Legislature(2001 - 2002)
02/02/2001 03:20 PM House L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 50-EXTEND BD OF ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, ETC. Number 1058 CHAIR MURKOWSKI announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 50, "An Act extending the termination date of the State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers, and Land Surveyors to June 30, 2005; relating to the temporary member of that board; and providing for an effective date." CATHERINE REARDON, Director, Division of Occupational Licensing, Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED), said she appreciates the committee hearing the bill to extend the sunset date. She said the bill was introduced by request of the governor, because of the second issue addressed in the bill - the temporary landscape architect board member. MS. REARDON said last year, the governor introduced a bill addressing the topic, and there was a lack of unanimity of belief about what should happen with the position. She said she believed the governor wanted to bring conclusion to the topic by working out a compromise, bringing it forward with the division as the sponsor. MS. REARDON said the bill extends the sunset date to 2005, as recommended by the sunset audit. She said Section 2 of the bill extends the temporary, non-voting landscape architect board member seat, until 2005. She explained that the seat would disappear at the next sunset date - giving the legislature time to decide what to do with the seat. Number 1206 MS. REARDON stated landscape architects were added as a group to be licensed by the board a few years ago. She conjectured that there are just ten landscape architects; that is one of the reasons "they" believe the temporary non-voting member status should be continued, rather than making it a permanent seat. She added that the board regulates approximately 5,000 people, so 10 or 12 is a small number. MS. REARDON added that it is a good idea to have a non-voting landscape architect on the board because it is a new profession for the division and the board; having the person at the table contributes valuable information about how the profession works. She said the board continues to consider its first applications, evaluate people's work experience and training, and come up with reasonable regulations governing the profession. She continued by saying it is a good time to have that representation at the table, but not necessarily the time to make it a permanent voting seat. MS. REARDON said the other change to the status of the non- voting landscape-architect position appears on page 2, line 4, where there is a bracket around the word "not". She explained that the current statute says the non-voting member is not entitled to receive state money for per diem or travel to the board meetings. If this bill passes, people will be eligible to have their plane ticket and hotel paid for by the state when participating in board meetings. She relayed that the division thinks this is a good idea; it is awkward and confusing to have a board members sponsored by their professional association, or looking for money [to attend meetings]. MS. REARDON said the sunset audit included a few recommendations that were responded to jointly by the division and board; they appear in the submitted letter on the last page of the audit. MS. REARDON commented that at this time "they" are not recommending any statute changes in response to the recommendations. Number 1335 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked Ms. Reardon if she is speaking for the department or the board today. MS. REARDON responded that she is wearing two hats today; she is always speaking for the department and did work in concert with the board on the letter of response to the audit. She added that she discussed it with them, and "they" decided jointly on what the letter would say to represent their views. MS. REARDON clarified that on the last sentence of her presentation where she said, "We are not recommending any statute changes in response to the audit at this time," she was speaking for the department. She said the board thought it might be good to add permissive language to its statute that would allow the board, if it so chose, to require continuing education by regulation; that is stated under the Audit Report, Agency Response, Recommendation 1. MS. REARDON said she heard testimony in the Senate on the companion bill [to HB 50], and it appears that there is still disagreement within the industry about mandatory continuing education. She said because of the lack of consensus, it might not be good to have it attached to HB 50. She said perhaps the Alaska Professional Design Council could speak to the issue. Number 1435 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG reminded Chair Murkowski and Ms. Reardon that it is "their" responsibility to look after and protect the interest of the citizens of Alaska. He said he agrees with the audit, but is reluctant to recommend that board members have "their toes stepped on." MS. REARDON said continuing education requirements are not universal among all of the professions in the Division of Occupational Licensing; they are common with the health care professions but not universal. She added that most members of the engineering and architect industry acknowledge that continuing education is coming, but know that they are not at that point yet. She said the issues that would arise, from people who don't want mandatory continuing education, at this time would be: that it is a hardship for people outside of the major metropolitan areas of Alaska; and it is expensive for "them" to get continuing education. She added that there isn't research showing that continuing education requirements reduce incompetence in a profession. MS. REARDON went on to say that responsible professionals educate themselves every year in a variety of ways including attending conferences, reading materials, and so forth. She said when talking about requirements for license renewal, it needs to be kept in mind that for bureaucratic reasons, continuing education needs to be documented and verified. She said it is hard to recognize the genuine self-education that a competent professional might do; without the diploma, it is hard to know whom to grant [licenses to]. Number 1581 MS. REARDON said some professionals are trying to weigh whether the hassle will be beneficial to consumers. She said a person might take a course that isn't worth much and not pay much attention. Therefore, "we" would be penalizing the responsible people that are already doing self-education by making them spend money. She mentioned that this might be an argument that opponents might have about mandatory continuing education. MS. REARDON said "they" feel Recommendation 2 [from the Division of Legislative Audit ("Legislative Audit")] is addressed in the bill. She said it states that the legislature [could] consider revising the membership of the board by eliminating the mining- engineer's designated seat, and in some way deal with the temporary landscape-architect seat. She said this bill deals with the landscape-architect temporary seat but does not remove the mining-engineer seat - a topic taken up by the legislature in the past. MS. REARDON said there is an appreciation of the mining industry in Alaska. And just because the number of mining engineers in Alaska is small, it doesn't mean there shouldn't be someone at the table who knows about correct mining engineering. She added that removing the seat [from the board] gives the perception that Alaska doesn't care as much about mining as it ought to which is the reason the governor didn't propose removing the seat in this bill. MS. REARDON finalized her testimony by saying that "they" believe the final item the board addressed in regulation was an ambiguity in the architecture statutes. Number 1680 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT concurred with Representative Rokeberg's previous statement that "they" are charged with looking out for the public's interest; he referred to the recommendations in the report and a letter from Jeffery Wilson, President, Alaska Professional Design Council (APDC), and Sam Kito III, Chair. He said their letter leads him to believe that there is not consensus on the recommendations [Legislative Audit recommendations for changes to AS 08]. He said "they" do support the extension of the Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers, and Land Surveyors (BRAELS). REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said the governor's bill went beyond just the BRAELS extension. He asked if the issues were taken up at the board meeting, and if "they" supported the way it came together. Number 1728 MS. REARDON said the board was supportive of the language used in the bill now, "Extending the temporary non-voting member", and paying for the cost of the member. She said the board clearly gave her the message that she was to try and achieve this. CHAIR MURKOWSKI asked Ms. Reardon if the board had considered voluntary continuing education with an offset to licensure fees. She said the Alaska Bar Association (ABA) does this and it is an alternative to mandatory continuing education. MS. REARDON said she hadn't thought of it, but it looked as if the legal profession was sort of in the same situation as the design professionals, where there is not unanimity of belief about continuing education. She said this is apparent in rural areas. Number 1770 MS. REARDON explained that voluntary continuing education has been instituted and would be considered a mitigating circumstance if a person is faced with disciplinary action; doing continuing education would be a "star" in a person's favor during sanctions. She added that there is also a 10 percent reduction in the renewal fee. She said she didn't talk to the board about it [instituting a voluntary system like the ABA's], because when she talked to them, she wasn't aware of the idea. She went on to say that the department sets the fees, so it would take departmental action to decide what the amount would be for someone doing continuing education. MS. REARDON clarified that she wouldn't be opposed to a fee system [like ABA's] and would be looking to the professionals to self-certify that they did the education; without a requirement for licensure, there is no reason to audit. She said the board may want to think about it, and she does not know if it would require a change in statute. Number 1865 CHAIR MURKOWSKI said the ABA is not checking to ensure completion of continuing education; there is no additional cost, and it is a way to encourage continuing education. She encouraged Ms. Reardon to bring it up [with the board]. Number 1888 JAMES BIBB, President, American Institute of Architects (AIA), Alaska Chapter, said he supports the extension of the sunset for the BRAELS. He said the AIA is ready to support continuing education and has, for several years, developed continuation education. He said "they" see the benefits to the profession and are ready to support the state on this issue. And he said: This is strictly within the architects association, with the AIA, and does not really represent the design professionals of Alaska - so that is something to be noted. MR. BIBB said "they" would support mandatory continuing education and have seen it in many states across the nation; Oregon and Florida just passed this [legislation]. He said it is something "they" anticipated, and there is a format in place to gain 18 hours of learning units a year; some [education] areas cover health and welfare in the profession, which are fairly well organized. Number 1970 MR. BIBB said the AIA also supports extending the temporary [non-voting landscape-architect] board member seat. He said there is an issue regarding Recommendation 3 - clarifying the statutes and keeping them clean. He said across the nation, AIA recommends against restricting licensure to a single process. He said AIA is looking at the National Council of Architectural Registration Board (NCARB). He explained that NCARB is in place, so if a person becomes certified through a national board, the Alaska board of licensing accepts it as a requirement. MR. BIBB explained that NCARB standardizes education and training across the country. He said the AIA is concerned about members licensed in other states; "they" want to make sure, upon entry into Alaska, that "they" are accepted in some format. He said AIA doesn't want to restrict prospective licensees, and would like to see an alternative route developed. He added that the AIA wants to ensure that the revision of the statute is completed. He said in some way, AIA is asking for the amendment to be set aside and reworded. MR. BIBB said AIA represents about 75 percent of the licensed architects in Alaska; they don't have consensus, and would like it before moving forward with NCARB exclusively. He said he has a memo for the committee that would provide some clarity. Number 2040 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said he was going in this direction when he commenting on Recommendation 3. He said he would like to read it [the memo] and ensure that it accurately reflects the position of the board. He said the statute is semantically unclear to the board, the way it is currently worded. He said he doesn't believe consensus can be reached with every design professional. However, if there is a problem that the committee can fix to make it semantically clear, they should do it. He said he would like to hear from others as to whether the committee is taking the right approach in moving the bill out without corrective action. REPRESENTATIVE HAYES asked Mr. Bibb about the BRAELS becoming an autonomous board. MR. BIBB said he did not know anything about it but said Ms. Reardon might have information. Number 2113 MS. REARDON said over the last five or six years, the architecture industry has expressed an interest in some type of autonomy from the division. She wasn't aware of the industry's current thinking, and thought there were varying opinions amongst the 5,000 Alaskans [members]. MS. REARDON explained that there had been legislation and debate on the topic a few years ago. She said within the department, it came down to the definition of autonomy. She said autonomy could mean many things, such as when a profession or program wants to be outside the Division of Occupational Licensing and form its own government agency, as a separate entity, not a part of the whole package. She said it would be like the Regulatory Commission of Alaska or something along those lines. She said autonomy could also mean [being] outside government altogether, or somewhere in between. MS. REARDON said deciding on the definition of autonomy can be difficult. She said while the department and possibly the administration, as a whole, might have strong views about having self-regulation outside government, a different response might be received from a proposal to leave occupational licensing. MS. REARDON said in talking about leaving occupational licensing, one gets into financial, economies-of-scale-type issues. And in talking about leaving state government completely, there are issues for groups not connected with elected officials, including: fining people, disciplining people, and saying who can and can't practice the profession. She said personally, she feels it is important to have elected representatives or government involved because otherwise there is a guild. MS. REARDON said she hopes if occupational licensing meets the needs of the industry well enough, within the division, the interest in leaving will lessen. Number 2253 REPRESENTATIVE KOTT asked about the language in the statute contained in the [legislative] audit [page 9] in the bold section, "in the opinion of the board," with respect to reciprocity and registration of someone from another state. He said "the opinion of the board" was somewhat troubling. He asked Ms. Reardon if the board had ever offered reciprocity. MS. REARDON answered by saying the board frequently grants licenses to architects licensed in other states. She said she thought the board always required the NCARB certification to come in by reciprocity. She said there are many architects from other places getting licenses in Alaska. MS. REARDON explained that the board is not saying that no one can come in from outside, that one must come in fresh to Alaska. She said the language in the statute implies that there are two tracks [to reciprocity]: holding a license from another state, or holding an NCARB certification. She said the board interprets both tracks the same. Number 2313 DWAYNE ADAMS, American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), said they accept the legislation as written and had worked closely with Ms. Reardon, who did a good job capturing the issues - those pertaining to landscape architects, the temporary board member, and continuing education. MR. ADAMS said the ASLA has a national council, the Landscape Architects Registration Board (LARB), which is much like NCARB for architects. He said "they" deal with continuing education every year, and 10 percent of the states that are licensed require continuing education. He said it is somewhat problematic because LARB doesn't provide the [continuing education] tracking that NCARB does. MR. ADAMS explained that in states that require continuing education for licensure, there are costs and administrative time involved in deciding on appropriate courses and maintenance. He said LARB is in favor of continuing education. He said it is seldom that a member would not comply. He said the questions that remain include how to track it, and how to handle the administration. Number 2436 SAM KITO, Chair, Alaska Professional Design Council (APDC), said APDC supports the extension of the sunset and the landscape- architect temporary board member position, consistent with HB 50. He referred to the audit recommendations and said the engineering community agrees on continuing education, but not on how it should be implemented. He said this is why APDC has asked that it not be considered at this time [in HB 50]. He said additional discussion with all of the design professionals is necessary to implement the continuing education program. TAPE 01-11, SIDE B Number 2452 MR. KITO said with respect to the "architectural comity" issue, they defer to the AIA, since it is primarily an architects' issue. He said as an organization that also represents the architects, APDC concurs with AIA on the issue. MR. KITO clarified that from APDC's perspective, with respect to AELS board autonomy, the Division of Occupational Licensing was put on program receipts for the board last year; APDC would like to see what the impacts would be. He said: AELS autonomy would have benefited our professions on the board. [There were two issues] ... Those two issues were the issues of travel, ... whether or not there would be flexibility to travel out of state for professional functions, and ... the issue of licensed disciplinary action enforcement. MR. KITO went on to say that with more control over the fee structure and spending within the AELS board structure, APDC wants to see how the changes address some of the problems that they have seen, and the board's ability to operate. REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO asked if APDC's members were surveyed to see if they would accept a fee increase. MR. KITO said the membership did not have a problem with paying additional money to provide the services for the board members. He said the issues [raised] were about budget restrictions and whether funding could be used if the fees were increased. Number 2372 MS. REARDON said last year the legislature decided to move occupational licensing receipts into a new receipt-supported services category. She said at the same time they granted expenditure authority for travel so the BRAELS' could participate in national meetings. She said as a result, participation in out-of-state professional conferences for the board has increased significantly this year. MS. REARDON said investigations and enforcement actions are areas that still need to be addressed; the travel issue has been addressed by the legislature. CHAIR MURKOWSKI asked Mr. Kito about voluntary educational commitments and whether he thought ADPC members voluntarily take ongoing educational seminars to stay current [in the industry]. MR. KITO said there are seminar programs circulating throughout the country for engineering professionals that have continuing education credits recognized in other states. He said the credits are available to the ADPC membership in Alaska. He added that there are seminars taken by engineering professionals in Alaska that qualify [them] for continuing education credit in other jurisdictions. MR. KITO explained that it is not a matter of whether continuing education should happen, but "how" it should happen in order to be fair to all professionals. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said the board could be set up to issue a license to someone who is not NCARB certified. He said he doesn't want to hold the bill up, if it is the wish of the committee to move it out. He noted that it has a House Finance Committee referral, and will eventually end up in the House Rules Committee, where he could develop language with the help of the professions. CHAIR MURKWOSKI asked Ms. Reardon about the Senate companion bill and whether the Senate has done anything that would address Representative Kott's concern. Number 2229 MS. REARDON said the identical bill [to HB 50] passed out of the Senate Finance Committee this morning and the issue of comity wasn't addressed. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said he was not ready to make an amendment to the bill; he wants to talk to the professionals and find out if the issue of comity needs to be addressed. Number 2181 REPRESENTATIVE HALCRO moved to report HB 50 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, HB 50 was moved out of the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT said it might be good to send HB 50 to the House Judiciary Committee to address whether it is a legal issue and whether there is liability from the board's perspective. He said if the board is challenged [by a prospective licensee], the question would be raised as to whether they would have to issue the license without NCARB certification. [HB 50 was reported out of committee.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|