Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 17
04/25/2005 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB249 | |
| SB137 | |
| SB139 | |
| SB140 | |
| SB139 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 137 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 139 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 140 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | HB 249 | ||
SB 139-OCCUPATIONAL BDS/AGENCIES CHAIR ANDERSON announced that the next order of business would be CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 139(L&C), "An Act relating to termination and oversight of boards, commissions, and agency programs; extending the termination date of the Board of Marital and Family Therapy; and providing for an effective date." TOM MAHER, Staff to Senator Gene Therriault, Legislative Budget & Audit Committee, Alaska State Legislature, explained that CSSB 139(L&C) stems from recommendations contained in two reports by the Division of Legislative Audit. Section 1 of the legislation extends the sunset date of the Board of Marital and Family Therapy from June 30, 2005, to June 30, 2010, as recommended by the audit included in the committee packet. The legislation also incorporates recommendations from the audit of the "Alaska Sunset Process and Selected Investigative Issues". Sections 2 and 4 of this legislation clarify that for those boards that are terminated, the transfer of authority for regulatory and disciplinary powers to the Department of Commerce, Community, & Economic Development (DCCED). Although DCCED has assumed the responsibility for administering the regulated occupation after a board has terminated, the statutes do not clearly provide the department the authority to do so. Mr. Maher expressed the hope that this change will address the uncertainty. MR. MAHER continued by pointing out that Sections 3 and 5 change the standard sunset period for occupational boards in AS 08.03.020(c) and nonoccupational boards in AS 44.66.010(c) from "not to exceed fours years" to "not to exceed eight years". Increasing the standard sunset period allows for better use of audit staff, committee time, and makes the sunset process less consuming for boards and regulatory agencies. Mr. Maher highlighted that since Alaska's sunset process has matured, most of the sunset reviews are less about eliminating boards and commissions and more about operational performance. In fact, 12 states have either repealed or suspended their sunset process. The most common standard is for an extension of 10 years, although Alaska and three other states have maintained a four- year extension standard. He noted that the legislature will still be able to set whatever time limit it deems appropriate, regardless of this statutory change. MR. MAHER specified that to focus on operational performance, this legislation requires specific analysis of efficiency effectiveness and the avoidance of duplication of functions during the sunset review. In Section 6 two criteria that must be considered during the course of the sunset review by the auditors is added to statute. "First, the extent to which the board, commission, or agency has effectively attained its objectives and the efficiency with which it has operated; and second, the extent to which the board, commission, or agency duplicates the activities of another governmental agency or the private sector," he said. Therefore, expanding the criteria assures that auditors will measure the efficiency and effectiveness of the entities under review. He informed the committee that the Senate Labor and Commerce Standing Committee approved an amendment offered by the administration, which inserted the language "all statutory authority of the board is transferred to the department" in Section 2. Furthermore, Section 4, which further defines the transition of board regulation when a board is terminated, was added. He then noted that there is one fiscal note from the Division of Occupational Licensing and explained: "passage of this legislation will incur no additional cost, the outlying years of the fiscal note merely show the cost of continuing this board at the current level, as already included in the budget." 4:20:42 PM CHAIR ANDERSON surmised then that the legislation maintains the current status in which fees cover the cost. He further surmised that the legislation extends the board to 2010 and the amendment in the Senate merely codifies that the department takes over if a board sunsets. MR. MAHER agreed with the chair's understanding. CHAIR ANDERSON noted that he liked [paragraphs] (10) and (11) on page 3 of the legislation. Those paragraphs seem to insert missions and measures to ensure that the board, commission, or agency attains its objectives and does so efficiently. Chair Anderson opined that such isn't the case for any other board or commission renewal. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG pointed out that the paragraphs would apply to all boards and commissions. 4:22:28 PM REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG turned attention to page 2, lines 13- 14, which transfer statutory authority of the board to the department. Representative Guttenberg related his understanding that after an entity sunsets, the language establishing the entity remains in statute. Therefore, he surmised that the only way to prevent the department from administering a commission that the legislature has (indisc.) is through the budget process. PAT DAVIDSON, Legislative Auditor, Division of Legislative Audit, Alaska State Legislature, explained that currently if a board is sunset, the regulations implementing the statute become void because the board is given powers. However, the statutes remain and thus statutes may conflict with the current licensing. For example, statutes may specify only a licensed professional can perform a certain occupation, but that occupation is no longer being licensed. Therefore, there is no effective mechanism to totally shut down an occupation. This language was intended to place the onus on the department to make the statutory changes that change it to a regulation under the division or alternatively eliminating the licensing function altogether. She highlighted that under current statute it does happen automatically. REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG posed a situation in which it's a commission without any powers, duties, and responsibilities. MS. DAVIDSON replied, "To the extent that there's any regulation in place that makes the agency happen, those regulations, when the board sunsets, are voided." Therefore, the department couldn't necessarily do anything. In further response to Representative Guttenberg, Ms. Davidson said that a commission without any written regulations would continue. 4:24:58 PM REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said that he didn't entirely understand Section 2 because it would seem that transferring the statutory authority of a [sunset] board would keep its regulatory and statutory scheme of enforcement alive. 4:25:57 PM CHAIR ANDERSON pointed out that this is an extension to 2010 and thus he surmised that if the extensions continue, Section 2 will never apply. MS. DAVIDSON clarified that Section 1 is a stand-alone provision that extends the Board of Marital and Family Therapy. The other sections change the licensing statutes overall. In response to Representative Rokeberg's earlier question, Ms. Davidson agreed that [Section 2] would allow the department to continue the regulation of an activity. However, there is not an effective way to shut it down because the statutes don't "go away." The desire, she opined, is to transfer the authority of eliminating the statutes [of entities that have sunset] and have a smoother transition. For instance, according to statutes one can't sell eyeglasses or contact lenses without being a physician, optometrist, or dispensing optician. The recommendation was to change the Board of Dispensing Opticians to a registration process while continuing to allow people to sell eyeglasses. However, that result doesn't occur with a sunset. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG acknowledged the administration's position in that it dislikes boards and commissions. Therefore, he said he wasn't sure that he agreed with the legislature transferring legislative authority over boards and commissions to the administration. REPRESENTATIVE GUTTENBERG asked if the result of the new language in Section 2 would be a case in which the authority is transferred to the department, which phases out the entity and the division brings forth cleanup language. 4:29:35 PM MS. DAVIDSON replied, "In general terms, yes." She explained that the goal is to avoid statutory conflict between a sunset board with no regulations while a licensing requirement remains. Therefore, the agency or the department would take steps to introduce legislation to either "shut down" licensing or change the statutes. She noted that it could also be done by the legislature. However, there is the need for statutory changes. "It's just that the sunset is too blunt an instrument to necessarily get to what that end goal is," she said. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG pointed out that although it may be a messy process, it has worked for 40 years. He highlighted that when an entity is sunset, there is a wind-down year in which to address the entity. REPRESENTATIVE CRAWFORD announced that he's not in favor of the legislation as it is now. Furthermore, he recalled that the Board of Marital and Family Therapy is one of the six boards that House [legislation] attempts to extend. 4:32:04 PM MS. DAVIDSON clarified that the Board of Marital and Family Therapy wasn't included in that legislation. She explained that the Legislative Budget & Audit Committee usually addresses any board extension that wasn't addressed near the end of session. 4:32:44 PM MS. DAVIDSON informed the committee that within the audit, the notion of combining behavioral health boards was reviewed. However, the professional counselors were strongly opposed to combining with marital and family therapists. Furthermore, there had already been legislation put forth to extend the Board of Professional Counselors as a single entity. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG pointed out that in the audit report, the recommendation was to change extensions from four to eight years. He inquired as to why eight years was chosen. MS. DAVIDSON said that many factors were considered when eight years was chosen, including the standard extensions in other states. While 10 years is the most frequent extension standard, past practice has shown that double extensions under Alaska's current four-year standard have passed. Ms. Davidson reminded the committee that the eight years is the number of years that an extension cannot exceed. However, any legislator can request a review of any governmental operation. CHAIR ANDERSON opined that four years is an appropriate amount of time because it's not too extensive. 4:35:19 PM REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX, recalling Representative Rokeberg's earlier comment, inquired as to why this process should be changed after it has worked well for 20 years. MS. DAVIDSON informed the committee that since approximately 1980, 18 entities have been terminated and 23 have been reestablished. The "Guide Board" was probably the most problematic and was a situation in which the department stepped in to regulate the occupation, although it had no legal authority to do so. Therefore, past practices were reviewed in an attempt to determine a way to smooth the process a bit. 4:37:22 PM CHAIR ANDERSON noted his desire to forward the legislation. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG pointed out that the legislature speaks through not acting some times, which he indicated was the case in relation to the "Guide Board". If this legislation is adopted, then the power to regulate the profession is given to the governor and it's taken out of the hands of the boards and commissions and the legislature. CHAIR ANDERSON announced then that he would hold SB 139. [SB 139 was taken up at the end of this meeting.] SB 139-OCCUPATIONAL BDS/AGENCIES CHAIR ANDERSON returned the committee's attention to CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 139(L&C), "An Act relating to termination and oversight of boards, commissions, and agency programs; extending the termination date of the Board of Marital and Family Therapy; and providing for an effective date." CHAIR ANDERSON moved that the committee adopt Amendment 1, as follows: Delete Sections 2 and 4. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG objected, and inquired as to the reason for deleting Section 4. 4:54:11 PM TOM MAHER, Staff to Representative Gene Therriault, Legislative Budget and Audit Committee, Alaska State Legislature, explained that Section 4 [proposes the same thing - to transfer statutory authority of the board to the department] as the new language in Section 2. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG removed his objection. There being no further objections, Amendment 1 was adopted. REPRESENTATIVE KOTT moved to report CSSB 139(L&C), as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, HCS CSSB 139(L&C) was reported from the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|