
03/01/22 (S) HSS AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/01/22 (S) Heard & Held
03/01/22 (S) MINUTE(HSS)
03/08/22 (S) HSS AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
03/08/22 (S) Moved CSSB 156(HSS) Out of Committee
03/08/22 (S) MINUTE(HSS)
03/09/22 (S) HSS RPT CS 3DP 1NR NEW TITLE
03/09/22 (S) DP: WILSON, REINBOLD, HUGHES
03/09/22 (S) NR: BEGICH
03/16/22 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/16/22 (S) VERSION: CSSB 156(HSS)
03/18/22 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/18/22 (H) STA, HSS
04/16/22 (H) STA AT 10:00 AM GRUENBERG 120
WITNESS REGISTER
RICHARD "OLE" LARSON, Appointee
State Board of Parole
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the State Board
of Parole.
SENATOR DAVID WILSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on
CSSB 182(JUD), as the prime sponsor.
JASMIN MARTIN, Staff
Senator David Wilson
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on
CSSB 182(JUD), on behalf of Senator Wilson, prime sponsor.
JACOB BUTCHER, Communications Manager
Mat-Com Dispatch
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on
CSSB 182(JUD).
KACI SCHROEDER, Assistant Attorney General
Criminal Division
Department of Law
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on
CSSB 182(JUD).
HILLARY PALMER
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 182.
MARK PEARSON, President
Alaska Peace Officers Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 182.
MATTHEW HARVEY, Staff
Representative James Kaufman
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an explanation of changes in the
proposed CS, Version B, for HB 316, on behalf of Representative
Kaufman, prime sponsor.
KELLY HOWELL, Special Assistant
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Public Safety
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on
CSHB 256(CRA).
LISA PURINTON, Chief
Criminal Records and Identification Bureau
Division of Statewide Services
Department of Public Safety
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on
CSHB 256(CRA).
KELLY GOODE, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Corrections
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on
CSHB 256(CRA).
SENATOR LORA REINBOLD
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced CSSB 156(HSS), as the prime
sponsor.
KELLI TOTH, Staff
Senator Lora Reinbold
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented a sectional analysis of CSSB
156(HSS), on behalf of Senator Reinbold, prime sponsor.
RICHARD URSO, PhD
Houston, Texas
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony during the
hearing on CSSB 156(HSS).
RYAN COLE, PhD
Boise, Idaho
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided invited testimony during the
hearing on CSSB 156(HSS).
ACTION NARRATIVE
10:06:30 AM
CHAIR JONATHAN KREISS-TOMKINS called the House State Affairs
Standing Committee meeting to order at 10:06 a.m.
Representatives Story, Eastman, Tarr, Vance (via
teleconference), and Kreiss-Tomkins were present at the call to
order. Representatives Claman (via teleconference) and Kaufman
(via teleconference) arrived as the meeting was in progress.
^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
^State Board of Parole
^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
State Board of Parole
10:08:22 AM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the first order of business
would be a confirmation hearing.
10:08:32 AM
RICHARD "OLE" LARSON, Appointee, State Board of Parole, provided
a summary of his professional history, which entailed nearly
three decades of work for various facilities within the
Department of Corrections (DOC). He shared that he was elected
to the Matanuska-Susitna Borough School Board in 2008, to which
he still served today on his fifth three-year term. In 2010, he
was appointed to the State Board of Parole where he served two
five-year terms. In 2020, he said, he joined the Nakamoto
Group, a contracting company that hired correctional
professionals to work in the U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) detention facilities "to ensure compliance
with performance-based national detention standards." He said
he had the time and the desire to serve on the State Board of
Parole and give back to Alaska.
10:12:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY inquired about Mr. Larson's time on the
State Board of Parole and how he typically adjudicated
individuals who came before the board.
MR. LARSON recalled that files, which contained information on
the candidates for parole, were typically received 7-10 days
before convening. He said he often looked at a person's
education, family history, completed programming, and
disciplinary actions. Additionally, victims' letters and
letters of support were considered.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked whether the board received
recommendations from DOC regarding parole decisions.
MR. LARSON provided a detailed recollection of the parole
hearing process. He noted that the parolees' files often
included a recommendation letter from a probation officer.
10:19:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked whether Mr. Larson typically based
his decisions on the probation officer's recommendation.
MR. LARSON answered yes, many decisions were based on the
recommendation from the probation or parole officer; however, it
was not the only factor taken into consideration. He stated
that the severity of the crime weighed heavily on the decision-
making process, as well as the individual's criminal history.
10:22:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN sought to confirm that Mr. Larson was a
new appointment; however, he had served on the State Board of
Parole in years prior.
MR. LARSON confirmed that he had served two five-year terms from
2010-2020.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN conveyed citizens' concerns that virtually
no one was being granted discretionary parole. He asked how
often discretionary parole was granted during Mr. Larson's time
on the board.
MR. LARSON said the average rate for discretionary releases was
between 40-45 percent during his 10 years on the board.
10:26:56 AM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS inquired about the relative rate of
recidivism and reoffenders in Alaska compared to other states.
MR. LARSON opined that education was a major issue and a
contributing factor. He suggested that if Alaska's youth stayed
in school and maintained a college or career technical education
track, incarceration rates would be lower.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS clarified his question, noting that he was
particularly interested in re-offense and recidivism. He
inquired about the rates of re-offense after being released into
society and how Alaska compared to other states in that regard.
MR. LARSON opined that 20 percent of incarcerated individuals
needed to stay incarcerated. He shared a personal anecdote.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS sought to confirm that Mr. Larson had
stated that 20 percent of the incarcerated population was
irredeemable in terms of orientation towards crime; 60 percent
had a potential for rehabilitation; and 20 percent was an
aberration that would never be incarcerated again once released.
He asked whether that was correct.
MR. LARSON answered yes, adding the 20 percent group deemed
"irredeemable" still had hope.
10:35:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR inquired about adverse childhood experience
and whether Mr. Larson had noticed any trends in terms of
factors that landed kids in the juvenile justice system.
MR. LARSON believed that education was a key factor, especially
for children with incarcerated parents or parents that struggled
with substance abuse issues. He pointed out that schools were a
safe haven for children with difficult home lives.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS opened public testimony; after ascertaining
that no on wished to testify, he closed public testimony.
10:40:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY moved to advance the confirmation of
Richard "Ole" Larson, State Board of Parole, to the joint
session of the House and Senate for consideration. She reminded
members that signing the reports regarding appointment to boards
and commissions in no way reflected individual members' approval
or disapproval of the appointees, and that the nominations were
merely forwarded to the full legislature for confirmation or
rejection. There being no objection, the confirmation was
advanced.
SB 182-INTERFERENCE WITH EMERGENCY SERVICES
10:41:15 AM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the next order of business
would be CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 182(JUD), "An Act establishing
the crime of interference with emergency communications."
10:42:41 AM
SENATOR DAVID WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, prime sponsor of
CSSB 182(JUD), provided a brief overview of the bill. He stated
that the bill established the offense of interference with
emergency communications. The statute would only apply when a
person repeatedly made 911 calls to report something they knew
had already been reported, repeatedly called 911 when there was
no emergency, harassed or threatened a 911 operator, or
disrupted communications between 911 operators and first
responders.
10:45:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked why the bill lacked exemptions for
individuals with dementia, developmental disabilities, or
behavioral health issues.
SENATOR WILSON argued that those exemptions already existed in
statute. He posited that an individual would have to
"knowingly" call and disrupt emergency communications to be
prosecuted.
10:46:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked whether adequate protections were in
place for people with developmental disabilities and behavioral
health issues.
JASMIN MARTIN, Staff, Senator David Wilson, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Senator Wilson, prime sponsor of CSSB
182(JUD), deferred to Mr. Butcher.
10:48:04 AM
JACOB BUTCHER, Communications Manager, Mat-Com Dispatch, shared
his understanding that the legislation was not geared towards
dementia or people with behavioral health issues. He believed
that there were other tools to address Representative Story's
concerns, such as CIP response, hospitalization, and the Crisis
Now model. He reiterated that the bill was intended for those
members of the community who choose to knowingly call 911
repeatedly or make false reports to simulate a SWAT response.
10:50:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked whether adequate protections were in
place [for people with developmental disabilities and behavioral
health issues].
10:51:13 AM
KACI SCHROEDER, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division,
Department of Law (DOL), agreed with Mr. Butcher. If the
Criminal Division was referred a case, she said, and there was
some indication that the individual had diminished capacity,
mental illness, or was suffering from a disease, his/her mental
state would be analyzed to identify whether the individual was
capable of acting knowingly. Additionally, she said she would
consider whether the individual could appreciate the nature of
his/her conduct and whether he/she was competent to stand trial.
Once those hurdles were crossed, she explained that the next
step was to consider whether prosecution was appropriate and in
the best interest of justice. For those reasons, she opined
that the appropriate protections were in place.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked how the proposed legislation would
apply to his grandmother who had Alzheimer's disease and tended
to call 911 incessantly. He inquired about the barriers to
prosecuting that hypothetical case.
MS. SCHROEDER shared her understanding that Chair Kreiss-
Tomkin's had stated that his grandmother was removed from
reality when dialing 911. For that reason, Ms. Schroeder
suspected that his grandmother did not understand the nature of
her conduct, which would result in legal barriers to
prosecution. Further, his grandmother would need to be deemed
competent to stand trial by a medical professional.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS pointed out that his grandmother's intent
was to call 911, despite her altered state of mind. He asked
Ms. Schroeder to speak on that.
MS. SCHROEDER explained that if his grandmother knowingly called
911 and was therefore capable of formulating a mental state, the
prosecution would consider whether she had the ability to
appreciate the nature and quality of her conduct, which could be
used as a defense by his grandmother's attorney. She emphasized
that this scenario was hypothetical at best. She suspected that
in most cases, his grandmother would not be prosecuted.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS said he appreciated that; however, if the
intent was to exclude individuals with behavioral health issues
or a declining mental state, he argued that the law should not
be criminalizing that behavior.
MS. SCHROEDER noted that the defenses she had referenced could
be found under AS 12.47.010 and AS 12.47.020.
10:57:04 AM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS inquired about the sentencing ranges for
the crime classification.
MS. SCHROEDER stated that a class A misdemeanor had a sentencing
range of 0-1 year while a class C felony had a sentencing range
of 0-5 years.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether any fines were associated
with class A misdemeanor and class C felony charges.
MS. SCHROEDER answered yes. She reported that there was a
maximum fine of $25,000 for a class A misdemeanor and a maximum
fine of $50,000 for a class C felony.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS stated that he did not take felony charges
lightly.
10:59:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether a larger fine would be
assessed if an organization was found liable.
MS. SCHROEDER answered yes. She reported that the maximum fine
for an organization that was found liable for a class A
misdemeanor was $500,000 and $2.5 million for a felony offense
that resulted in death.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether it was currently against
the law to knowingly submit a fraudulent report to law
enforcement or an emergency dispatcher.
MS. SCHROEDER acknowledged that there was an existing crime,
referred to as "making a false report."
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether it was currently a crime to
knowingly harass an emergency dispatcher.
MS. SCHROEDER said not specifically; however, harassment in the
second degree covered some of the conduct in question.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether it was currently a crime to
threaten an emergency communications officer.
MS. SCHROEDER said, "It depends on what it is."
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether there was an exemption for
emergency communications officers.
MS. SCHROEDER answered no.
11:01:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN understood that the larger concern was
that someone with mental illness or behavioral health issues
shouldn't be charged at all. He opined that people in that
situation shouldn't have to be entered into the criminal justice
system at all, as it wouldn't make their situation any better.
He asked how to "deal" with that.
MS. SCHROEDER reiterated her belief that the type of case in
question would not be pursued by prosecution.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN recalled a scenario about an elderly woman
who called 911 several times per month because she was lonely.
He expressed his hope that she, or someone like her, would not
be prosecuted despite the potential for interrupting the system.
SENATOR WILSON believed that the proposed legislation would
provide a tool for intervention to help mitigate future
interruptions.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked how frequently fraudulent calls were
coming in with the intent to deceive emergency dispatchers.
MR. BUTCHER said those calls were much less frequent. He
emphasized that the bill was not intended for elderly people or
people suffering from an illness. He assured Representative
Claman that emergency dispatchers and law enforcement would
"take care" with those callers. He reiterated that the bill was
intended for people who were placing calls with the purpose of
disruption because they were upset with law enforcement or first
responders.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked how the proposed crime differed from
harassment at the misdemeanor level.
MR. BUTCHER explained that the dispatcher would be able to tell
the caller that if he/she continued to call, the audio would be
passed to a law enforcement officer. From there, the law
enforcement officer would make contact with the individual to
warn him/her that continued calls would result in criminal
charges.
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN asked whether the audio recording would be
relied upon to file the charges, as opposed to the dispatcher
needing to make a personal declaration.
MR. BUTCHER said the recordings would be an additional tool if
an arrest was made.
11:14:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN expressed his concern that the bill could
discourage people from calling 911 during a true emergency. He
recommended strengthening the harassment laws instead of
criminalizing new behavior.
11:17:25 AM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS opened public testimony.
11:17:46 AM
HILLARY PALMER stated her support for SB 182, as someone who had
relied on emergency medical services to save her type I diabetic
husband from kidney failure before his life saving transplant
surgery. She pointed out that currently, to file a harassment
charge, a dispatcher must fill out a complaint form that
includes personal information, thus providing an opportunity for
personal attacks and stalking. She urged the committee to
consider the problem from the perspective of someone undergoing
a severe medical emergency and to pass the proposed legislation.
11:21:03 AM
MARK PEARSON, President, Alaska Peace Officers Association,
urged committee members to support the bill. He argued that
current statutes did not directly address the problem. He
encouraged passage of the bill to eliminate the existing
statutory loophole.
11:22:46 AM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS closed public testimony on CSSB 182(JUD).
He announced that the bill was held over.
11:23:13 AM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
HB 316-STANDARDIZED IMPROVEMENT TRACKING SYSTEM
11:23:44 AM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 316, "An Act providing for a
standardized improvement tracking system for state agencies."
11:24:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 137, [labeled 32-LS1076\B, Wallace,
3/17/22], as the working document.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS objected.
11:24:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN, prime sponsor of HB 316, explained that
the original version of the bill was too strident, as it would
have effectually created a tracker for "everything," which was
not the intent. He stated the proposed committee substitute for
HB 316 ("Version B") would capture the actual intent of tracking
"higher criticality" action items. He deferred to Mr. Harvey to
provide an explanation of changes.
11:25:33 AM
MATTHEW HARVEY, Staff, Representative James Kaufman, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Kaufman, prime
sponsor, explained that the main changes included: prioritizing
the critical few improvement items and progressing only these
critical items; condensing the tracking requirements for
improvement items; publicizing the annual report regarding use
of the system; and clean up language.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS removed his objection. There being no
further objection, Version B was adopted as the working
document.
11:28:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN believed that the fiscal note was made in
reference to the original version of the bill, which explained
the large scope and indeterminant amount.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether there had been any dialogue
with the executive branch about the magnitude of the fiscal note
for Version B.
MR. HARVEY indicated that the sponsor's office intended to meet
with the Office of Management & Budget (OMB) now that Version B
was before the committee.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether there had been any engagement
with the University of Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN shared his understanding that the
university already had an improvement system in place.
11:30:15 AM
MR. HARVEY confirmed that the university already had a system in
place. He said that if the bill were to pass, the system would
be put into a standardized format across all agencies.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether any other states had
implemented a similar tracking system.
MR. HARVEY suggested that a project management office in
Washington, which focused on improvement projects, had a similar
system. Additionally, the U.S. Government Accountability Office
(GAO) had a robust action tracker for audit findings and
findings based on other reports and publications.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked Mr. Harvey to define "higher
criticality" with the inclusion of real-world examples.
MR. HARVEY referenced audit findings from the Legislative Budget
& Audit Committee (LB&A) and how they could be organized under
the proposed system.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS opined that the system's application to
state agencies was of higher significance than legislative
audits.
11:35:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN clarified that the intent was to create
utilities that enabled organizations to improve. He
characterized the State of Alaska as a multi-billion-dollar
operation that could use a few more quality management
processes.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that HB 316 would be held over.
HB 256-LAW ENFORCEMENT: REGISTRY; USE OF FORCE
11:36:48 AM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 256, "An Act relating to the Alaska
Police Standards Council; relating to municipal correctional
officers and municipal correctional employees; making municipal
police officers subject to police standards; requiring the
Department of Public Safety to submit a yearly use-of-force
report to the legislature; requiring a municipality that employs
a person as a municipal police officer or in a municipal
correctional facility, the Department of Corrections, or the
Department of Public Safety to report to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation incidents of use of force by state and municipal
police, probation, parole, and correctional officers and
municipal correctional facility employees; and providing for an
effective date." [Before the committee was CSHB 256(CRA).]
11:37:03 AM
The committee took a brief at-ease.
11:38:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR, prime sponsor, introduced CSHB 256(CRA).
She paraphrased the sponsor statement [included in the committee
packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
House Bill 256 establishes a use-of-force database
under AS 44.41.055 that will be overseen by the
Department of Public Safety which will collect reports
of use of force by a municipal police officer,
municipal correctional facility employee, a probation
officer, parole officer, correctional officer, state
trooper, village public safety officer, or regional
officer. This report will be submitted by the
Department of Public Safety under AS 44.41.020(h). The
Alaska Police Standards Council shall maintain a
central registry with information that the Council
obtains from the Department of Public Safety, the
Department of Corrections, or a municipality.
This bill also requires the Alaska Police Standards
Council to adopt regulations that require a police
officer, probation officer, parole officer, municipal
officer, or correctional officer to report to a
supervisor when an incident of force or deadly force
occurred or in a situation in which an officer was
prepared to use deadly force. This report will also
include demographic information such as the person
whom the force was used, age, gender identity, and
sexual orientation if freely given by the individual.
Additionally, the officer who used the force and the
borough or census area in which the use of force
occurred.
Currently, there is no database that tracks instances
of use-of-force within the State of Alaska. While this
database will not be open to the public, it will be
shared for employment purposes amongst departments and
agencies who may be hiring an officer or employee as
well as the Alaska State Legislature. This will allow
for transparency among agencies and will close
loopholes that allow officers to be hired on to
another agency after being fired for use-of-force
incidents or certificate denial or revocation.
11:47:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked what kind of feedback the bill
sponsor had received from smaller law enforcement agencies.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said much of the conversation had been
around implementation and what information would be gathered
from each incident of force or deadly force. She acknowledged
that all of the large agencies in Alaska approximately 80
percent of police officers - were already participating in the
use-of-force database, and that capturing the last 20 percent
would come from the smaller agencies.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked Ms. Howell to comment from the
perspective of the Department of Public Safety (DPS).
11:50:59 AM
KELLY HOWELL, Special Assistant, Office of the Commissioner,
DPS, stated that DPS already collected data from law enforcement
agencies and reported portions to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), such as uniform crime reporting (UCR)
statistics, which was similar to the proposed use-of-force
database. She explained that DPS staff was reaching out to
agencies to encourage participation in information submittal,
which was currently voluntary. She noted that additional
federal grant funds were being pursued to assist in creating an
easier method for agencies to submit information to the FBI.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS sought to confirm that 80 percent of public
safety officers were already reporting the data.
MS. HOWELL deferred to Ms. Purinton.
LISA PURINTON, Chief, Criminal Records and Identification
Bureau, Division of Statewide Services, DPS, reported that 20
agencies were registered to report, of which 5 had less than 20
officers in the department.
11:54:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether the requirement in [Section
11] stating that all municipal correction officers or municipal
police officers must complete the requirements of AS 18.65.240
was necessary given the recruiting and retention issues.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR clarified that the officers would be given a
two-year timeframe to complete that requirement, per CSHB
256(CRA). She explained that the two-year timeframe was added
in response to the concern voiced by Representative Eastman.
She believed that the representative had referenced an old
version of the bill. Additionally, she noted that a "good
portion" of municipal correction officers were already receiving
the training, which was being provided at no cost to the state.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS interjected to share his understanding that
the committee was looking at Version A of the legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR clarified that a committee substitute was
adopted in the Community & Regional Affairs Standing Committee
(CRA).
11:57:46 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 11:57 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
12:00:19 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS noted that the current version of the bill,
CSHB 256(CRA), had been distributed. He requested a summary of
changes in the current version of the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR provided a brief summary of changes, which
read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Following feedback from our partners, we have included
several changes to HB 256:
? Section 7 in Version 32-LS1341\A, referring to DOC
reporting use of force from probation officers, parole
officers, or correctional officers to the FBI, is
removed. All subsequent sections are renumbered in
Version [I].
? Section 8*: References to village public safety
officers and regional public safety officers are
removed.
? Section 9*: A reference to the Department of
Corrections is removed.
? Section 12*: Increases the one-year compliance
timeline to two years in order to allow for more
training academy cycles.
? Section 13*: References to the Department of
Corrections and correctional facilities are removed.
12:02:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether 12 hours of training on
domestic violence or sexual assault could be covered in a
standalone program. He shared his understanding that currently,
it was included in the academy's curriculum.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR said there was no desire to change the
academy's current training.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR, in response to a question from
Representative Eastman, clarified that the municipal correction
officers had their own academy.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN considered a scenario in which an officer
attended an out-of-state academy, came in as a lateral hire, or
graduated from the academy years ago. He asked whether they
would be required to undergo the new training outlined in
Section 11.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR clarified that the provisions in the bill
would only apply to those hired after the effective date.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN expressed confusion.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked Ms. Goode to speak to the issue.
12:07:11 PM
KELLY GOODE, Deputy Commissioner, DOC, conveyed that all but two
communities used the DOC academy. She explained that the two-
year requirement would allow the officers to complete the
training on a more flexible timeline.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN maintained his concern that the language
on page 4, lines 8-9, suggested that all employees including
those that had already graduated from the academy would have
to meet the training requirement outlined in Section 11 within
two years, which was not the bill sponsor's intent. He
suggested changing the language.
MS. GOODE agreed that it would be a policy call. She said she
had understood the language to indicate that the two remaining
communities - Bristol Bay and Craig would be brought into the
DOC correctional officer academy, suggesting that those officers
would be required to attend the academy training within two
years.
12:09:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN opined that the language in Section 1,
"an incident in which an officer used deadly force or prepared
to use deadly force against a person" was broad. He inquired
about the meaning of that phrase.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR indicated that the federal definition was
highlighted in a document [included in the committee packet],
titled "National Use-of-Force Data Collection Flyer," from the
U.S. Department of Justice. She deferred to Ms. Howell to
provide the statutory definition.
MS. HOWELL, citing DPS policy, defined "prepares to use" as
follows:
unholstering a weapon with the intention of preparing
to use it against a specific individual or group.
Unholstering a weapon and directing it towards a
specific person or group even if that person is not
aware this action requires a use-of-force report;
however, conducting a building search or similar
operation with an unholstered weapon where no person
or group is encountered would not be reportable. It
is not the mere unholstering of a weapon that triggers
the reporting requirement, but the directing of that
weapon against a particular person or group.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether the department's policy
would be incorporated into statute.
MS. HOWELL could not speak to other agencies' policies.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked whether "use of force" was defined
in statute or whether the definition would be drawn from DPS
policy.
MS. HOWELL stated that both "force" and "deadly force" were
defined in statute under AS 11.81.900.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether the agency had a formal
position on the proposed legislation.
MS. HOWELL read a prepared statement, which suggested that DPS
had existing measures in place for reporting use of force
incidents. She opined that the bill would reinforce current DPS
policies and practices. She stated that the department
supported such efforts to increase transparency and build trust
with the public.
12:16:56 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that CSHB 256(CRA) was held over.
SB 156-PROHIBIT COVID-19 VACCINE DISCRIMINATION
12:17:33 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the final order of business
would be CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 156(HSS), "An Act relating to
COVID-19 immunization rights; relating to objection to the
administration of a COVID-19 vaccine; relating to COVID-19
vaccination status and eligibility for health care insurance;
and providing for an effective date."
12:18:21 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 12:18 p.m. to 12:21 p.m.
12:21:45 PM
SENATOR LORA REINBOLD, Alaska State Legislature, prime sponsor,
provided brief introductory remarks regarding CSSB 156(HSS).
She paraphrased the sponsor statement [included in the committee
packet], which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
CS SB 156 ensures that a state agency or political
subdivision of the state may not adopt or issue
regulation, ordinance, or similar policy that requires
an individual to be vaccinated against COVID-19 to
receive public benefit that is available to the
public. Essentially, CS SB 156 ensures the public is
not discriminated against based on COVID-19 vaccine
status. In addition, the bill seeks to ensure a state
agency, an employee of the state may not require an
individual to produce documentation of their COVID-19
vaccination status or immunity passport to travel to
or within the state. An individual may object to the
administration of a COVID-19 vaccine based on
religious, medical, or other grounds. Parents or
guardians may object to the administration of a COVID-
19 vaccine to the minor child based on religious,
medical, or other grounds. CS SB 156 passed the senate
with bipartisan support because this bill protects an
individual's civil liberties citing article 1 section
22 of the Alaska Constitution, ensures that regardless
of COVID-19 injection history, neither can be
discriminated against with regard to health insurance.
12:25:40 PM
KELLI TOTH, Staff, Senator Lora Reinbold, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Senator Reinbold, prime sponsor of
CSSB 156(HSS), presented a sectional analysis of the bill
[included in the committee packet], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
Section 1: Added a new section to clarify legislative
intent specific to COVID-19 injections "It is the
intent of the legislature that every person should
have the right to choose their own medical
interventions because art. 1, sec 22, of the
Constitution of the State of Alaska protects a
person's right to privacy."
Section 2: AS 18.09 is amended adding a new section
Article 2A. COVID 19 Immunization Rights;
Discrimination.
Sec 18.09.250 Exercise of rights and access to
benefits. A state agency or political subdivision may
not adopt or issue a regulation, ordinance, order, or
similar policy that requires an individual to be
vaccinated against COVID19 in order to exercise their
right to receive a benefit that is available to the
public.
Sec 18.09.260 Personal vaccine history. A state
agency, an employee of the state, or agent of the
state may not require an individual to produce
documentation of the individual's COVID-19 vaccination
status or a COVID19 immunity passport in order to
travel to, or within, the state. 32nd Legislature
Committees: Vice Chair Legislative Council Vice Chair
Senate State Affairs Senate Member: Legislative Budget
& Audit Health & Social Services Joint Armed Services
Committee 3/21/2022 32-LS1352\G 2 CS SB 156
Immunization Rights and Objections to Administration
of a COVID-19
Sec. 18.09.270 Discrimination based on vaccination
status. It is unlawful discrimination for: a person or
a governmental entity to refuse, withhold from or deny
an individual any local or state services, goods,
facilities, advantages, privileges, licensing,
educational opportunities, health care access, or
employment opportunities based on the individual's
COVID-19 vaccination status or whether the individual
has a COVID-19 immunity passport; bar an individual
from employment, or discriminate against individual
compensation or term, condition or privilege of
employment; a public accommodation to exclude, limit,
segregate, refuse to serve or otherwise discriminate
based on COVID-19 vaccination status or immunity
passport; a recommendation by a person, governmental
agency, or employer to receive a COVID-19 vaccine is
not unlawful discrimination under this section.
Sec. 18.09.280 Objection to the administration of a
COVID-19 vaccine. An individual may object to the
administration of a COVID-19 vaccine to that
individual based on religious, medical, or other
grounds. A parent or guardian of a minor child may
object to the administration of a COVID-19 vaccine to
the minor child based on religious, medical, or other
grounds. A person may not require an individual to
provide justification or documentation to support the
individual's decision to decline a COVID-19 vaccine or
decline a COVID-19 vaccine for a minor child.
Sec. 18.09.290. Definition. In AS 18.09.250-18.09.90,
"COVID-19" means the novel coronavirus disease caused
by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
(SARS-CoV-2)
Section 3: AS 21.54.100 (a) 9 adds language to the
health care insurer that offers, issues for delivery,
delivers, or renews a healthcare insurance plan in the
group market may not establish rules for eligibility,
including continued eligibility and waiting periods
under the plan, for an individual or dependent of an
individual based on (9) the individual's COVID-19
vaccination status; in this paragraph, "COVID-19 has
the meaning given in AS 18.09.290. This safeguards
everyone regardless of COVID-19 injection history.
Section 4: This act takes effect immediately under AS
01.10.070 (c)
12:29:29 PM
MS. TOTH provided a summary of changes [included in the
committee packet] from version I to version G, which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
1. Added language to the title "related to vaccination
status and eligibility for health care insurance; and
providing for an effective date."
2. Section 1: Added Legislative intent is that every
person should have the right to choose their own
medical interventions because Article 1 Section 22 of
the constitution of the state of Alaska protects a
person's right to privacy.
3. Section 3: Amends AS 21.54.100 (a) (9) The
individual's COVID-19 vaccination status; in this
paragraph, "COVID19" has the meaning given in AS
18.09.290
4. Added Section 4: This act takes effect immediately
under AS 01.10.070 (c)
12:30:45 PM
SENATOR REINBOLD provided a PowerPoint presentation, titled "SB
156 Prohibit COVID-19 Discrimination" [hard copy included in the
committee packet]. She began on slide 1, which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
(1) No COVID19 mandatory injections
(2) No COVID19 passports
(3) No COVID19 discrimination
(4) No COVID19 mandatory injections for employment
(public or private)
SENATOR REINBOLD defined popular sovereignty on slide 2. She
turned to slide 3, which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Alaska's Constitution Article 1 Section 1:
This constitution is dedicated to the principles that
all persons have a natural right to life, liberty, the
pursuit of happiness, and the enjoyment of the rewards
of their own industry; that all persons are equal and
entitled to equal rights, opportunities, and
protection under the law; and that all persons have
corresponding obligations to the people and to the
State.
SENATOR REINBOLD proceeded to slide 4, which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
The American Frontline Doctors "Vaccine Bill of
Rights"
"Emergency Use products are specifically prohibited by
federal law from being mandated:
The CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices
(ACIP) affirmed in August 2020 that under an Emergency
Use Authorization (EUA), experimental vaccines are not
allowed to be mandatory;
Decades-old universally accepted Codes of Medical
Ethics, including the Nuremberg Code and the
Declaration of Helsinki absolutely prohibits any form
of coercion whatsoever to individuals participate in a
medical experiment;
12:33:08 PM
SENATOR REINBOLD advanced to slide 5, which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
"Vaccine Bill of Rights" Continued
It is neither feasible nor safe to mandate
experimental vaccination given the large number of
COVID-19 recovered patients in the general population
and the FDA/Pfizer/ Moderna protocols which excluded
COVID-19 recovered patients;
It is neither feasible nor safe to administer
experimental vaccines to many groups of patients, such
as persons with post-natural infections, waning
titers, allergic reactions, as well as childbearing
women, etc.;
Vaccine passports, "digital health IDs," and other
such required documentation pose substantial risks to
personal privacy and equal treatment before the law
for all citizens;
The doctors and nurses administering the inoculation
are required by law to give informed consent and they
cannot do they if they themselves are not informed;
And lastly,
Private businesses operating within the jurisdiction
have no legal authority to require or mandate or
coerce medication or experimental medication for any
persons?"
SENATOR REINBOLD reviewed the historical definitions of
"vaccine," as changed by CDC, on slide 6. Slide 7 provided the
statutory definition of "vaccine," per AS 18.09.990(11). Slide
8 outlined informed consent, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
1. The nature of the patient's illness, the diagnosis,
the proposed treatment plan and the prognosis.
2. A description of the recommended procedure or
treatment and its purpose.
3. The probable outcome, particularly if it is
difficult to predict, and the patient's expected post-
procedure/treatment course.
4. The most likely risks and side effects and the
potential benefits as well as the potential
complications of the procedure or treatment.
5. Reasonable alternative methods of treatment or
nontreatment including the risks, benefits,
complications, and the prognosis associated with each
alternative or with nontreatment
12:37:50 PM
SENATOR REINBOLD directed attention to slide 10, which
highlighted a memo from Legislative Legal Services confirming
that Alaska was an opt-in state. She continued to slide 11,
which stated that federal law prohibited mandates of emergency
use COVID vaccines, tests, and masks. She directed attention to
slide 13, which defined coercion and clarified that it was
criminal. She highlighted the number of deaths from vaccines on
slide 15. Slides 16-20 detailed a U.S. Supreme Court Case,
National Federation of Independent Business v. Occupational
Safety and Health Administration.
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS welcomed invited testimony.
12:43:07 PM
RICHARD URSO, PhD, argued that there was tremendous risk
associated with the COVID-19 vaccine, despite it being labeled
safe and effective. He opined that a "one size fits all"
approach to vaccination was a danger to patients. He discussed
children ages 5-11, opining that a mandated vaccine would kill
many of them. Additionally, he detailed all the potential side
effects of the vaccine.
12:48:20 PM
RYAN COLE, PhD, agreed with Dr. Urso that the COVID-19 vaccine
was "all risk and no reward." He stated that the vaccine was
emergency authorized and experimental, arguing that all
recipients should have received informed consent. He reported
that individuals who were COVID recovered had natural immunity
at 13-30 percent higher than vaccinal immunity. He shared his
understanding that the vaccines were not tested against
additional variants of COVID-19, such as Delta and Omicron. He
opined that it was unscientific, immoral, and unethical to
require any person to get a shot for a virus "that does not
exist and does not work against the protein virus circulating in
the population."
12:51:36 PM
CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that CSSB 156(HSS) was held over.
12:52:29 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 12:52
p.m.