04/03/2002 08:08 AM House EDU
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
April 3, 2002
8:08 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Con Bunde, Chair
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Joe Green
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Gretchen Guess
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Gary Stevens
Representative Reggie Joule
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
THE PROGRESS OF EACH SCHOOL TOWARD HIGH ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE;
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION QUALIFYING EXAM
WAIVERS AND APPEALS
- HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 479
"An Act relating to a minimum expenditure for the instruction
component in a public school budget; and providing for an
effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 11(FIN)
"An Act relating to required school attendance; and providing
for an effective date."
- MOVED CSSB 11(FIN) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 449
"An Act relating to forgiveness of certain student loans; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 479
SHORT TITLE:MINIMUM EXPENDITURE FOR INSTRUCTION
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)GUESS
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/19/02 2316 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
02/19/02 2316 (H) EDU, HES
02/19/02 2316 (H) REFERRED TO EDUCATION
02/22/02 2370 (H) COSPONSOR(S): CRAWFORD
04/03/02 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 120
BILL: SB 11
SHORT TITLE:COMPULSORY SCHOOL ATTENDANCE/AK HISTORY
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) THERRIAULT
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/08/01 0014 (S) PREFILE RELEASED - 12/29/00
01/08/01 0014 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/08/01 0014 (S) HES, FIN
02/05/01 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
02/05/01 (S) Heard & Held
02/05/01 (S) MINUTE(HES)
04/20/01 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/20/01 (S) Heard & Held
04/20/01 (S) MINUTE(HES)
04/27/01 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/27/01 (S) Moved Out of Committee
04/27/01 (S) MINUTE(HES)
04/28/01 1323 (S) HES RPT 1DP 1DNP 2NR
04/28/01 1323 (S) NR: GREEN, WARD; DP: DAVIS;
DNP: LEMAN
04/28/01 1323 (S) FN1: INDETERMINATE(EED)
02/21/02 (S) FIN AT 9:30 AM SENATE FINANCE
532
02/21/02 (S) Heard & Held
02/21/02 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
02/28/02 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE
532
02/28/02 (S) Moved CS(FIN) Out of
Committee
02/28/02 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/01/02 2336 (S) FIN RPT CS 6DP 3NR NEW TITLE
03/01/02 2336 (S) DP: DONLEY, KELLY, GREEN,
AUSTERMAN,
03/01/02 2336 (S) WILKEN, LEMAN;
03/01/02 2336 (S) NR: HOFFMAN, OLSON, WARD
03/01/02 2336 (S) FN1: INDETERMINATE(EED)
03/05/02 (S) RLS AT 10:00 AM FAHRENKAMP
203
03/05/02 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
03/05/02 2387 (S) RULES TO CALENDAR 3/6/02
03/06/02 2387 (S) FN2: ZERO(EED)
03/06/02 2389 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
03/06/02 2389 (S) FIN CS ADOPTED UNAN CONSENT
03/06/02 2389 (S) ADVANCED TO THIRD READING
UNAN CONSENT
03/06/02 2389 (S) READ THE THIRD TIME CSSB
11(FIN)
03/06/02 2389 (S) PASSED Y14 N4 E2
03/06/02 2390 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE(S) SAME AS
PASSAGE
03/06/02 2390 (S) DAVIS NOTICE OF
RECONSIDERATION
03/13/02 2419 (S) RECON TAKEN UP - IN THIRD
READING
03/13/02 2419 (S) PASSED ON RECONSIDERATION Y18
N- E1 A1
03/13/02 2419 (S) EFFECTIVE DATE(S) SAME AS
PASSAGE
03/13/02 2420 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/13/02 2420 (S) VERSION: CSSB 11(FIN)
03/15/02 2537 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
03/15/02 2537 (H) EDU, HES
04/03/02 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 120
BILL: HB 449
SHORT TITLE:STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS:MEDICAL CARE
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)WILSON
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/19/02 2309 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
02/19/02 2309 (H) EDU, HES, FIN
02/19/02 2309 (H) REFERRED TO EDUCATION
04/01/02 2746 (H) COSPONSOR(S): LANCASTER
04/03/02 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 120
WITNESS REGISTER
EDDY JEANS, Manager
School Finance and Facilities Section
Education Support Services
Department of Education and Early Development
801 W 10th Street, Suite 200
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1894
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 479.
JOHN ALCANTRA, Government Relations Director
National Education Association - Alaska (NEA-AK)
1840 Bragaw, Number 100
Anchorage, Alaska 99508
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 479 and [CSSB
11(FIN)].
DEBBIE OSSIANDER, Legislative Chair
Anchorage School Board
P.O. Box 670772
Chugiak, AK 99567
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 479 and
support of SB 11.
MIKE FISHER, Chief Financial Officer
Fairbanks North Star Borough School District
520 5th Avenue
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 479.
SENATOR GENE THERRIAULT
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 121
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as the sponsor of SB 11.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 02-13, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR CON BUNDE called the House Special Committee on Education
meeting to order at 8:08 a.m. Representatives Bunde, Porter,
Green, Wilson, and Guess were present at the call to order.
THE PROGRESS OF EACH SCHOOL TOWARD HIGH ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE;
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION QUALIFYING EXAM
WAIVERS AND APPEALS
CHAIR BUNDE announced that the committee would begin by hearing
the answers to the Department of Education and Early
Development's (EED) questions that were provided in regard to
appeals and waivers, as well as the "Thick Report," the
unofficial name of the report regarding the progress in
improving education. He pointed out that the department had
asked whether it should proceed in developing waivers for the
high school qualifying exam (HSQE) based on the recommendations
of the report. He noted that he has a chart that indicates that
Representatives Porter, Green, Stevens, Joule, and Guess said
the recommendations "were on track."
CHAIR BUNDE turned to the second question with regard to whether
the committee wants [to propose] legislation that creates an
appeals board and process this year. To which the majority of
the committee suggested waiting until next year to do so. The
third question was in regard to whether the committee had any
recommendations on the "Thick Report" indicators of educational
improvement. The majority of the committee viewed [the report]
as appropriate and useful. There were no questions or comments
from the committee or the department.
HB 479-MINIMUM EXPENDITURE FOR INSTRUCTION
CHAIR BUNDE announced that the first item of legislation would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 479, "An Act relating to a minimum expenditure
for the instruction component in a public school budget; and
providing for an effective date."
Number 0274
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS, Alaska State Legislature, testified as the
sponsor of HB 479. Representative Guess explained that with SB
36 a minimum expenditure for the [instruction component in a
public school budget] was placed in statute. That minimum
expenditure was 70 percent. However, a dispersed school
district, which lacks economies of scale, has the same
requirement as a dense school district, which has economies of
scale. Therefore, a dense school district should be able to put
more money into the classroom. She explained that she used the
number of students per school as the density proxy. Therefore,
if there are more students per school, she believes [that school
district] should be able to put more toward classroom
expenditures. Representative Guess specified, "It just [goes]
from the 70 [percent] and [goes] up. I did not deal with the
lower part of the 70 percent scale." She acknowledged that
there is controversy with regard to whether 70 percent [as the
minimum expenditure for the instruction component] is
appropriate.
CHAIR BUNDE commented that he would appreciate Representative
Guess' view with regard to the appropriateness of the 70 percent
[for the minimum expenditure for the instruction component].
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS remarked that the legislature should tackle
energy. She said that until the energy costs for certain school
districts are addressed, she didn't know [how] to fairly assess
what school districts are able to use for classroom
expenditures. She pointed out that some school districts use a
third of their operating budget for energy costs, and therefore
it's hard to assess anything else.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked whether [the minimum expenditure]
should also take into account the rising cost of insurance.
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS said that part of the discussion is in
regard to what should be part of the minimum expenditure.
Number 0581
EDDY JEANS, Manager, School Finance and Facilities Section,
Education Support Services, Department of Education and Early
Development, noted that he had provided the committee with some
handouts. Mr. Jeans said that EED reported a zero fiscal note
for HB 479 because the department is already doing this process.
This legislation simply changes the percentage for some school
districts. He explained that the spreadsheet based on the
current budgeted expenditures for instruction illustrates that
39 school districts would have required a waiver under this
proposed provision this year. Under the current 70 percent
minimum expenditure requirement, there were a total of 29 school
districts that required a waiver in fiscal year 2002.
MR. JEANS related his belief that the concept to require
districts to direct more money to instructional expenditures is
a good concept. The question is whether 70 percent or the new
recommended percentage is the appropriate percentage. As the
spreadsheets illustrate, the percentages recommended in HB 479
would require the department to review and make recommendations
for an additional ten school districts. He noted that the
department has been heavily questioned on the 29 waivers that
were approved this year. However, Mr. Jeans said he believes
that all the school districts are making progress, which is
demonstrated through a schedule [the department] has circulated
throughout the legislature. Mr. Jeans remarked that he likes
the concept of density as a factor in determining what
percentage districts have to put toward instruction. He pointed
out that some school districts are serving 10-15 communities
with 100 to 200 children in each community. There are fixed
costs for each facility in each community. Therefore, it will
be difficult for those districts to ever meet the 70 percent.
Mr. Jeans pointed out that he took Representative Guess'
proposal and reviewed what would happen if each category was
reduced by 5 percent. By a 5 percent reduction, 13 school
districts would require a waiver.
Number 0810
CHAIR BUNDE asked if HB 479 is the equal waiver opportunity
bill.
MR. JEANS responded that he believes [HB 479] provides a more
realistic view of what districts are able to do. With the 70
percent minimum expenditure, there will always be a number of
school districts that won't meet the 70 percent. Those school
districts that don't meet the 70 percent have too many fixed
costs with too small of a student population to spread those
costs. He pointed out that there are a large number of school
districts in this situation, and they aren't just the large
disbursed districts. Some of the districts that don't meet the
70 percent are small single-site districts that have fixed costs
for the facilities, the administration, and the utilities. If
HB 479 was to move forward, Mr. Jeans recommended the committee
consider decreasing these percentages by 5 percent. Although a
number of school districts still wouldn't meet the 65 percent,
there would be quite a few districts that would be close to the
65 percent. He predicted that those districts close to the 65
percent would move to the 65 percent with the department's
encouragement.
CHAIR BUNDE related his belief that this is a new enough concept
that the bill shouldn't be moved forward today.
Number 0950
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER inquired as to how Mr. Jeans viewed this
approach as related to the cost differential study that is
occurring.
MR. JEANS stated his opinion that the two issues stand alone.
The cost differential study will make adjustments for school
districts for fixed costs such as increased heating costs. As
districts receive that adjustment through the foundation
program, those districts should be able to move closer to the
minimum expenditure requirement. However, he specified that he
wasn't saying that the 70 percent along with the adoption of the
district cost factor study would result in everyone meeting the
70 percent. He related his belief that it would assist
districts in moving toward that goal [of 70 percent], which he
believes to be positive.
Number 1005
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN surmised that the majority of the children
are going to be in school districts needing waivers under either
Mr. Jeans' or Representative Guess' concept.
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS pointed out that such [reasoning] would
assume that in the year lag, the school districts don't rise to
the minimum expenditure required. "We are assuming waivers
under the current budget not under the effective date as a year
away, not under a future budget," she pointed out. This
[legislation] pushes the larger school districts, which she felt
hadn't been pushed yet. She said she didn't assume that
Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau would request waivers. Under
Mr. Jeans' proposal those [districts] would have to move 2-3
percent. Representative Guess specified that she hadn't viewed
HB 479 as a waiver equity bill. With the 70 percent, the school
districts with economies of scale didn't have to look at their
books, although she felt those districts have the opportunity to
put more money into the classroom. Therefore, the committee
should consider requiring such.
CHAIR BUNDE said he didn't disagree.
Number 1147
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON requested that Mr. Jeans provide a chart
specifying the base pay in the schools so that [the committee]
can see that those schools paying the teachers less can easily
meet the percentage requirement.
CHAIR BUNDE pointed out that the more a district pays for
teachers the more money there is in the classroom, which would
make it easier for the 70 percent to be achieved.
MR. JEANS informed the committee that the department doesn't
readily have the school districts' salary scales available and
thus it would require quite a bit of data gathering. However,
based on the McDowell study from which the 70 percent was
developed, the study concluded that on average there is very
little if any variance in average teacher salaries. Although
the more remote rural districts are paying teachers a higher
salary at the entry level, those teachers simply don't stay in
the position very long. In large urban districts, the teachers
stay for a long time and move further up the pay scale. Mr.
Jeans said that he believes HB 479 is really addressing the
fixed costs because a small student population disbursed over a
large area results in higher fixed costs on a per student basis.
Therefore, the district wouldn't be able to meet the percentage.
With a more condensed large population, those fixed costs are
smaller on a per student basis and thus it's easier to meet the
[percentage].
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON explained that what she was addressing is
that those schools that pay less would have difficulty reaching
the 70 percent.
Number 1319
JOHN ALCANTRA, Government Relations Director, National Education
Association - Alaska (NEA-AK), announced that NEA supports HB
479. Any legislation that places more funding in the classroom
is viewed as positive.
Number 1385
DEBBIE OSSIANDER, Legislative Chair, Anchorage School Board,
testified via teleconference. Ms. Ossiander announced the
Anchorage School Board's opposition to HB 479. The board
believes that HB 479 isn't a realistic approach to school
funding. Ms. Ossiander informed the committee that Anchorage
spends approximately 78 percent of its [funding] on the
instructional [expenditure] in the classroom. In order to make
the 85 percent [required under HB 479], the Anchorage School
District would have to spend over $22 million additional dollars
on instruction. If the Anchorage School District eliminated
every administrative post and every curriculum support area and
left only the instructional expenditures and operation and
maintenance, the district would reach the 85 percent. Ms.
Ossiander pointed out the in-depth review that school boards and
districts give their annual budget each year. The [board] has
tried its best to place as many dollars in instruction as
possible. The [Anchorage School Board] believes that it's doing
a good job. Ms. Ossiander concluded by reiterating the board's
opposition to HB 479.
CHAIR BUNDE related that one of the comments he receives is that
there are too many people "in the head shed" [in the Anchorage
School District] and thus the expenses are too high. Therefore,
he suggested that perhaps [the district/board] could do be a
better job of communicating the administrative costs to the
general public.
MS. OSSIANDER mentioned that they have been working on that. In
comparative studies of other large districts in the country, she
believes [the district/board] does well [in communicating the
administrative costs].
Number 1550
MIKE FISHER, Chief Financial Officer, Fairbanks North Star
Borough School District, testified via teleconference in
opposition to HB 479. Mr. Fisher noted that the Fairbanks North
Star Borough School District, a relatively large district, does
enjoy an economy of scale. That, along with prudent fiscal
management, enables the district to meet and exceed the current
70 percent requirement, with which the district philosophically
agrees. Currently, about 76.8 percent of the Fairbanks North
Star Borough School District's budget is allocated to the
instructional component. Increasing the instructional component
requirement to 85 percent is unrealistic, he said. Mr. Fisher
informed the committee that the district spends about $86
million on the instructional component and $26 million on the
noninstructional component. He pointed out that just because
something is classified as a noninstructional component doesn't
mean that it's an administrative cost. Most of the
noninstructional costs aren't administrative costs. He
specified that of the district's $26 million noninstructional
component, about $15 million is operation and maintenance and
about $11 million is everything else. Therefore, to meet an 85
percent instructional component, the district would have to
shift over $9 million of the $26 million noninstructional budget
to the instructional budget. Such action would result in the
elimination of every central office department and all
noninstructional support other than operation and maintenance,
which is impossible. Such cuts would include cutting the entire
school board, the superintendent, the assistant superintendent,
all school secretaries, all property insurance coverage, all
student testing and assessment, all teacher recruitment and
hiring, all payroll and vendor payment processing, all
accounting and financial recordkeeping, all purchasing and
warehousing, and all student records and data processing
functions. Mr. Fisher explained that in order to obtain an idea
of a district's administrative overhead, then one must review
the indirect cost rate. Alaska's approved rate next year will
be 4.3 percent. Reduction in the noninstructional areas are in
conflict with the legislature's increasing impetus toward
assessment, evaluation, and accountability.
Number 1743
CHAIR BUNDE asked if, in fact, assessment and testing aren't
part of the instructional component.
MR. JEANS related his belief that assessment is part of the
instructional component, but he offered to double-check.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON remarked that it might be interesting to
review what those schools meeting 70 percent actually fund.
CHAIR BUNDE noted the cost differential study and the challenge
to have a common chart of accounts that would apply for each
district. Chair Bunde announced that public testimony on HB 479
would be closed. [HB 479 was heard and held.]
SB 11-COMPULSORY SCHOOL ATTENDANCE/AK HISTORY
CHAIR BUNDE announced that the next order of business would be
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 11(FIN), "An Act relating to required
school attendance; and providing for an effective date."
Number 1860
SENATOR GENE THERRIAULT, Alaska State Legislature, testified as
the sponsor of SB 11. He explained that the current law
specifies that education is mandatory at age seven. However,
most people in Alaska enroll their child in first grade at age
six. Therefore, in many schools there are one or two children
who are enrolled at age six and the parents utilize the school
as a babysitter. In such cases, the child [often] attends
school sporadically, which establishes a dynamic in which the
teacher spends an inordinate amount of time attempting to keep
these children up with the rest of the class. He suspected that
in such a situation, the child would likely be held back.
Therefore, CSSB 11(FIN) specifies that if one chooses to enroll
his/her child at age six, then that will be the compulsory age
for that child. "Once you've made that decision, then you're
going to have to make a good faith effort to get that child to
school on a regular basis, and if you don't, then the truancy
laws would apply," he explained.
CHAIR BUNDE recalled debate [regarding legislation] to reduce
the mandatory education age to six. Among some parents, there
was considerable angst because they felt that age six was [too
young]. He asked if there has been such testimony in relation
to SB 11.
SENATOR THERRIAULT recalled that initially SB 11 was
misunderstood because some read it to require all children to
attend public school. Also, many people felt that SB 11 merely
changed the age for mandatory attendance from seven to six.
Therefore, CSSB 11(FIN) was born. Senator Therriault noted that
most of Alaska's children, at the age of six, are in some sort
of school whether it be a home school, private school, or public
school. He estimated that 1-2 percent of parents choose not
enroll their children until age seven. Senator Therriault
stressed that adding subsection (c) doesn't impact the current
subsection (b), which includes a lengthy list of reasons why one
could keep their child from attending a public school.
Number 2049
CHAIR BUNDE pointed out that much research is pointing out [the
benefits] of early education. However, he understood Senator
Therriault to have found that [some Alaskans] are resistant to
taking advantage of early learning opportunities.
SENATOR THERRIAULT said that most children in Alaska are
enrolled in Kindergarten at age 5. Although the statutes don't
require education of young children, many districts offer
programs for children who need help getting up to speed [before]
entering the regular school system. This legislation merely
says that if one chooses to put their child in school at age
six, then the parent must make a good faith effort to get their
child to school on a regular basis.
CHAIR BUNDE related, from his wife's experience as a
Kindergarten teacher, that many people "push and fudge with that
date" so that their child can start Kindergarten [early].
Number 2120
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS requested that Senator Therriault discuss
what happens when a parent decides to withdraw their child.
SENATOR THERRIAULT pointed out that there are truancy laws.
Therefore, if a child was enrolled in public school at age six
and that child didn't attend school, then that child would be
[in violation] of the truancy laws. In further response to
Representative Guess, Senator Therriault explained that
currently a six-year-old enrolled in public school could come
[as often or as little] as the parent wanted. In such a
situation there was nothing that the district could do because
the child didn't have to be present until the following year.
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS posed a situation in which a six-year-old
begins first grade, but the parents then decide it's not best
for the child.
SENATOR THERRIAULT related his belief that a parent could
utilize one of the options listed under subsection (b) and
[withdraw their child].
CHAIR BUNDE viewed SB 11 as merely expanding the social
contract. He remarked that there is a difference between
withdrawing a child and a child having sporadic attendance.
SENATOR THERRIAULT pointed out that sporadic attendance not only
impacts the child who is sporadically attending class, but the
other students in the class as well.
Number 2270
JOHN ALCANTRA, Government Relations Director, National Education
Association - Alaska (NEA-AK), testified in support of [CSSB
11(FIN)]. Mr. Alcantra, as a parent of a Kindergartner, told
the committee that there is a strong correlation between a
child's attendance and the child's ability to keep up. Mr.
Alcantra viewed this legislation as positive.
Number 2332
DEBBIE OSSIANDER, Legislative Chair, Anchorage School Board,
testified in support of SB 11, in its original version. The
committee substitute (CS) considerably weakens the bill, he
said. [The Anchorage School Board] believes that the compulsory
education age should be age six. She pointed out that there are
high standards and expectations for reading, writing, and math
for children age five to seven. Young children are expected to
learn to read, distinguish between common genres of text, know
basic phonics, and write complete stories with paragraphs and
sentence structure.
TAPE 02-13, SIDE B
MS. OSSIANDER continued by pointing out that seven-year-olds are
required to be familiar with simple addition and subtraction and
recognize and understand the concept of fractions. She noted
her appreciation of Chair Bunde's comments with regard to the
solid data that highlights the importance of early educational
experiences for children. Ms. Ossiander related that [the
board] feels that children entering the system at age seven are
at a disadvantage. This last year, [the Anchorage School
District had] 50 seven-year-olds enter the system without any
prior school experience. Such children are difficult to place.
Ms. Ossiander said that the state should recognize that six-
year-olds should be in some kind of educational environment.
Therefore, Ms. Ossiander urged the committee to return to the
original bill, SB 11.
CHAIR BUNDE remarked, "I hate to lose the good in search of the
perfect." There being no one else wishing to testify, Chair
Bunde closed public testimony.
Number 2302
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS moved to report CSSB 11(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
zero fiscal note. There being no objection, CSSB 11(FIN) was
reported from the House Special Committee on Education.
HB 449-STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS:MEDICAL CARE
CHAIR BUNDE announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 449, "An Act relating to forgiveness of certain
student loans; and providing for an effective date."
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, testified as
the sponsor of HB 449. She pointed out that across the nation
there is a shortage of health providers. In HB 449, health
providers are defined as basically registered nurses.
The committee took a brief at-ease. [At this point the tape was
changed.]
TAPE 02-14, SIDE A
CHAIR BUNDE announced that HB 449 will be pulled per the
sponsor's request.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Education meeting was adjourned at 9:01
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|