Legislature(2013 - 2014)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/11/2014 08:00 AM Senate EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB210 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| = | HB 210 | ||
HB 210-SCHOOLS: RESTRAINT, SECLUSION, CRISIS TRG
8:01:00 AM
CHAIR STEVENS announced the consideration of HB 210. He said
that version B.A was before the committee.
8:01:26 AM
VASILIOS GIALOPSOS, Staff, Representative Charisse Millet,
Alaska State Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, presented information
on HB 210. He related that Alaska currently has no statewide
policy regarding the conditions under which a student could be
restrained or secluded in school and HB 210 would address that.
The bill has four key components. The first is that a school
district's safety and discipline program, which would include
policies for restraint and seclusion, would need to be made
available to parents, legal guardians, students, and the public.
The second component is, if a child were to be restrained or
secluded, the school must notify the parent or legal guardian on
the same day of the incident. The third component defines the
terms of restraint and seclusion. It requires school staff to be
trained and to conduct a review process as soon as practicable.
The last component would have Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED) approve the crisis intervention programs for
school districts. School districts would also need to submit a
report on a yearly basis.
8:05:04 AM
CHAIR STEVENS said it is the first hearing on the bill. He asked
if the death of a child has occurred due to restraint.
MR. GIALOPSOS said not in Alaska. In Ohio, a child died from
asphyxiation due to improper restraint.
CHAIR STEVENS asked who would do the restraining.
MR. GIALOPSOS said it would usually be the special education
provider or the administrator.
8:06:27 AM
SENATOR DUNLEAVY commented on training for the designated
restrainer.
MR. GIALOPSOS addressed the training for the restrainer. He said
often a school staff will train other teachers.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY said the focus is on special education issues.
MR. GIALOPSOS said correct.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY asked about reporting on the same day.
MR. GIALOPSOS replied there will be notification on the same
day.
8:08:10 AM
CHAIR STEVENS thought one of the reasons for this legislation
was to protect personnel from lawsuits.
MR. GIALOPSOS agreed it would reduce liability and lessen
injuries.
SENATOR GARDNER related that she was looking at the bill from a
student-safety perspective. She referred to Section 5, where the
bill exempts religious schools from complying with reports to
parents, crisis training, and the review provisions. She
questioned, if the goal is to protect students, why religious
schools are exempt.
MR. GIALOPSOS said the original version of the bill included
religious and private schools. He noted, upon consultation with
legal services and through the committee process, it was
concluded that there are no statutory enforcement mechanisms for
religious schools to comply. A legal opinion determined that
corporal punishment is allowed, but not to the point of assault
or injury. The bill provides parents a choice.
SENATOR GARDNER maintained that the report to parents is
important in public and in private schools.
MR. GIALOPSOS responded that existing statutes preclude that for
private schools.
8:11:54 AM
SENATOR DUNLEAVY stated that anyone with an IEP or a 504 plan
would be trained in this procedure.
MR. GIALOPSOS said that is the intent.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY explained 504 requirements.
CHAIR STEVENS asked if students in private schools have IEP's.
MR. GIALOPSOS deferred to the department to answer.
CHAIR STEVENS opined that the policy could be used by public and
private schools.
8:13:38 AM
CLAYTON HOLLAND, Director, Pupil Services, Kenai Peninsula
School District, Kenai, Alaska, testified in support of HB 210.
He said that the Kenai School District has been implementing
most of what is in this bill for several years. He described the
notification process they use and the Mandt System training, a
crisis prevention program. He said they update the plan often.
The district has a policy to have at least one person trained in
small schools and a minimum of two in the larger schools.
CHAIR STEVENS asked if the bill would require any changes in the
Kenai District.
MR. HOLLAND said the district is currently in compliance.
SENATOR GARDNER understood the bill targets students who are in
danger to themselves and to others, not a student under the desk
crying.
MR. HOLLAND agreed. He said they don't restrain a student unless
they are a danger to themselves or others.
8:17:53 AM
CHRISTIE REINHART, Staff, Governor's Council on Disabilities and
Special Education, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in support of HB
210. She shared her experience as a parent of an autistic child.
She said the staff at the school her son attended had a plan for
restraint which worked. She described what happens when there is
not such a plan in place. She concluded that clear regulations
about restraints and seclusion are needed in public schools to
ensure that students are safe.
CHAIR STEVENS asked if HB 210 solves the problem and if it is
already in place.
MS. REINHART related that it is in place already in some school
districts. Having consistency across the state is very
important. She praised the thoroughness of input from various
groups resulting in a gold standard bill.
CHAIR STEVENS announced the arrival of Senator Huggins.
8:22:39 AM
LUCY HOPE, Director, Student Support Services, Mat-Su Borough
School District, Wasilla, Alaska, testified in support of HB
210. She described the restraint and seclusion plan in the Mat-
Su School District that has been in place since 2008 and which
bears similarities to the bill. She described the definitions of
the plan and the training involved, which uses the Mandt System.
She pointed out that changing challenging behavior depends on
developing strong and healthy relationships, training, and
avoiding restraint. The 2-day course is spent on how to avoid
using restraint. Appropriate personnel in each school are
trained. The methodology of the process is included in the
student's IEP. She described the program as pro-active. She said
this bill would not change what is happening in Mat-Su except
for reporting to the state.
CHAIR STEVENS asked about the Mandt System.
MS. HOPE described the program modules that focus on specific
topics, such as using restraint, building healthy relationships,
and how to have conversations with students. The restraint
module requires a demonstration of proficiency of restraint
techniques. She compared it to CPR - it has to be automatic. She
noted that communication between adults in the classroom is
important.
8:28:04 AM
SENATOR GARDNER asked if they require a nurse to check on the
student following the incident. She asked if the Mat-Su District
has a school nurse in each building.
MS. HOPE said one person is designated to each building, but not
necessarily a nurse.
MARK REGAN, Legal Director, Disability Law Center for Alaska,
Anchorage, Alaska, testified in support of HB 210. He related
that the bill would put into place best practices about
seclusion and restraint and ensure reporting to the state. He
pointed out that often parents do not know that restraint or
seclusion is taking place in school.
8:31:59 AM
SENATOR GARDNER asked if he is concerned that private schools
are exempted, especially regarding not reporting to parents.
MR. REGAN said they were in support of the original version of
the bill that did not exclude private schools. He noted it is
best to start with what people can deal with so they do support
the amended version of the bill.
SENATOR GARDNER asked if they support the bill version with
private school exemptions.
MR. REGAN said yes.
SENATOR GARDNER asked if he would support it if it required
parental notification at private schools.
MR. REGAN said yes, but that version would contain an oversight
issue.
8:33:52 AM
JEANNE GERHARDT-CYRUS, representing herself, Kiana, Alaska,
testified in support of HB 210. She explained that she was
speaking as a parent of a child who was repeatedly restrained by
individuals who were not trained. She described the procedure
used and the lack of follow-up for her daughter by a medical
person. She noted that the staff was untrained. Her daughter was
diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome. She described her
daughter's current state - an honor student and avid reader due
to new tactics of self-accommodation. She stressed that everyone
is safer under de-escalation techniques.
CHAIR STEVENS thanked Ms. Gerhardt-Cyrus for her testimony. He
noted larger districts seem to be complying and wondered if it a
problem for smaller districts.
MS. GERHARDT-CYRUS said her small district currently has a
program and training in place.
CHAIR STEVENS asked how many staff and teachers are in Kiana.
MS. GERHARDT-CYRUS said there are 10 certified teachers and
about 90 to 120 students.
8:42:19 AM
MS. GERHARDT-CYRUS shared a letter by her daughter, Ivory, who
requested that the legislature support this legislation.
8:44:16 AM
ASHLEY DUNKS, representing herself, Palmer, Alaska, testified in
support of HB 210. She shared her experience having an autistic
son and how he struggled in school with anxiety and fear. She
described how the school dealt with her son's behavior by
isolating him. As a result, she had him medicated, but the
behavior continued and she was not informed. She said the BLC is
currently researching the incident at North Star School. Since
he has moved to a new school, she said her son is doing well.
CHAIR STEVENS thanked Ms. Dunks for her testimony.
8:51:54 AM
KENDRA STEA, Director, Client Services, Crisis Prevention
Institute (CPI), Milwaukee, Wisconsin, testified in support of
HB 210. She said her company is a national training provider
that produces programs, response techniques, and safety
strategies. She stressed the importance of HB 210. She offered
to answer questions.
CHAIR STEVENS noted there are various systems to assist with
training.
MS. STEA said yes.
8:55:21 AM
MIKE COONS, representing himself, Palmer, Alaska, testified on
HB 210. He shared his experience as a paramedic and the
importance of the Mandt training. He suggested that paramedics
provide the training rather than teachers and that there be a
stress debriefing after incidents.
9:01:24 AM
SENATOR GARDNER asked if private schools are subject to AS
14.33.120.
PAUL PRUSSING, Deputy Director, Teaching and Learning Support,
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED), Juneau,
Alaska, answered questions related to HB 210. He said the
department has no involvement with private schools.
SENATOR GARDNER asked why the exception for private schools
needs to be in the bill.
MR. PRUSSING responded that the sponsor could address the
question, but he understood that there was a legal determination
regarding that.
SENATOR GARDNER said the state can't require private schools to
inform parents of the use of seclusion or restraint of children.
MR. PRUSSING said yes.
CHAIR STEVENS asked if the department is supportive of the bill.
MR. PRUSSING said yes.
CHAIR STEVENS inquired if the department sees any difficulties
in implementing the provisions in the bill throughout the state,
in large and small districts.
MR. PRUSSING noted a minimal fiscal note and very little effort
on the department's part.
9:03:50 AM
At ease
9:04:42 AM
CHAIR STEVENS requested that the sponsor address Senator
Gardner's question.
SENATOR GARDNER asked whether Section 5 is needed.
MR. GIALOPSOS said he understood that Section 5 is not
superfluous because it was in the original bill and because
Legislative Legal suggested exempting private and religious
schools. Otherwise, the Department of Health and Social Services
(DHSS) would have to address lacking the enforcement mechanism
and it would be a false pretense that the department would be
able to enforce it. The sponsor considers it a matter for a
separate bill.
CHAIR STEVENS suggested Jean Mischel from Legal Services might
be available for comments.
SENATOR GARDNER said child abuse is not acceptable and the
provision should apply to private schools even though the
department cannot hold them accountable. She noted she would not
object to passing the bill out of committee.
MR. GIALOPSOS said the sponsor is inclined to submit a separate
piece of legislation next session.
9:08:34 AM
At ease
9:09:23 AM
MARY NANUWAK, representing herself, Chevak, Alaska, testified in
support of HB 210. She maintained that the bill should apply to
both private and public schools.
9:11:10 AM
CHAIR STEVENS explained that Section 5 exempts private and
religious schools from provisions in HB 210.
JEAN MISCHEL, Attorney, Legislative Legal Services, Legislative
Affairs Agency, Juneau, Alaska, answered questions related to HB
210.
SENATOR GARDNER clarified her question. She said Section 5
exempts the schools under three provisions. She understood that
the reporting requirements to the state are not required of
private and religious schools. The provision that exempts them
from AS 14.33.120(b), which is simply notifying parents when
restraint or seclusion has been used. Even if there is "no teeth
for failure to comply," she opined that it is important to be
clear to all schools that all parents of all students need to be
notified when their children are impacted. She called it good
public policy. She asked if that could be done in this bill or
if it would have to be separate legislation.
MS. MISCHEL related that current regulation of private schools
divides them into non-exempt and exempt private schools. Non-
exempt schools must meet all public education laws. Exempt
schools would not be beholden to this bill nor other provisions
in state law pertaining to schools. The requirement that schools
notify parents is applicable to governing bodies of the school
district. Even without Section 5 exemptions for private schools,
she opined that Section 1 would not apply because it requires
the governing body of a school district to do something. The
legislature does have some authority over private and religious
schools regarding public health and welfare of state residents.
She said AS 14.45.030 and AS 14.45.100 are the primary
provisions that the legislature has adopted with respect to
private schools. She suggested, under public health and welfare
authority, the provisions might be applied, but not in Section
1.
9:15:13 AM
SENATOR GARDNER suggested removing AS 14.33.120(b) from Section
5, leaving in the provision of parent notification. She asked if
there would be problems doing so.
MS. MISCHEL said you could take the cross reference out of
Section 5 and make it applicable to exempt private schools. It
may leave an ambiguity. She suggested stating the intention to
include public or private schools in Section 2. Current law
requires exempt private schools to comply with laws and
regulations relating to physical health, fire safety,
sanitation, immunization, and physical exams. She said she could
easily argue that the provision affects physical health.
However, each private school would go through a determination
whether those laws apply to them. She said she would be
surprised if private schools didn't report to parents.
SENATOR GARDNER offered Conceptual Amendment 1, in Section 5, to
remove AS 14.33.120(b), and in Section 1, add the words "public
or private" after "A" on line 23. It would then read, (b) "A
public or private school shall, on the same day . . . ."
CHAIR STEVENS asked Senator Gardner to state the intention of
the amendment.
SENATOR GARDNER explained that the intention is that all
schools, public or private, shall notify parents on the same day
that restraints or seclusion are used on the student.
SENATOR HUGGINS objected. He questioned where the cut-off point
is.
SENATOR GARDNER said it is about protecting students when
restraints are used by authorities and informing parents.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if Senator Gardner would include vacation
bible schools.
SENATOR GARDNER responded that they are not really schools.
CHAIR STEVENS voiced concern about the change and suggested that
there were other ways to achieve the intent.
A roll call vote was taken. Senator Gardner voted in favor of
Conceptual Amendment 1 and Senators Stedman, Huggins, Dunleavy,
and Chair Stevens voted against it. Therefore, Conceptual
Amendment 1 failed to pass.
9:20:59 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS moved to report CSHB 210(FIN)am from committee
with individual recommendations and attached fiscal note. There
being no objection, the motion carried.
9:21:12 AM
At ease
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|