---------- DOCUMENT HEADER ----------
---------- DOCUMENT HEADER ----------
ARIZONA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Forty-seventh Legislature – Second Regular Session
SENATE JUDICIARY AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES JUDICIARY
COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE FOR THE SUNSET HEARING OF THE
ARIZONA CRIMINAL JUSTICE COMMISSION
Minutes of Meeting
or upon adjournment of the House Judiciary Committee
Chairman Farnsworth called the meeting to order at 10:09 a.m. and attendance was noted by the secretary.
Members Present
Senator Aguirre Representative Gallardo
Senator Harper Representative Miranda B
Senator Martin Representative Quelland
Senator Miranda R Representative Yarbrough
Senator Huppenthal, Chairman Representative Farnsworth, Chairman
Members Absent
None
Speakers Present
John Blackburn, Jr., Executive Director, Arizona Criminal Justice Commission (ACJC)
Dana Hlavac, President, Arizona Public Defender Association
Representative Kyrsten Sinema, representing herself
Jon Kokanovich, representing himself
Wendy Roberts, Coordinator, Victim Compensation Program, Coconino County
Terry Azbill, Executive Director, Arizona High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA)
David Neri, Commander, Pima County/Tucson Metro Counter Narcotics Alliance
Names of persons who did not speak (page 5)
PRESENTATIONS:
John Blackburn, Jr., Executive Director, Arizona Criminal Justice Commission (ACJC), testified on the role of the ACJC (Attachment 1). He advised that the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission was established in 1982 and operated at the direction of the Legislative Council to address criminal justice issues. In 1985 ACJC was removed from the Legislative Council and began to serve as a resource and service organization for Arizona’s 480 criminal justice agencies. Its focus was on criminal justice issues ranging from drugs, gangs, victim compensation and assistance to criminal record improvement initiatives. Since then, the agency has evolved to meet the changing demands of criminal justice needs in Arizona. The primary characteristic of ACJC and why it continues to be extremely vital and very successful in the State is because of its cooperative and collaborative role in this State’s commitment to criminal justice and the safety of the citizens of Arizona. ACJC works on behalf of the criminal justice agencies in Arizona to facilitate information and data exchange by establishing and maintaining criminal justice information archives, monitoring new and continuing legislation relating to criminal justice issues and gathering information and researching existing criminal justice programs. In 1982 the agency was designated as the State Administering Agency (SAA) for numerous federal criminal justice grant programs as well as state grant programs. Membership in the Commission in 1988 was changed to 19 Commissioners; 14 are appointed by the Governor and are municipal, county or elected officials. The remaining five members are criminal justice agency directors. He said the membership brings together diverse elements of the State’s criminal justice system with the mission of enhancing the overall effectiveness of the criminal justice system while focusing on protecting the public. There are seven program areas under the ACJC: Crime Victims’ Services; Criminal Justice Systems Improvements; Drug, Gang and Violent Crime Control; Information Technology; Public Information; Statistical Analysis; and Finance. ACJC will administer $40 million in grant funds this next fiscal year to support criminal justice programs and initiatives statewide. ACJC’s sound fiscal management and program successes have been recognized at the state and national levels. ACJC manages grant administration in addition to auditing and oversight functions to ensure the effective use of state and federal funds. ACJC ensures public funds are spent in accordance with state and federal laws and guidelines. ACJC meets its legislative mandates by conducting expert research on criminal justice issues and trends, and it provides that research and analysis to local, state and federal policy makers. He referred to the Arizona Youth Service 2006 State Report, one of ACJC’s latest reports, which has been developed into a valuable tool for state, county and local jurisdictions (Attachment 2). Also distributed to Members was a packet outlining the critical issue of records integration in Arizona (Attachment 3).
Chairman Farnsworth queried whether ACJC has statutory authority to audit. He also asked what is done with the information if an agency is non-compliant. Mr. Blackburn responded that auditing is mandated by the requirements of the grants. If the guidelines are not followed, the grant funds are reverted back into the program.
Representative Gallardo noted that the Commission represents all aspects of the criminal justice system. He asked Mr. Blackburn if he would agree that the public defender’s office might play a critical role in the decisions of the Commission. Mr. Blackburn agreed that the public defender’s office can be a vital piece of the court process; however, he questioned its value to the Commission.
Representative Gallardo brought up the victims’ rights advocacy group. Mr. Blackburn advised that the Commission is writing preliminary legislation to appoint a victims’ rights advocate.
In response to Senator Harper’s question regarding juror assignment, Mr. Blackburn related that the Commission has no jurisdiction over that issue. The Administrative Office of the Courts determines the jury pool.
Dana Hlavac, President, Arizona Public Defender Association, testified that in general he supports what the Criminal Justice Commission does and its overall tasks; however, he is concerned there is no true criminal justice oversight in Arizona because there is no defense representation on the Commission. He believes the entire scope and purpose of ACJC needs to be re-examined during this Sunset process. He stated there is no independent oversight of the labs, reports and systems used to prove people guilty, citing the Ray Krone case and the Adams litigation as examples of wrongful prosecutions. He noted the several attempts to put public defenders on the Commission have failed. The current system is unbalanced and needs everyone’s input. He maintained that it is time for the Legislature to make Arizona a safer place for all of its citizens by appointing a member of the defense bar to the Commission. He pointed out that unbalance also exists because the Commission receives federal funds but the defense does not. He asked that the Legislature not recommend the renewal of the Commission as it stands but rather recommend that the Commission be expanded to include public defenders on the same level and basis as county attorneys.
Representative Gallardo asked whether the victims’ rights advocacy group would be a critical part of the decision-making process of the Commission. Mr. Hlavac said he believes that any Commission that speaks on behalf of other people must include those other people. Victims are a very important part of the system.
Representative Kyrsten Sinema, representing herself, stated that the victims’ rights system is a good addition to the Commission. It is also important to include representation from the defense bar. She believes both are an integral part of the criminal justice system. She urged this Committee to move for the inclusion of representation by the criminal defense bar into the ACJC.
Representative Gallardo pointed out that an argument against the inclusion of criminal defense attorneys on the Commission relates to the issue of conflict. Representative Sinema believes there is no conflict because individual cases are not discussed. The Commission is responsible for disbursing funds to different agencies.
Jon Kokanovich, representing himself, testified that he is a retired crime lab director. He expressed support for ACJC and said it has been the premier body to assist with the enhanced funding of Arizona’s crime labs. The Commission has been instrumental in helping crime labs come together to develop a statewide plan that has increased federal grant funds, resulting in an increased crime-fighting ability. ACJC has provided a neutral but supportive forum for lab directors and other interested parties to work together on common interests and problems. He said he would like to encourage Members to recommend that the Commission move forward without change to membership.
Representative Gallardo brought up 2005 legislation which recommended increasing ACJC membership to include three members appointed by the public defenders office and one member of a victims’ rights group. He asked Mr. Kokanovich to comment on this. Mr. Kokanovich replied that crime labs work for both the prosecution and the defense; however, he said it is an adversarial system. He believes that having the defense bar play a significant role on the decision-making of the Commission would dilute the effectiveness of ACJC.
Representative Gallardo asked if there is objection to including a victims’ rights advocate on the Commission. Mr. Kokanovich stated that a victims’ rights advocate would be a wonderful addition to the Commission.
Representative Miranda referred to Mr. Kokanovich’s comments and asked how inclusion of the defense bar on the Commission would be counterproductive. Mr. Kokanovich reiterated that since the system is adversarial, he does not think that conflict is healthy on the Commission. Leaving membership as it is currently would be a positive thing. Representative Miranda countered that he thinks increasing membership would add an element of stability.
In response to Representative Miranda’s query in terms of accuracy, efficiency and accessibility to both the defense and prosecution, Mr. Kokanovich advised that the State’s crime labs are striving for 100 percent accuracy. He reminded Members there is a national oversight and accreditation group that independently looks at all the various aspects of crime labs throughout the nation.
Representative Miranda stated that both law enforcement and the prosecution have a vested interest in ensuring that crime labs have oversight. He asked Mr. Kokanovich whether the defense bar also has a vested interest in making sure the system is operating proficiently. Mr. Kokanovich agreed with Mr. Miranda’s statement; however, he said he believes ACJC is the wrong forum to discuss those issues.
Wendy Roberts, Coordinator, Victim Compensation Program, Coconino County, expressed support for the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission. She advised that the Commission is the agency that bridges statewide program differences and provides consistency for the state. Arizona is only one of two states in the nation that has a centralized victim compensation program. ACJC offers guidance and leadership to the counties, and provides compensation funds as well as victim assistance grants.
Terry Azbill, Executive Director, Arizona High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA), related that HIDTA is part of the Executive Office of the President of the United States Office of National Drug Control Policy. HIDTA’s focus is to combat drug trafficking and money laundering that passes into and through the State of Arizona. The mission of the HIDTA program is to disrupt the marketplace of illegal drugs in the entire nation by assisting federal, state and local law enforcement entities. The Arizona Criminal Justice Commission was the first recipient of state and local HIDTA funds. The Commission is uniquely qualified to handle HIDTA funds by providing impartiality and statewide oversight. He said he is a big supporter of the ACJC. Their work has benefited not only the HIDTA program and law enforcement, but more importantly, the citizens of Arizona and the nation. He said he highly recommends the continuation of the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission.
David Neri, Commander, Pima County/Tucson Metro Counter Narcotics Alliance, advised that the Alliance is a drug interdiction and investigation task force serving metropolitan Pima County. He stated he is here today to encourage Members to recommend the reauthorization of the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission. The Alliance uses a variety of services provided by ACJC. An important service is the administration of grant funding which enables the Alliance to include smaller jurisdictions that otherwise would be unable to participate in a task force. ACJC uses its role as a fiduciary for several funding sources and accountability for Arizona’s resources. He maintained that to eliminate ACJC or mitigate its role in state government would remove a mechanism for coordinating efforts and would undermine law enforcement’s ability to provide for public safety, resulting in more crime in Arizona’s communities, a more vulnerable border with Mexico, and absence of information sharing and cooperation.
Commander Neri commented that law enforcement would be opposed to the inclusion of the defense bar in the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission. He believes there is a responsibility for the prosecution counsel and the defense counsel to have a respectful but adversarial position. The defense bar has indicated that it would divert funds away from existing programs. Current resources are limited and redirecting funds would limit the success of either side.
Mr. Quelland queried how eliminating the Commission would foster more crime in Arizona. Commander Neri responded that the Alliance’s success in being able to interdict the level of crime comes from a combination of the number of jurisdictions and resources available to combat crime. Joint use of intelligence sources and resources enable the Alliance to form strategies against the greatest threats facing communities and would open an environment for crime to flourish.
Persons in support of continuing the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission who did not speak:
Enrique Cantu, Executive Director, Arizona Automobile Theft Authority
Richard Travis, Arizona Attorney General’s Office
Mark Faull, Special Assistant County Attorney, Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (MCAO)
RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE:
Senator Huppenthal stated he strongly supports and encourages the Commission’s continuation.
Representative Yarbrough moved that the Joint Committee of Reference make the recommendation to continue the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission for ten years.
Representative Gallardo moved that the final recommendation of the Joint Committee of Reference include the recommendation that the membership of the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission be expanded to include public defenders and victims’ rights advocates.
Senator Martin asked whether this Committee has the authority to make recommendations on changes to the Commission’s membership. He wondered whether that has to be a statutory change.
To that point, Senator Aguirre noted that this Committee just makes recommendations to the Legislature. Part of that recommendation would be that the Committee supports the addition of the defense bar and the victims’ rights advocates to the membership of the Commission.
Question was called for on Representative Gallardo’s motion that the Commission’s membership includes public defenders and victims’ rights advocates. The motion failed.
Representative Gallardo stated that everyone realizes the importance of this Commission. The question is one of fairness. He believes that having the Commission look at all aspects of the issue is an important part that needs to be addressed.
Representative Quelland said he is particularly interested in the inclusion of a victims’ rights advocate to the Commission.
Senator Martin spoke in favor of the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission. He also expressed support of a victims’ rights person to the Commission’s membership.
Question was called for on Representative Yarbrough’s motion on the extension of the Commission for ten years. The motion carried by a roll call vote of 9-1-0-0 (Attachment 4).
Without objection, the meeting adjourned at 11:22 a.m.
___________________________________
Joanne Bell, Committee Secretary
July 6, 2016
(Original minutes, attachments and tape on file in the Chief Clerk’s Office)
---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------
Senate Judiciary and House of Representatives Judiciary
Committee of Reference for the Sunset Hearing of the
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
2
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
---------- DOCUMENT FOOTER ---------