Okay, I'd like to call the Senate State Affairs Committee meeting to order.
It is February 10th, Tuesday, February, 10, the time now is 3.30 PM.
Present today, Vice Chair Senator Bjorkman, Senator Greg Jackson,
Senator Tilton, my self-chair Kawasaki, we are expecting Senator Willakowski to be here on his way.
I would like thank Kerry Tippo from Senate Records and Zach Lawhorn from the Legislative Information Office.
Today's agenda we have two items on today's Agenda
We had originally
planned to discuss with the Department of Corrections a couple issues related to
deaths and jails we are going to have to
Table that issue until a later time due to the fact that they're currently an ongoing litigation
that's nothing that there's something that just probably shouldn't be discussed in public,
but we do want to make sure that they do have an opportunity to come forward at maybe a future
time along with one of the one the attorneys from law maybe at some point.
to address some of these issues
that they are able to do on record.
We're gonna go ahead and hear first then,
we have the second hearing on Senate Bill 126,
Correctional Facilities Placement.
It is sponsored by Senator Rob Yunt.
We have a second, hearing, on Senator 71,
pre-trial services, Supervisions, Agreements.
It's rules at the request of the governor.
I'd like to welcome Senator Robert Ynt
and staff to Senator...
Ryan McKee to come up and present the bill, we heard last year at this time, so.
Yeah, for the record, and thank you, Mr. Chair for having us today.
So for record my name is Rob Yunt, I'm the Senator for
the Wassell area from Metal Lakes to the North Lakes and Colony area.
So SB 126 directs the Department of Corrections to look at two cost cutting measures.
and any savings that could create, the second would add a section to the powers given to
the commissioner to give them the ability to look at out-of-state options for housing
inmates who have seven years or more remaining on their sentence.
Should the cost of doing this be cheaper than remaining in state?
Either or both cost-cutting measures could add up to a large sum of money or potential
I look to the will of this committee to help me shape this legislation in a way that is both compassionate and fiscally responsible.
And I'll add a little bit more, this is, you know, oftentimes we get to run legislation that we're excited about.
And there is none of that here.
This is a very delicate situation, and I'd look forward to.
All of your great questions today, and everything that we can do as a group to do this as compassionately and responsibly as possible.
So with that, this is my chief of staff, Ryan McKee.
And he will be helping with today's committee here.
For the record, Brian McKees, staff to Senator Young, I will briefly go over the section since it's been a little while since we last brought this up.
So section 1, AS333061 adds a new subsection to section one.
Section E would grant the commissioner the ability to investigate cost reductions by either consolidating existing facilities or
designating placement of a prisoner at an out of state facility.
Section F clarifies that any prisoner that is sent out of state shall be housed exclusively apart from prisoners who are not residents of the state.
As that was brought up as a concern when it happened last time so we want to make sure that doesn't happen again.
Section G requires that the State estimate the cost savings annually resulting from actions taken under sections.
Section e of this section it also allows the legislature to appropriate an amount equal to the annual cost savings estimate for education purposes, thank you
Thank You mr. McKee are there questions of the sponsor of The Bill or his or her staff
Okay senator Yorkman. Thank you very much chair Kawasaki
previous consolidations within the Department of Corrections have been
discussed within past ten years. Considering this legislation, which
facilities are you hoping to close? That, through the chair, it's a fantastic
question and honestly I don't think that's any of my business. I trust the
Our governor or potential incoming governor, or at least at the very least, all of the Senate and
legislature to help with that decision, I wouldn't feel right trying to make that on my own.
Thank you.
Thank You, Senator Bjorkman.
I think that's a good answer.
As Senator Bjorkman knows, we have had this discussion in a recent year about potentially
shutting down one in the district in that peninsula area.
And I know that there was lots of justifications for maybe potentially closing that facility
as opposed to other facilities.
There are different facilities that are not in best condition, for instance.
I don't know the best way to do that, but I certainly could see the value in having
that somebody can do, not, and be less political, maybe,
than having legislators discuss what they don't want.
I'm just familiarized with the old base for alignment
closure back in the 90s when they had commissions that
were established that were not evaluated,
sort of what areas were the best to close.
And I am glad that they didn't.
get rid of Allison because Allison of course is now one of the biggest F-35 stations.
It took a lot of groundwork, a lotta folks saying why that was justified, and we had former general
gosh what was his name? Hamilton, Mark Hamilton from the University of Alaska come and speak,
But I think that there definitely should be something if there is consolidation, I mean
we've got schools being consolidated right now, we got school's closing down.
We have a $202 per inmate per year charge is what that's called per day, sorry, per
day.
$200 to just think about that, $100 a day when you take the entire budget and then levelize
it over the number of inmates.
Thank you for bringing this forward senator yont. I
Do have a question if you do know the answer if it can give me sort of close to answer to some
Do you know how many inmates are currently at that seven-year mark?
Why was it just gusted a seven year mark versus something else?
Yeah, yes, sir in to the chair
The day that we pulled the information there was 792 I cannot say exactly what that is today
You know, the legislature will have to help finish shape in this bill, but
I would want to see our inmates brought home when they get down to two years or less remaining.
And so how do you do it in a manner that is A, fiscally responsible and
B, compassionate and it gets them back here for training?
We do have in job placement and the other things before they reenter society.
That was kind of a sweet spot where there was a lot of individuals, still.
Many were serving life or close to life sentences.
So that just kind seem like a number that would help balance the budget and
help with consolidation.
Right now, consolidation unfortunately is not necessarily an option because we're at capacity.
And so even the facilities that maybe have a few.
Open beds can't necessarily bring someone into them unfortunately because maybe there are different sacks or because of different type of crime levels and so
No, it's it. It's a tough conversation that and and I will reiterate what I said earlier. I don't think that it would be
Right for me to try to to
Try to choose which facility would Be in that position. Um, I think we hire executives for a reason and we would want to leave it to them
Thank you senator. Yeah, I'd like to welcome senator Wieckowski
We are on Senate bill 126 are there any questions further from committee before we open up testimony
All right here I can see none we're gonna go ahead and open public testimony
If you could try to limit your public testimonies to three minutes, but we recognize you might have
more comments to make. We will first go to Anchorage where we have Mr. Mike Carvey,
policy director for the ACLU. If you could state your name and your affiliation for
the record, welcome to the Senate State Affairs Committee.
Thank you and good afternoon Chair Kawasaki and members of the committee for
the records. My name is Mike Garvey and I am policy Director for
We appreciate the opportunity to offer our views on Senate Bill 126 and the issue of sending prisoners out of state.
We acknowledge that Senate bill 126 does not require the transfer of any currently incarcerated Alaskans to prisons outside
and is presented as a discussion on.
However, we have concerns about in training to build concepts in statute given that no other potential avenues for
reducing costs are mentioned.
and then moving prisoners out of state jeopardizes the constitutional rights of prisoners in Alaska
as well as presents public safety concerns.
Alaska's constitution guarantees prisoners the right to rehabilitation,
to due process, the rights to counsel, and the Right to Adequate medical care.
But out-of-state incarceration harms Alaskan families and communities by
relationships that are critical for reducing recidivism and preventing
intergenerational incarceration. Travel to the lower 48 is logistically and
financially challenging and sending people to prisons outside is likely to
force families into impossible choices, like whether or not they will move
outside as well. Additionally, when people are incarcerated thousands of miles
away, it will be immensely challenging for the state ombudsman, courts, prisoners,
and the Department of Corrections to maintain visibility and ensure their rights are being
of help. Finally, before the state last relied on lower 48 prisons, many Alaskans convicted
of crimes had little exposure to gang culture, but incarceration outside forced them to join
or form gangs to protect themselves from harm. And when these prisoners returned to Alaska,
gang cultures came back with them. These concerns fit alongside the significant logistical and hidden
raised by the Department of Corrections in its fiscal analysis.
If Alaska wants to reduce costs associated with incarceration,
one way would be to better utilize the state's special medical and geriatric parole systems.
These systems are designed to allow qualified prisoners with severe disabilities
or who are older than 60 to be granted parole provided they won't pose a threat of harm to the public.
Healthcare costs are one of DSC's primary budget drivers and older and medically complex people generally have higher health care expenses
But the state almost never grants parole of this type much less hold hearings
We would be happy to hold this
We'd be having to discuss this idea further and appreciate the opportunity to share concerns about this bill today. Thank you
Thank You very much, Mr. Garvey
Yeah, I see in section one the bill it specifically discusses
Just two ways to reduce costs housing prisoners, and maybe if you do have a suggestion on other ways
That we could put into statute that might make sense
That would be great. You're welcome to forward any comments
On that issue directly to the state affairs committee at Senate state of affairs at aka lg.gov
And that goes for anyone who's online or would like to testify on Senate bill 126
that address again is senate state affairs at a-k-l-e-g-dot-gov.
We'll go ahead next. There's no questions. We're going to go
ahead, next to Adam Barker. If you could state your name and your affiliation for the record.
Hello, Senator and Senate members of the State Affairs Committee.
Thank you very much for your time. My name is Adam Barber and I am representing myself.
I'm calling from Casa Grande, Arizona, but I was a formerly incarcerated prisoner in the
state of Alaska from 1994 to 2019 when I released on supervision via interstate combat to Arizona.
Since my release, I've earned both my bachelor's and my master's degrees in criminal justice
as well as a certification in forensic psychology.
impact on the prison of themselves and your eventual impact
on Alaska communities. The impact of sending prisoners out of
state on, excuse me, the impact to sending
prisoners, out-of-state, on Alaskan families cannot be
understated. First, sending prisoners out
of state thousands of miles from their families removed the
rehabilitative aspect of family visitation,
which the Alaska appellate court found significant in Brandon versus
decided in 1997. Second, the family bond is strained by any incarceration, but it can
be strained to the point of breaking when the offender sent out of state at the cost for most
families for visitation will be prohibited. The impact on the prisoner population has been
previously observed when when first mass shipment of prisoners out-of-state occurred in 1995.
Prior to out state placement the Alaska prison system was not structured as it is now.
Prisoners would mingle regardless of rates of crime, but once in a private prison, the
prison population began organizing itself, often in response to influence or pressure
from other contracts that were housed with us.
The gains we now have in Alaska prisons are a direct result of the cross-pollination from
other contract and adopting some of their characteristics.
In addition, housing, segregation, food, programming, and medical care are all of inferior quality
to that which we receive in Alaskan.
Specifically, The cost of medical will not be transferred to a Private Prison.
DOC will have to cut a separate check for that and the cost of medical care for the for an aging
population is one of the biggest line items in DOC's budget. The impact on Alaska communities
will be delayed but inevitable. When do you see Alaska prisoners out of state we were gone for
almost 20 years. I spent from 1997 to 2013 in private prisons in Arizona and Colorado before
being returned. when we came back we heard about the out-of-state prisoners and how much more difficult
We were more violent, had gang affiliations, drug addictions, behavioral problems,
and we're more resistant to authority than those who had never been sent out of state.
Then we were released back into the community. For some like myself, we left prison behind us.
For many, though, they were apt to get out and return to incarceration, often in conjunction
with another charge. They went back to their communities and created more victims because
the behavioral issues they developed out-of-state had not been addressed or resolved prior to the
To this committee need proof of this, we really request a report from the Department of Corrections containing the percentage of the prison or population that was housed out of state
then returned to incarceration after release.
I'd venture to guess that that percentage is higher than the standard recidivism rate.
Sending out a senior offenders out in state to a private prison does not curb the aging prison population
that Alaska currently has and the medical care costs are not subsumed in yearly contract. There will be a separate fee.
While the general cost of care and custody is approximately two-thirds of what it is in Alaska,
we do not get the same level of programming, the
same
level medical care, nor the
same due process for institutional
infractions that we're doing in
Alaska.
Add to that the strain on the family unit from the offender being sent a
minimum of 2300 miles away, which is the
distance from Anchorage to Seattle with no option of
visitation.
Phone calls that are exorbitant at one point it used to cost us 52 cents a
into a much more dangerous environment.
Bites between contracts was a fairly common occurrence
and would often involve weapons.
This will create a more hardened criminal
and provide a greater risk to communities,
which in my, which should not be an option in
my opinion.
Thank you for your time and I stand ready to answer any questions.
Thank You. Mr. Barker, are there any
questions? I did want to say Mr
the housing of prisoners that they shall be exclusively apart from prisoners who are not
residents of Alaska.
I think that that's sort of addressed at least part of here, maybe one of your concerns,
though.
I would, I understand that, that might be part
of the bill, but I also understand
that was our original understanding when we were sent to, when
and as the facility had open beds they would fill them with whatever contract
became available that had similar programming needs.
Thank you Mr. Barger. Mr Bargar when you came back and after 2013 did you go to
Goose Creek Correctional Center? Yes sir I did. Okay. Thank You very much Mr
Okay hearing and seeing none are there is there anybody in the room who'd like testify on Senate bill 126
Anybody from the department
They don't they're not jumping up and down
Okay, hearing seeing done we'll go ahead and close public testimony for now
Again, public testimony can be received by the committee Senate State Affairs at the
Email address Senate state affairs at aka leg.gov. That is Senate's data fairs at a K le g dot gov
Are there any final questions for the sponsor of the bill or his staff?
I guess there's no questions. I'll just say just as a comment that Goose Creek was
being worked on when I started as a legislator. It got finished probably by 2010 or 2011.
And then the idea, it had always been, make sure that we get all of our prisoners back in state.
I think that that, you know, the
idea was that it was going to be cheaper and the
idea that was gonna be potentially better for families, also better lower recidivism rates,
things like that. Not sure if those all played out as
Originally discussed, this was, of course, a legislature prior to us ever being there.
But it was Senator Greene.
And I think that if we looked at the old records about what Goose Creek had promised and
what the Department of Corrections had promise, I'm not sure that we would see costs had been
driven down or that recidivism rates had dropped.
or anything of the above, but I think it's definitely worth it.
I appreciate you bringing this bill forward, Senator Yount.
Did you have any other comments you'd like to make before we set this
bill aside and set a deadline for the amendments?
Yeah, thank you.
Through the chair, I'll just close with this, that those are both those
great testimony and I'm sympathetic to their concerns.
You know, I was a once a young child that would travel to see family members as well on a Sunday
And so that's not a great situation for anyone to be in
You don't wish we weren't in the situation, but here we are, you know
We did pass HB 35 last year, which I'm a big supporter of electronic devices
That will help substantially with retraining inmates. It could help with FaceTiming
You
loved ones that are on a list that's allowed,
under set circumstances right there.
That was a bill that got a lot of good committee hearings
last year on both sides of both bodies.
There's a real opportunity there to help lower healthcare
costs and different things with telehealth.
And, you know, we've got and we'll provide it
for the next, the new next committee.
But.
The visitation rates for all of our jails and facilities that they got us are very low.
It's unfortunate, we all wish they were way higher, but the reality is that their not so.
As the bill moves forward, I hope that, like I said, will be handled with compassion.
It is a delicate situation.
I would never vote for something that was going to.
Send our inmates out of state to be intermingled with inmates of other states
If we can't do this in a way that we keep our Alaskans together, then I don't think we should look at it
And so that's that was why I put that in section one. So thank you, sir
Thank you
Senator yont any further questions
All right hearing and seeing none we will set Senate bill 126 aside and establish a time for
amendments. I don't know what that time will be but we'll figure it out. We're
going to go ahead and take a brief at ease for the next bill.
All right. I'd like to call the Senate State Affairs Committee meeting back to order.
We next have Senate Bill 71. Senate will bill 71 is by the senate rules committee by request
of the governor. We did hear this bill last year toward the beginning of
the year and we are recognizing the Governor wanted us to hear the bills.
We are putting all these bills on our agendas and so we have now with us
To present Senate Bill 71, pre-trial services supervision agreements, Dusty
DeMont, director of pre trial probation and parole. We also have Kevin Worley,
director administrative services that might be able to be here to summarize
the legislation in Senate bill 71. And we also
have Rachel Turner, legislative liaison to the Department of Corrections.
Good afternoon. My name is Kevin Worley. I'm the admin services director for the Department of Corrections
I'll give a brief overview of Senate Bill 71
So the purpose of the bill is to clarify statutory authority for
the department of corrections related to pretrial supervision for a municipal only cases
It doesn't change operations expand supervision or mandate billing
The bill does clarify DOC's pre-trial supervision authority, applying to violations of state law, so this only applies to a municipal code violations.
And then authorizes the department to obtain agreements with the municipalities for pre trial supervision.
It also authorises adoption of regulations and charging reasonable fees.
Thank you other questions for mr. Warley or miss Dumont I
Guess I'll start with the question on the municipal agreements since this is only
dealing with municipal laws that would only impact a place like Anchorage, right?
To the chair and the Anchorage and Juno
Thank You Anchorage in Juneau I heard that I guess
I'm working on other legislation relating to
unfunded mandates and things like that and I am just curious
this would essentially
transfer the
financial responsibility to municipalities it looks like. Is that the case?
To the chair again Kevin Worley Department of Corrections
It would transfer a portion I don't know that we would fully be collecting the cost of the pretrial supervision
But there would be some some charge that
We would have that would in the terms of The bill be reasonable
Thank You mr. Warley there are other questions at this time
I will go ahead and open up public testimony. I do not have anybody else online for Senate Bill 71.
Is there anybody in the room who would like to testify on Senate bill 71?
Okay, here we can see none. We'll go head and close public
testimony just a reminder that public testimonies always open. If anybody would
Senate State Affairs at aka LEG.gov and we will make it public to the rest of the committee members and
we'll also put it online as soon as staff's able to do that.
Are there any other comments on Senate Bill 71 from the administration?
Okay. Any questions of committee members before we set Senate Bill 71 aside?
Okay, thank you for being here today. We appreciate your ability and your willingness to be here in present for Senate bill 71.
Again, this is a bill from the governor's office.
We will set senate bill seventy one aside at this time.
Is there any other business to come before the Senate State Affairs Committee?
I actually do not see any.
We will work again closely with the Department of Corrections
on potentially bringing back some information that we've asked for
that can talk about in public. Specifically about
the correctional center, the deaths in correctional centers,
sort of things like that. We also will, I'm sure, talk
that's a big highlighted item at $202 an inmate. I remember when it was $110 an
inmate, that the total amount of money that was spent divided by the
total number of inmates. So it's gone markedly up and you know we're having
this discussion right now about school boards are in town, school board you're
talking about the per pupil allocation, how much they get at 30 some thousand
When you look at the cost of how much
it takes to teach a child versus how
much it take to incarcerate a person,
I know it's apples to oranges, but it is nearly twice
as much, if not more.
And that's an expense we just should not
have if we can avoid it.
Thank you for letting me be on my soapbox.
Are there any other questions or comments of the committee?
Okay, on announcements on Thursday, we will meet here February 12th where we
will hear here Senate Bill 126 correctional facilities and placement.
We will also, I'm sorry,
I am going to have to schedule an amendment deadline for Senate bill 126.
If people can bring amendments to us by Wednesday,
that would be great if not,
we'll try to work with.
committee members, but I think there's some definite people who brought up some
comments that should be listened to. So we'll try to hear Senate Bill 126 at
that point in time. We will also have a first hearing on Senate bill 203,
prohibited weapons, firearms, fire arms, conversion devices, and we will hear
bills previously heard or scheduled. If there is nothing else before coming
before the committee, the meeting is adjourned. The time is now 403.