MINUTES SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE April 27, 1996 9:50 a.m. TAPES SFC-96, #96, Side 1 (000-575) SFC-96, #96, Side 2 (575-388) CALL TO ORDER Senator Rick Halford, Co-chairman, convened the meeting at approximately 9:50 a.m. PRESENT In addition to Co-chairmen Halford and Frank, Senators Phillips and Sharp were present. Senators Rieger and Zharoff arrived soon after the meeting began. Senator Donley did not attend. ALSO ATTENDING: Representative Martin; Representative Kott; Annie Carpeneti, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, Dept. of Law; Art Snowden, Administrative Director, Alaska Court System; Elmer Lindstrom, Special Assistant, Dept. of Health and Social Services; Judy Erickson, Juneau, Alaska; Linda Snow, aide to Representative Martin; Richard Vitale, aide to Representative Parnell; Roger Poppe, aide to Representative Kott; and aides to committee members and other members of the legislature. SUMMARY INFORMATION HB 22 - STATE LONG-TERM PLANNING Richard Vitale came before committee to speak to the bill on behalf of Representative Parnell. CSHB 22 (Fin) was subsequently REPORTED OUT of committee with a $5.2 fiscal note for all departments. HB 104 - DISCLOSURE OF JUVENILE RECORDS Testimony was presented by Representative Kott, Roger Poppe, Annie Carpeneti, Elmer Lindstrom, and Judy Erickson. Amendment No. 1, by Senator Donley, to add "regarding the arrest" to language at page 2, line 11, and deletion of the remainder of the sentence was pending when the meeting was recessed. HB 520 - INQUESTS, CORONERS, POST MORTEMS, ETC. Testimony was presented by Art Snowden and Elmer Lindstrom. CSHB 520 (Fin) was subsequently REPORTED OUT of committee with a zero fiscal note from the DPS, a $287.6 note from DH&SS, and a ($287.6) note from the Court System. HB 525 - PERMANENT FUND INVESTMENTS Representative Martin and Linda Snow spoke in support of the bill. It was then REPORTED OUT of committee with a zero fiscal note from the DOR(APFC). HOUSE BILL NO. 525 An Act designating certain permissible investments by the Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation in taxable municipal or state debt securities and corporate debt securities; changing the allocation limits on domestic and nondomestic government and corporate securities, nondomestic corporate promissory notes, domestic and nondomestic corporate stocks, and taxable government debt securities; and providing for an effective date. Co-chairman Halford directed that HB 525 be brought on for discussion. REPRESENTATIVE TERRY MARTIN came before committee. He explained that the bill was introduced by House Finance on behalf of the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee. The Representative noted that the flexibility sought by the board of trustees of the permanent fund stems from an evaluation of the five fiduciary programs in Alaska. Senator Rieger advised that he spoke with representatives of the permanent fund and asked if they would object to increasing the percentage set forth at Page 2, Line 18, from 50 to 60 percent. They indicated they would not. That would make asset allocation a bit more permissive. Co- chairman Halford voiced his understanding it would allow for 60 percent to be placed in stocks. In response to a question from the Co-chairman concerning need for the increase, Senator Rieger explained that investments "are up against the limit." The reason bracketed language is being removed is because the board is having difficulty achieving the asset allocations recommended by specialists. Representative Martin noted that the permanent fund corporation has no objection to the change but wishes to remain neutral. He requested that, for the sake of expediency, the percentage remain at 50 percent. Co- chairman Halford voiced reluctance to make the change without additional background information. Senator Rieger said that failure to effect the increase would merely "hold down overall returns." Senator Sharp asked if language within Section 4 would lower the present grade of investment that could be purchased. LINDA SNOW, aide to Representative Martin, responded affirmatively. She said that the lowest grade of investment that can currently be made is A. Investment grade (BBB) is one grade lower. The proposed bill allows for investment in BBB. Senator Rieger MOVED for passage of HB 525 with individual recommendations. No objection having been raised, HB 525 was REPORTED OUT of committee with a zero fiscal note from the Dept. of Revenue. Co-chairman Frank and Senators Phillips, Rieger, and Zharoff signed the committee report with a "do pass" recommendation. Co-chairman Halford and Senators Donley and Sharp signed "no recommendation." CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 520(FIN) An Act relating to death investigations and inquests, coroners, public administrators, and medical examiners, including the state medical examiner; relating to the jurisdiction of district court judges and magistrates in certain cases involving death. Co-chairman Halford directed that CSHB 520 (Fin) be brought on for discussion. ART SNOWDEN, Administrative Director, Alaska Court System, came before committee. He referenced first the fiscal notes accompanying the bill and advised of a net zero effect. As background information, Mr. Snowden explained that, for many years, the state utilized a coroner system for determining death. It was a problematic system in which magistrates attempted to determine the cause of death, the state paid for autopsies, and supplementals were needed every year. The legislature created a partial medical examiner system several years ago, and a supplemental was not requested this year because of better ability to control costs. The proposed bill is supported by police, prosecution, courts, and the Dept. of Health and Social Services. It takes the remainder of the coroner system and moves the PCNs to the Dept. of Health and Social Services. The medical examiner will define the cause of death. Mr. Snowden attested to the fact that magistrates are not forensic pathologists. He described problem associated with investigation of death in rural areas of Alaska. The former coroner system created many problems for police and prosecution. The proposed bill solves those problems, and the net cost is zero. Co-chairman Halford noted automatic pressure within the court system budget to keep use down. He suggested there would be less pressure to do so in other budgets. Mr. Snowden responded that, under the proposed bill, the court system would not be ordering autopsies. A true medical examiner and contracts with health aids can precisely determine whether an autopsy is needed. That should cut down need for autopsies, over time. Senator Zharoff cited problems relating to return of bodies to rural areas following autopsies. ELMER LINDSTROM, Special Assistant, Dept. of Health and Social Service, came before committee. He said that as a former staffer to a rural legislator, he was aware of the problem. Creation of the medical examiner's office has dramatically reduced the number of transports of bodies into Anchorage. The office continues to provide for return to the home community, following examination. The medical examiner has proven to be a very cost effective system. The proposed bill will contribute to further efficiencies. Senator Sharp MOVED for passage of CSHB 520 (Fin) with individual recommendation and accompanying fiscal notes. No objection having been raised, CSHB 520 (Fin) was REPORTED OUT of committee with a $287.6 note from the Dept. of Health and Social Services, a ($287.6) note from the Court System, and a zero note from the Dept. of Public Safety. All members signed the committee report with a "do pass" recommendation with the exception of Senator Donley who signed "no recommendation." CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 22(FIN) An Act relating to long-term plans of certain state agencies and recommendations regarding elimination of duplication in state agency functions. Co-chairman Halford directed that CSHB 22 (Fin) be brought on for discussion. RICHARD VITALE, aide to Representative Parnell, came before committee. He explained that CSHB 22 (Fin) would integrate long-term (six-year) planning into the budget process. He noted that Representative Parnell had been working on the effort for a number of years. Co- chairman Frank referenced language at Page 2, line 13, and questioned the difference between "rural" and "bush." Mr. Vitale said he was unaware of a legal difference between the two. He noted that it was a point of importance to "some people that were out of the urban areas to make that distinction." Co-chairman Halford voiced his understanding that "rural" is road-system rural versus Western Alaska. The Co-chairman referenced language requiring OMB to compile a single, long-term plan for judicial and executive branches of government and voiced concern that the judicial branch may not agree with OMB preparation. Mr. Vitale said the language was reviewed by the Court System. Wording is such that OMB is to utilize the plan developed by the Court System. Senator Zharoff asked how departments could be expected to do the work with which they are charged and develop plans to coincide with budget submissions. Co-chairman Frank asked how the planning process would dovetail with budget preparation. Mr. Vitale explained that the proposed bill is the first step in developing a budget process similar to the Texas plan which includes a side-by-side comparison of the cost of each item and the ultimate goal. The intent is not a 50-page documents but a simple statement of goals and objectives. Co-chairman Frank suggested that sunset language be included. He voiced concern over placing additional undertakings, that require much time and effort, into law when they may not be utilized as planning documents. Mr. Vitale said that he did not believe the sponsor would support sunset because the concept within the bill is for long-term planning predicated on a performance-based budget. It only works when one looks back over the years and determines what the goals were and how moneys were spent. Co-chairman Frank MOVED for passage of CSHB 22 (Fin) with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes. No objection having been raised, CSHB 22 (Fin) was REPORTED OUT of committee with a $5.2 House Finance Committee fiscal note covering all departments. Co-chairman Frank signed the committee report with a "do pass" recommendation. All other members signed "no recommendation." CS FOR SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 104(JUD) am An Act relating to disclosures of information about certain minors. Co-chairman Halford directed that CSSSHB 401 (Jud)am be brought on for discussion. ROGER POPPE, aide to Representative Kott, came before committee. He explained that the proposed bill is one of many approaches undertaken, both nationally and within the state, to deal with the increase in juvenile crime. The legislation underwent numerous changes as attempts were made to determine the type of information to be released by various agencies. Information would only be released on juveniles who commit crimes that would be felonies if committed by an adult. Twenty-four other states have similar legislation. Mr. Poppe attested to problems associated with earlier stages of the bill in that many states separate support, care, and treatment of juveniles in need from juveniles who are in trouble. Since they have separate agencies dealing with separate aspects, release of records on juveniles who are in trouble is easier to accomplish. However, because the Dept. of Health and Social Services combines those functions, an attempt to release the information would jeopardize $7 to $10 million in federal moneys. The propose bill does not involve the Dept. of Health and Social Services. It relates to arrest and allows the arresting officer to release to the media, on request: 1. The minor's name. 2. The name of the minor's parents. 3. The date and nature of the offense. 4. Description of the offense. It is hoped release of the information will have a deterrent impact on juveniles, prior to commission of crime. Further, release would notify residents of a community of juveniles who pose a possible threat to public safety. A House floor amendment ensures that the information cannot be incorporated by the Dept. of Public Safety into its criminal justice information system and become part of computerized criminal records. In response to a question from Senator Donley regarding language within SCS CSSSHB 104 (HES), Mr. Poppe said it attempted to get the court system to release information at the end of the process. There was concern that juveniles should be provided an opportunity to clear their names. If they were adjudicated non-delinquent, the courts could release that information. Unfortunately an interpretation from Region 10 and Washington, D.C. was that since the court received the information from the Dept. of Health and Social Services, the court could not release the information without jeopardizing department funds. That approach was then dropped in SCS CSSSHB 104 (Jud), and the focus was directed toward the Dept. of Public Safety and the initial arrest situation before any information goes to the Dept. of Health and Social Services. Senator Donley asked how the proposed bill would modify language relating to victims. Mr. Poppe explained that information relating to victims remains unchanged at Page 2, lines 11 and 12. ANNIE CARPENETI, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, Dept. of Law, came before committee in opposition to the bill, saying it would be unfair to children. It would allow police officers to release information pertaining to arrests of young people of any age. At the time of arrest, resolution of the charges is unknown. The young person may be innocent. The young person may plead or be convicted of a misdemeanor as a juvenile. Co-chairman Halford asked if the process set forth in the bill reflects "the way it happens to everybody else." Mrs. Carpeneti indicated that that is the procedure for adults. She stressed that the philosophy of the juvenile justice system is different from that for adults. Mrs. Carpeneti advised that the Governor's task force on youth and justice is working on how to release information in a way that is fair to the community, the public, and the child. ELMER LINDSTROM, Special Assistant, Dept. of Health and Social Services, came before committee. He said that if the bill were to pass, it would not create a situation identical to that for adults. Court proceedings for an adult and resolution of the case are public knowledge. In the case of juveniles, if the initial charge is a felony, and that information is released, there is no mechanism for information on resolution of the case, including a determination of innocence, to be made public. When the Dept. of Health and Social Services becomes involved, it is precluded from releasing the information. Referencing the Governor's task force, Mr. Lindstrom stressed that recommendations from the conference would move the department "down the path of disclosure of records and/or opening of proceedings." The department is presently attempting to position itself for the change. Organizational issues within the department need to be addressed to minimize the loss of federal funds. Senator Sharp attested to frustration expressed by constituents over inability to determine whether criminals are living within their neighborhoods. He suggested that the most vicious, by the highest percentage, are those shielded by "the under eighteen law." It is time to change that. Mr. Lindstrom responded that if release of information on only those individuals were at issue, the department position would be very different. The proposed bill cast a much wider net. Senator Randy Phillips suggested that the department is out of touch in terms of dealing with real people and real problems. He expressed frustration over threats of loss of federal funds when changes in the juvenile justice system are proposed. In response to earlier comments that a juvenile would have no means of refuting arrest charges if they were found to be invalid, Co-chairman Halford suggested that nothing prohibits the juvenile from telling people he or she was not convicted. Mrs. Carpeneti countered by saying that a juvenile could say he or she was innocent whether or not that was true. She questioned how a juvenile could effectively disseminate information on his or her innocence were that the case. She further questioned whether the parents of a juvenile should have to sue for false arrest to clear a young person's name. Senator Rieger inquired concerning the logic behind publication of the accusation but not resolution of the case. Mr. Poppe reiterated that court system release of information derived from the Dept. of Health and Social Services would result in loss of funding. Mrs. Carpeneti acknowledged frustration and increasing public demand for information. The concern is over how, when, and what type of information is made available. Senator Rieger next inquired regarding why arrest information was selected for release. Mr. Poppe explained that conversations with the Dept. of Public Safety indicate that the department errors on the side of caution in arresting juveniles. The department is also careful about how charges are filed. Bill language provides that the Dept. of Public Safety "may" release the information. That provides some leeway. If release appears inappropriate, information will not be made available. Mr. Poppe referenced drug cases in which a juvenile ultimately becomes an informant as an example of a situation in which release of information on the juvenile's arrest could place him or her at risk of harm. Senator Donley questioned whether the department would be required to release information under the freedom of information act. Mr. Poppe voiced his understanding that language is permissive rather than mandatory. Mrs. Carpeneti concurred but said that the issue should be researched. Co-chairman Halford voiced his assumption that the freedom of information act contains an exemption for ongoing law enforcement investigations. Further discussion of use of "may" and "shall" throughout the bill followed. Senator Donley specifically pointed to use of "may" in subsection (5) at Page 2, relating to disclosure of information to a victim. He voiced need for victims and school officials to receive pertinent information. Senator Sharp referenced the difference between being arrested and charged. He advised of research indicating many arrests but very few charges since matters are handled within the Division of Family and Youth Services. He asked if that is still the procedure, that many arrests of juveniles are never adjudicated. Mr. Lindstrom acknowledged a substantial number of petitions on adjudications for multiple misdemeanors. For many minor crimes there appear to be no consequences. END: SFC-96, #96, Side 1 BEGIN: SFC-96, #96, Side 2 Senator Rieger inquired concerning the contents of a petition for adjudication of delinquency. Mr. Lindstrom deferred comment to the director of the Division of Family and Youth Services. Senator Donley directed attention to Page 2, line 11, and MOVED to add "regarding the arrest" following the word "information" and to delete all text on line 12, so that subsection (5) reads: (5) may disclose to a victim information regarding the arrest including copies of reports. Co-chairman Halford asked that those who signed up to testify on the bill do so before a vote on the proposed amendment was taken. JUDY ERICKSON came before committee and described the circumstances under which her son, distraught over the recent death of both his father and grandfather, committed a felony and is now awaiting adjudication . She stressed that not all juveniles who commit a crime are vicious or the type that would continue to cause problems within a community. She attested to strict probation, mandated full restitution, and the fact that her son and the other young people involved will probably never do wrong again. The young people are involved in counseling and are doing well. The victims have been involved in the entire process. Mrs. Erickson further attested to the painful nature of the situation for both the juveniles and their parents due to the fact that Juneau is a small community and rumors spread quickly. She advised that her son continues to be greatly troubled by concern that society now views him as a bad person. She urged caution regarding release of information on young people, saying that potential exists for arrest of a juvenile who was perhaps present when a felony was committed but did not participate. She stressed the difference between a young person who has committed four, five, or six felonies and one who has "gotten in trouble one time." Mrs. Erickson attested to having had a good experience with the juvenile justice system and advised that the outcome was fair to both her son and the victims. She urged the committee to remember that the goal is rehabilitation of young people who make mistakes. She questioned the wisdom of making a public display of juveniles who are not repeat offenders. In response to an inquiry from Senator Rieger, Mrs. Erickson noted that the arresting officer will often not know the juvenile or his or her circumstances. It is the probation officer who conducts a background check. Senator Zharoff inquired concerning the potential for state or municipal liability associated with release of information. Anne Carpeneti deferred comment to staff from Dept. of Law, civil division. She acknowledged the possibility of liability for mistakenly releasing information. REPRESENTATIVE PETE KOTT, sponsor of the legislation, briefly came before committee. He advised that the intent is to reduce recidivism among juveniles. He then voiced his belief that disclosure would have a positive impact. He stressed that the bill deals with serious offenses. The overriding factor is protection of the public. It is paramount that the public be aware of the type of crimes committed within the vicinity. Senator Randy Phillips voiced his assumption that the legislation stems from requests from constituents and, in turn, reflects community values and morals. Representative Kott concurred, advising of support by the municipality and Eagle River Chamber of Commerce. Co-chairman Halford noted need to attend the Senate Floor Session and directed that the meeting be recessed with Senator Donley's motion on Amendment No. 1 pending. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was recessed at approximately 11:00 a.m.