Legislature(1995 - 1996)
03/09/1996 10:03 AM House STA
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 348 - VIDEO/AUDIOTAPE INTERVIEW OF ABUSED MINOR The next order of business to come before the House State Affairs Committee was HB 348. CHAIR JAMES called on Barbara Cotting, Legislative Administrative Assistant to Representative Jeannette James, to explain the committee substitute. Number 0301 BARBARA COTTING, Legislative Administrative Assistant to Representative Jeannette James, explained the changes to the committee substitute, CSHB 348(STA) (9-LS1187/G). She referred the committee members to page 1, line 12, "(1) one person from the department;" and explained the word "department" referred to the Department of Health and Social Services. She referred the committee members to page 2, line 21 - 22, and explained the following language was added for clarification, "unless the nature of the investigation clearly indicates otherwise; and." Furthermore, she explained on page 2, lines 27 - 28, a redundancy was omitted. The bill was accompanied by a $0 fiscal note from the Department of Public Safety. The Division of Family and Youth Services (DFYS) also promised a $0 fiscal note. Number 0399 REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN asked if the millions of dollars were gone from the original fiscal note? He further asked Ms. Cotting if she had actually seen the $0 fiscal note from DFYS? MS. COTTING replied Diane Worley, Director, Division of Family and Youth Services, would probably bring the fiscal note with her. She would be here shortly. She was running late today. CHAIR JAMES called on the first witness via teleconference in Homer, Walter Gauthier. Number 0412 WALTER GAUTHIER, Member, Guardians of Family Rights, explained the Guardians had four branches in Alaska, and more were being organized. It was organized specifically because of the abuse of families by agencies. He stated the agencies were case load driven. Therefore, without a case load, they did not have a budget or a job justification. He said there was no check and balance in the system, and it was based on hearsay. The Guardians demanded videotaping of all interviews in their entirety to provide a check and balance to the system. He objected to the changes in the committee substitute. The Guardians preferred the Senate version to the House version. Number 0603 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN IVAN asked Mr. Gauthier why he did not trust the agencies and the formation of a work group? Number 0643 MR. GAUTHIER replied the agencies involved were case load driven. Therefore, they did not have a budget unless there was a case load. Number 0703 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN thanked Mr. Gauthier for his time. Number 0708 REPRESENTATIVE CAREN ROBINSON moved to adopt CSHB 348(STA) (9- LS1187/G), as a working document. Hearing no objection, it was so adopted. Number 0736 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON moved that CSHB 348(STA) move from the committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal notes. Number 0769 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN objected for discussion purposes. He said he understood the need for CSHB 348(STA) but was not comfortable with the committee substitute because of native children who did not speak the English language. He wanted some protection for the non- English speaking children and families and suggested using a translator, when necessary, for example. He announced he would not hold the bill today, however. Number 0834 CHAIR JAMES replied the testimony was pointed at DFYS. She explained the bill was a management agreement between four departments - the Department of Public Safety, The Department of Education, the Department of Law, and the Department of Health and Social Services. There was more protection because of the variety of agencies involved. The public would be able to participate in the memorandum of agreement process as well. She said she understood the concerns of Representative Ivan, but felt they were being met in the bill. Number 1030 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN removed his objection. Number 1041 REPRESENTATIVE GREEN wondered if the force of the four departments would inhibit the indigenous community from coming forward with their concerns. Number 1087 CHAIR JAMES replied the community would not be talking to the four departments, but rather the memorandum of agreement made by the four departments. REPRESENTATIVE GREEN wondered if that was really a true concern of the indigenous community before discussing the issue further. Number 1110 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN replied he was concerned about the strong force the four departments represented that a family would have to face, whether native or non-native. Number 1142 CHAIR JAMES replied the intent of CSHB 348(STA) (9-LS1187/G) was to agree upon a method to conduct an interview through a management agreement. Number 1175 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN asked if the right to an attorney was infringed? CHAIR JAMES replied the right to an attorney was not infringed. Number 1194 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON said CSHB 348(STA) (9-LS1187/G) did not change any laws. It created a standard policy for accountability. It had been done in the past. She explained the bill was a safety net. The bill also called for the best and most effective method to safeguard the child. Number 1314 CHAIR JAMES reiterated it was a written agreement between agencies. Number 1381 MS. COTTING announced Diane Worley, DFYS, was present. The $0 fiscal note had been forwarded already to the House State Affairs Committee. Furthermore, she explained the Indian Child Welfare Act superseded state policy for further safeguards. Number 1403 REPRESENTATIVE IVAN said he would shut-up now. CHAIR JAMES stated hearing no further objection, CSHB 348(STA) (9- LS1187/G) was so moved from the House State Affairs Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|