Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 106
04/04/2012 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB369 | |
| Confirmation Hearing: University Board of Regents | |
| Presentation: Lower Kuskokwim School District | |
| HB369 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 369 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 369-STUDENT PARTICIPATION IN SPORTS
8:06:49 AM
CHAIR DICK announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 369, "An Act relating to student participation in
sports."
GARY MATHEWS, Executive Director, Alaska School Activities
Association (ASAA), stated that ASAA is the governing body of
interscholastic high school activities in the state. Its 200
high school members follow a standard set of rules, bylaws and
policies for interscholastic competition, including fine arts,
athletics, and academic activities. He explained that this bill
combines the "concussion bill" and the "home school" bill. He
read his comments, as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Implementation of HB 369 will create a major change to
student eligibility rules, which have been in effect
for 56 years in Alaska. At this time it's not wise to
adopt such a change when school districts across the
state don't know the ramifications of this bill. Our
main concern is how the bill can be fairly implemented
across the districts across the district of the state
- all 53 school districts - which are members of
Alaska School Activities Association (ASAA) and how
parity can be ensured when home school parents are
providing the curriculum and assigning grades. Alaska
education regulation 4 AAC 06.115, Interscholastic
Activities was adopted by the state Board of Education
(BOE) on June 26, 1994. The purpose of which - and
this is an excerpt - is to provide a procedure that
enables school districts to promote and govern
interscholastic activities effectively, economically,
and fairly, while keeping those activities in their
proper perspective, educationally.
8:10:26 AM
MR. MATHEWS read his comments, as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Under the proposed legislation the legislature, rather
than school districts, regional Associations or Alaska
School Activities Association would be setting
policies for interscholastic activity participation.
Fifty-three member school districts in Alaska,
represented through the the Alaska School Activities
Association are opposed to the passage of HB 369 for
the points specified above.
If HB 369 is passed by the legislature, schools and
ASAA will need some time to amend the rules and to
adopt new procedures. ASAA Board of Directors and
regional associations hold their final meetings of the
year during March and April so some of the
associations have already finished their meetings and
the ASAA board will meet in two weeks in Bethel.
Implementing such a change by August 1 of this school
year when our activity season starts will be extremely
difficult and once the school year begins we must have
all changes in place so that all activities programs
are treated fairly - so we're not treating some
sport's seasons differently than others.
It is my recommendation that changes to
interscholastic eligibility rules resulting from
legislative action have an effective date of July 1,
2013 if HB 369 is passed. Thank you.
8:12:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON explained one of the issues that the Kenai
Borough School District (KBSD) has been reviewing the past few
years has been the participation by students attending one
school, but participating in another school that offers sports.
He asked whether the ASAA would allow particpation in either
football or hockey in a school separate from the closest school
at which a student may participate in other sports, such as
basketball or other small team sports.
MR. MATHEWS responded that the question is difficult to answer.
He said the schools in the area are all part of the Kenai
Peninsula School District (KPSD) so smaller schools would have
an opportunity to form cooperative teams with the larger
schools. This currently happens with Homer High School and the
small Old Believer schools just north of Homer. This bill would
not affect that issue; however, HB 369 would affect students who
attend private home schools and the statewide correspondence
programs, such as IDEA, Raven, and Pace. School districts
sponsor programs for students not only within their districts,
but for correspondence students outside of their districts. He
emphasized that would directly affect the aforementioned
programs as well as private home schools. Private home schools
currently may become members of ASAA and their kids can
represent home schools in many sports and activities, but
football or hockey are usually restricted since they are team
sports.
8:14:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DAN SADDLER, Alaska State Legislature, asked
whether Mr. Mathews has reviewed the first section of the bill
related to concussions.
MR. MATHEWS pointed out the language in [section 1] of the bill
is slightly different than what the ASAA had hoped for since the
original request was to eliminate four words in the statute "and
is currently certified." Last year, HB 115 was adopted to
address treating sports concussions, but the bill included a
provision requiring medical providers to obtain certification.
He clarified that the state does not certify physicians or
medical providers in concussion management, which was not
clarified in the bill. He said the ASAA could live with the
current revision, which removes "and is currently certified, as
verified in writing or electronically by the qualified person"
He emphasized the ASAA had hoped the language "as verified in
writing or electronically by the qualified person" would stay in
the bill since the language would tend to protect school
districts and would place the liability on the medical provider
to say whether he or she is qualified rather than to have the
school district make that determination. Thus the organization
can manage with the current language in HB 369, with respect to
concussion management, although it is not their preferred
wording.
8:16:15 AM
CHAIR DICK noted general agreement and stated his observations
seemed like good ones.
8:16:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE recalled an earlier question on the
preferred effective date of July 1, 2013. He suggested that if
the bill were to pass it would likely go into effect on July 1,
2012. He asked whether a year would be enough time for ASAA to
implement the changes.
MR. MATHEWS related the ASAA's process for rulemaking, such that
the ASAA has six regions, which have representatives on their
Board of Directors, plus a representative of the school board
association, the superintendents' association, and the student
government association. He explained that proposed changes are
brought forth from various entities, including regions to the
board; a hearing process would occur and if it passes muster the
board would implement the changes and any effective dates. He
reported that the ASAA meets in two weeks, but will not meet
again until October 2013 so any changes scheduled to go into
effect for the 2013 school year must be approved by the board
this month. Otherwise, some sports will begin under one set of
rules and part way through the school year other sports - such
as wresting or basketball - would fall under another set of
rules. He favored the ASAA working under one set of rules.
MR. MATHEWS explained that under the bill, student eligibility
rules would need to undergo a complete review, which could prove
cumbersome considering that the bill proposes a major policy
change. An effective date would also need to be considered to
allow for any adjustments. He spoke about the cumbersome
aspects since graduation and grade point averages requirements
could be affected. He recalled problems physicians had when the
concussion bill passed and anticipated similar problems. He
reiterated many processes would change if non-enrolled students
are involved and the organization would need time to inform
people who will be affected by the changes. Additionally,
penalties could apply to schools if they allow athletes to
participate who have not met eligibility rules.
8:19:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE recalled most nonprofit organizations have
provisions for special meetings of the board. He questioned
whether that was possible with the ASAA.
8:20:09 AM
MR. MATHEWS answered that it is possible although once the
school lets out board members are not available since many are
teachers or school district employees. He focused his concern
on the procedures. It would be necessary to develop an
implementation plan since there are literally thousands of home
schooled children in Alaska who may wish to participate at their
nearest public school. The ASAA would need to develop processes
to accept students for athletics, but still ensure that home
school students follow the same set of eligibility standards
other students must follow. He suggested if East Anchorage High
School receives a request for ten home school students to
participate on its football team the school would need to notify
the ASAA to ensure each student has met eligibility standards.
He reiterated that although the organization works during the
summer, contacting the schools prior to the football season
beginning, which is usually about the third week of July, would
be difficult.
8:22:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked whether an effective date for
each section of the bill would be helpful.
MR. MATHEWS answered yes.
8:23:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT asked him to quantify the burden one home
school student who wishes to participate in interscholastic
activities at a high school might place on a school
administrator.
MR. MATHEWS answered that the school would determine whether the
student has met eligibility requirements, including attendance,
grades, and other considerations. The school would obtain some
of the information from parents or the statewide correspondence
school. The timeliness would depend on the responsiveness of
the parents or the specific correspondence school.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT acknowledged that currently home schooled
students play on teams in Anchorage. He related his
understanding the bill was introduced as the result of an issue
that arose for a Chugiak High School homeschooled student. He
asked for the basic changes between the current system and the
interscholastic activities provisions under the bill.
MR. MATHEWS explained that the status quo in the Anchorage
School District (ASD) is that the school runs its own home
school programs. Students can enroll in the home school program
and select a school of eligibility at their nearest school.
Under HB 369, students who are not part of the ASD home school
program - private home schooled students not affiliated with any
entity in the state - would have the same benefits and play
sports at one of the public high schools in Anchorage.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT asked whether he could foresee a student
who cannot meet eligibility requirements in a public school
could change to a private school status in order to regain
eligibility to play on a team. He asked whether the bill would
create a potential loophole in the eligibility process for
interscholastic activities.
MR. MATHEWS answered yes. He recalled this happening when a
student had become disenchanted with a school or had been
removed from school for a disciplinary matter. The parents
subsequently began home schooling the student. Several weeks
later the student decided to participate in interscholastic
sports through the home school program. The ASAA's ruling
deemed the home school student's participation unfair since it
would have given the student an advantage over students who had
met eligibility requirements. He concluded that allowing the
student to participate would have been unfair.
8:26:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to section 2 of the bill. He
expressed concern that this provision would create a major
change in the state supervision of home schools. He noted that
if anyone wished to participate in fine arts or sports the
school district would need to supervise the curriculum, the
attendance, and the progress towards graduation. He suggested
that before section 2 could be implemented the state would need
to have a detailed conversation with home school parents. He
asked whether the school districts would be more involved in
certification of grades, attendance, and progress towards
graduation than under the current process.
GARY MATHEWS agreed with the potential outcome since schools
would be held accountable for reporting on the status of home
schooled students.
8:28:54 AM
DREMA FITZHUGH, Member, Chugiak Football Boosters Club, referred
to a student, Craig Lowe, who was deemed ineligible in midseason
last year. She expressed her appreciation to Representative
Saddler for introducing the bill.
8:30:21 AM
MARY VALLIERES stated her son is Craig Lowe. She offered her
support for all parents of home schooled students who want their
children to be able to participate in sports. She explained
that her son was excluded from high school football since he was
home schooled by a different school district and was later found
ineligible. She recalled Mr. Mathew's earlier testimony that
the effective date of the bill would be next year. She pointed
out that her son is a senior and he will never have an
opportunity to play high school football. This was his first
sport, she said. She reiterated that the home schooled children
who are seniors will never have a chance again to play high
school sports. She did not understand the reason her son, who
was enrolled [in the IDEA program, which is a statewide home
school program,] was ineligible since he resides in Chugiak, but
could not play football at Chugiak High School.
CHAIR DICK appreciated her testimony and encouraged her to speak
to her position on the bill. He related his understanding that
the bill, if passed, may have an effective date beyond the
timeframe that would help her son's eligibility issue.
MS. VALLIERES responded that parents want their children to be
able to have childhood opportunities and it is difficult to have
their student excluded from programs. She emphasized the
importance of music education.
CHAIR DICK understood music education is an option for home
schooled students, but noted these homeschooled students are not
eligible to play football.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether she had any thoughts on how
home school parents might verify a student's progress in a
program like IDEA.
MS. VALLIERES responded that she must provide samples of her
son's progress quarterly. She related she typically has
communicated by phone and e-mail with her son's teacher and she
submits his grades.
8:36:36 AM
PETE HOEPFNER, President, Cordova School Board, stated his
opposition to HB 369. He related that this bill covers two
diverse and divergent topics. The first topic relates to the
medical diagnosis and treatment of concussions, which needs to
be addressed. A requirement for certification needs to be
deleted since a regulatory body to do so does not exist in
Alaska. He related his understanding that physicians currently
have expressed strong concern with signing any version of the
medical release form. Thus this change is necessary. He
pointed out that the second section of the bill relates to home
schooled student participation in public school activities. He
offered his belief that this section of HB 369 has multiple
problems. He offered his belief that implementing these
provisions would become a paper nightmare due to the need to
continually monitor eligibility of home schooled students in
order for them to participate in the public schools. He said
that if parents want their children to participate in student
activities they must enroll them in school. He pointed out that
Cordova students can enroll in the Cordova School District's
home school program and become eligible for any activity.
Additionally, he cautioned that a home schooled student could
displace a public school student. Further, he recalled that
student activity fees were previously mentioned. In Cordova,
student activity fees are a little lower, but none of the fees
add up to the costs involved for a coach's salary, equipment,
and travel. The costs for the home schooled student would not
be funded, he said. Further, budget constraints currently
exist. Last year Cordova funded $100,000 towards student
travel, but this year only $75,000 is budgeted for travel. He
reiterated that funding for home schooled students is not taken
under consideration. He surmised that parents sometimes choose
to home school their children when they think public schools are
insufficient; however, the parents then want their homeschooled
children to participate in sports programs. He stated support
for HB 15, which passed last session, and needs to be amended to
eliminate the certification provision of those treating
concussions; however, he expressed his opposition to the home
school provision in HB 369 since students can participate by
enrolling in the local school's home school system and due to
lack of funding.
8:40:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to section 1 of HB 369 to the
addition of the four words, "and is currently certified" and
asked about the effective date for that portion. He asked
whether it would affect ASAA's ability to implement the change.
MR. HOEPFNER answered that he is a board member of ASAA, but did
not want to speak for the ASAA; however, the sooner the four
words could be deleted from the existing language, the better,
since a certification process does not exist.
8:41:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA reviewed the fiscal note, which indicates
no cost involvement to EED. She asked whether any costs arise
for the department or if the costs would be carried by the
parents themselves.
CHAIR DICK stated his understanding that the fiscal note is to
the EED.
MR. HOEPFNER said that Cordova's travel budget for the team
travel is $100,000. He indicated the money is derived from
student allocations. He pointed out that numerous costs are
associated with student activities. Students travel to rural
districts and the funding within the budget would not allow for
student activities such as coaches, buildings, energy for lights
and heat. He stressed that student activities keep students
engaged, which is why school boards fund them. Some costs are
offset by fundraising; however, home schooled students do not
contribute money to the effort so it becomes an unfunded
mandate. He indicated that the student allocation for the
student in Chugiak previously mentioned went to the Galena
School District since Mr. Lowe was enrolled in the Galena
program and not the ASD. He stated that the student could have
enrolled in the ASD and his eligibility would not have been an
issue.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA referred to the comment that this
represents an unfunded mandate. She asked whether the travel
funding is state funding or if travel costs are raised in the
community.
MR. HOEPFNER said that the school provides a portion of the
travel funding, but the teams raise the balance of the travel
funding. He recalled that the high school volleyball team
needed to raise approximately $21,000 for travel costs. He
further recalled the school district funded $10,000 through the
general fund monies, but the remainder was raised by the
community.
CHAIR DICK acknowledged that Cordova has been very effective and
they have earned awards for superintendent of the year and
teacher of the year. He said it would be difficult to imagine
that home schooled students and their parents would not be
involved in any of the community fund raising efforts.
8:47:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER clarified the aspect of the bill that Mr.
Hoepfner supports.
MR. HOEPFNER related his understanding the language "and is
currently certified" needs to be deleted since there is not any
state certification process available. He suggested that Mr.
Mathews could speak to the specific language since he was not
certain.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER referred to Mr. Hoepfner's opposition to
section 2. He said it seemed that some of his concerns would
also apply to the local school students and not just the home
schooled students. He pointed out that home schooled students
would be involved in fundraising and secondly, the burden of the
eligibility proof exists for students enrolled in public
schools. He did not think it would be much different for home
schooled students.
[HB 369 was set aside.]
HB 369-STUDENT PARTICIPATION IN SPORTS
6:31:00 PM
CHAIR DICK announced that the committee would return its
attention to HOUSE BILL NO. 369, "An Act relating to student
participation in sports." Discussion on the bill was begun
during the 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. portion of the meeting.
6:31:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 369, Version 27-LS1324\X, Mischel,
4/4/12.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON objected for the purpose of discussion.
6:31:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER reviewed the changes in the proposed CS
Version X, beginning with a new title ["An Act relating to
student participation in interscholastic activities; and
providing for an effective date."], which reflects that the bill
now covers all interscholastic activities, as opposed to simply
sports. In section 1, as discussed earlier in committee, the
language deleted from page 1, line 8 read:
[AND IS CURRENTLY CERTIFIED,
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER directed attention to section 2 of
Version X, explaining that this section now refers to
interscholastic activities, not just sports, and he noted that
the student is still the party responsible to provide all of the
required eligibility documentation to the school. Additional
requirements remain the same, with the exception of medical
documents, which are only necessary for those activities that
require them, such as sports. On page 2, line 23 of Version X,
the word "external" was deleted from the previous version and
replaced with the word "recognized" which is a term more
commonly used in statute.
6:33:35 PM
LYNN SMITH, Staff to Representative Dan Saddler, Alaska State
Legislature, proceeded with the changes in the proposed CS
identified as Version X. She explained the change from
"external" to "recognized" was recommended by Legislative Legal
and Research Services, Legislative Affairs Agency. On page 2,
line 30 of Version X, the word "classes" replaced the word
"credits" on page 2, line 28 of the previous version, in
response to the concern that not all classes are considered a
credit. Ms. Smith then directed attention to page 3,
subparagraph (C) of the original bill that read:
if a student in grade 12, has passed all parts of the
secondary school competency examination required under
AS 14.03.075
MS. SMITH said this subparagraph has been removed in Version X
because the high school competency exam does not have to be
completed until April, so there is the potential that a high
school senior may not have passed all of the tests. Removal of
this provision will allow a student to participate in activities
as long as they are "on track to graduate." Another change
under definitions is found on page 3, line 3 of Version X, which
read:
(4) "interscholastic activities" means preparation
for and participation in events or competitions
involving another school when the preparation or
participation
(A) is sanctioned or supported by the statewide
interscholastic activities governing body;
(B) is conducted outside of the regular school
curriculum; and
(C) does not involve participation in student
government at a school.
MS. SMITH explained this change excludes participation in
student government and for activities for which a student is
required to take a class, such as a choir class that is
scheduled during the regular school day. In addition, Version X
makes section 1 effective immediately and changes the effective
date for section [2] to 7/1/13.
6:36:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER referred to a concern raised by
Representative Pruitt that he called "school eligibility
shopping." Version X retains language from the original bill
that prohibits this practice beginning on page 2, line 7 that
read:
that the student would be eligible, based on the
residence of the parent or legal guardian of the
student, to attend were the student not enrolled in an
alternative education program ...
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER advised this language ensures that a
student cannot "jump out of his own home zone" school in order
to participate. In addition, he addressed the financial
implications on schools, and paraphrased from the following
written statement [original punctuation provided]:
There is no significant disparity in the financial
support between the students covered by this bill, and
regular public high school students:
1) Students from home schools or alternative schools
would have to pay the same activity fees as students
in local high schools.
2) Schools and athletic facilities are often funded by
bonds, paid for by the state on a 90-10 match. The
state has already paid most of the cost; the remainder
is paid by local property taxes, which are also paid
by parents of HS students.
3) Parents of HS kids must pay property taxes that go
toward the 4 mil local contribution under state
education foundation formula. In areas where there is
no local required - like in [the] Bush - then no local
parents pay property taxes.
4) Again, many of the costs of athletic programs are
sunk costs - gyms, stadiums, uniforms, balls,
equipment. It is not necessary to reequip an entire
athletic department each year, based solely on
contributions' of this year's team members.
6:38:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA pointed out that many communities do not
have property taxes, and it is unfair if schools have fewer
resources because home school students are not included in the
student count.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER pointed out the issue addressed by this
bill is not fairness in the funding of schools. The issue is if
the area does not have property taxes, there would not be
disparity as neither the home school parent, nor the public
school parent, pay local property taxes.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSA stressed that a school is given funds based
on its number of students on the day of the school count. Thus
the cost of bringing in students who are not part of the count
will not be made up through property taxes.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said students are required to pay student
participation activity fees. Also, local schools have fund-
raising activities, and home school students would participate
as other team members would.
6:42:37 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON surmised the legislation applies to "home
school students that are in a district-provided school, or a
statewide accredited school, or that are all in public schools -
that are public vocational schools, the military youth academy,
and a public ... statewide correspondence school ... that
provides less than three hours per week of face-to-face
interaction with students." The legislation does not include
"typical" home school students across the state.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said correct, and added that the
definition in the bill does not include independent home
schools.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked whether vaccinations would be
required.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER expressed his belief vaccinations are
required, and medical fitness standards for sports are the same
for all students. In further response to Representative Seaton,
he clarified that medical records would be provided "when
required."
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON indicated he was referring to a student
going to a school for any activity.
6:44:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE opined shot records are required for
certain things.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked, "In this case students can go to
school without those, unless there's a particular vaccination or
physical exam or something that's required by that specific
activity?"
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said correct.
6:45:21 PM
MR. MATHEWS asked whether every reference to "interscholastic
sports" in the original bill is now "interscholastic activities"
in Version X.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said that is correct.
MR. MATHEWS asked for clarification on whether a private home
school that does have accreditation to a recognized body, such
as the American Home School Association, would come under this
legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said yes, the legislation applies when a
home school is accredited by a recognized accrediting body.
6:49:13 PM
CHAIR DICK, after determining no one else wished to testify,
closed public testimony.
6:49:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON removed his objection to the adoption of
the proposed CS for HB 369, Version X, as the working document.
There being no further objection, Version X was before the
committee.
6:49:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved Conceptual Amendment 1, labeled 27-
LS1324\D.2, Mischel, 4/4/12, and announced his intention to add
another conceptual change to it.
6:50:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON objected for the purpose of discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said the conceptual amendment as written
removed section 2 of the bill, and he added another conceptual
change that deleted section 4, which is the effective date for
section 2. Representative Seaton observed that the bill has
just been introduced and already has been drastically changed
after hearing testimony from three people, but without testimony
from school districts, or from home schools. Furthermore, the
students affected have changed from those in all grades to those
in grades nine through twelve, and from those in sports to those
in all interscholastic activities, although there has been no
testimony from participants in any activity; in fact, the public
has not been heard. He opined section 2 is not ready to
advance, and encouraged the committee to hear further testimony
and discussion on liability and insurance issues, and on state
funding. Representative Seaton said he was unsure of his
opinion on the idea, but has a problem not knowing the bill's
effect on his constituents and on school districts that are
presently in a funding crisis which could be exacerbated by
expanding enrollment in interscholastic activities.
6:54:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI stated his support for the amendment and
for section 1 of the bill, which is a "technical tweak" to a
bill adopted last year. However, section 2 is a policy call
before the committee that was just introduced today.
Interscholastic activities need to be expanded beyond sports,
but there are questions that are unanswered by the bill, such as
the inclusion of show choirs and Model United Nations.
Representative Kawasaki spoke of the need to talk with his
constituents and school district regarding the possibility that
home school students may displace public school students on a
team, without meeting the same academic requirements. He
acknowledged that home school students presently participate in
his district, but wanted to finish researching the issues.
6:57:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA stated her support for Amendment 1, and
noted that many families in her district in Anchorage are home
schooling their children. She recounted a personal experience
to emphasize the importance of social activities for home school
students, and said Amendment 1 will allow the bill to truly
address the issue properly.
7:00:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE said he would not support the amendment and
stated his belief that all students should have the opportunity
to participate in sports and other enriching activities at
school. He said the financial burden is the same for everyone
in a community, as property taxes and state funding for
education are the same. Representative Feige said he was
satisfied with the CS as written because alternative education
programs as defined must be accredited programs with structure,
curriculum, and a grading scheme. The bill also requires that
the student provide whatever documentation that the school
demands. He pointed out that most of the schools in his
district already allow home school students to participate in a
variety of activities and "... they don't seem to be complaining
about the cost or the fairness, or anything like that now."
7:02:54 PM
CHAIR DICK spoke of his experience as a home school teacher, and
said most home school students are ready for college because
they are disciplined about their schoolwork. Nationally, home
school students are getting a better education than those in
public school. In Alaska, the cost to the state for home school
programs is less than one-half of that of public schools, and he
stated his support of both sections of the bill.
7:03:55 PM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON maintained her objection.
7:04:01 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Cissna, Kawasaki,
and Seaton voted in favor of Conceptual Amendment 1.
Representatives P. Wilson, Feige, Pruitt, and Dick voted against
it. Therefore, Conceptual Amendment 1 failed by a vote of 3-4.
7:05:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT moved to report CSHB 369, Version 27-
LS1324\X, out of committee with individual recommendations and
the accompanying fiscal notes.
7:05:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA objected.
7:05:19 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Pruitt, P. Wilson,
Seaton, Feige, and Dick voted in favor of the proposed CS for HB
369, Version X. Representatives Cissna and Kawasaki voted
against it. Therefore, CSHB 369(EDC) was reported out of the
House Special Committee on Education by a vote of 5-2.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| CS HB 369 Version X 040412.pdf |
HEDC 4/4/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 369 |
| CS HB 369 Am.pdf |
HEDC 4/4/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 369 |