Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/10/1997 01:44 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
March 10, 1997
1:44 P.M.
TAPE HFC 97-52, Side 1, #000 - end.
TAPE HFC 97-52, Side 2, #000 - end.
TAPE HFC 97-53, Side 1, #000 - end.
TAPE HFC 97-53, Side 2, #000 - #289.
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Therriault called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 1:44 p.m.
PRESENT
Co-Chair Hanley Representative Kelly
Co-Chair Therriault Representative Kohring
Representative Davies Representative Martin
Representative Davis Representative Moses
Representative Foster Representative Mulder
Representative Grussendorf
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Al Vezey; Representative Con Bunde; Nancy
Buehl, Department of Education; John Cyr, National Education
Association -Alaska; Gail Fenumiai, Division of Elections;
Office of the Lieutenant Governor; Jim Baldwin, Assistant
Attorney General, Department of Law; Jim Sykes, Green Party,
Anchorage; Kevin Morford, Green Party, Anchorage; Jack
Coghill, Chair, Alaska Independent Party (AIP); Scott
Kohlhaas, Alaska Libertarian Party;
SUMMARY
HB 112 "An Act amending the definition of `political party'
except as the definition of the term applies to
the regulation of contributions and expenditures
in state and municipal election campaigns, an
amendment that also has the effect of changing the
definition of `political organization' as applied
to the regulation of games of chance and contests
of skill."
HB 112 was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with a fiscal impact note
by the Office of the Lieutenant Governor, dated
2/26/97; and with a zero fiscal note by the
Department of Revenue, dated 2/26/97.
1
HB 145 "An Act relating to certification of teachers."
HB 145 was HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 112
"An Act amending the definition of `political party'
except as the definition of the term applies to the
regulation of contributions and expenditures in state
and municipal election campaigns, an amendment that
also has the effect of changing the definition of
`political organization' as applied to the regulation
of games of chance and contests of skill."
REPRESENTATIVE AL VEZEY, SPONSOR, testified in support of HB
112. He maintained that HB 112 would bring order to the
chaos in the electoral process. He observed that political
parties must run a candidate for Governor and receive 3
percent of the vote cast in that general election, in order
to retain their legal status. He observed that third
parties are growing. He noted the last time a Governor was
last elected with a majority vote was in 1970. He explained
that the legislation would provide a mechanism for a
political party to retain its status without running a
candidate for Governor every four years. He observed that
political parties have special status under the Alaska
Public Offices Commission (APOC). Political parties are
able to participate in charitable gaming activities.
Political parties must file APOC reports.
Representative Vezey observed that 10,000 represent
approximately 3 percent of the registered voters. The
legislation allows a party that has 10,000 registered voters
to retain party status under Alaska statutes without running
a candidate for governor.
Representative Davies observed that the Republican and
Democratic parties would not be affected. He stated that
the Alaska Independent Party (AIP) has more than the
required 10,000 registered voters.
Co-Chair Therriault noted statistics for the following
parties:
*Democrats - 71,000;
*Republicans - 104,000;
*Alaska Independent Party - 16,000; and
2
*Green Party - 3,000.
Representative Davies summarized that the AIP party would
not have to run a candidate, while the Green Party would
have to run a candidate for governor in the next general
election. Representative Vezey estimated that there would
be a concentrated registration drive if the legislation were
passed.
Representative Grussendorf asked if the Sponsor considered
requiring the gubernatorial candidate to receive more than
45 percent of the vote. Representative Vezey clarified that
his intent is to lessen the need for a runoff election and
allow small parties to retain their status if they do not
run a candidate.
Representative Grussendorf pointed out that many smaller
parties are trying to influence election issues through
their candidates. Representative Vezey observed that
smaller parties would not be precluded from running a
candidate.
JIM BALDWIN, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LAW
observed the need to document the interest that is being
served by the legislation. He observed that the legislation
is a limitation on the right of political association. He
noted that the Court ruled in Vogler versus Miller, that the
State must have a compelling governmental interest to place
limitations on political recognition for purposes of
admission to the primary election ballot. He suggested that
the legislation cannot be defended on the premise that an
election of a gubernatorial candidate by a majority vote is
paramount. He observed that under the legislation the Green
Party would not be a recognized party and the AIP would be a
recognized party.
Mr. Baldwin observed that most states require that a
political party meet a percentage of those that voted in the
last primary election. Once a party is recognized they are
included on the ballot without petition. He observed that
in order to meet the registration requirement individuals
must disclose their party affiliation before the party can
achieve recognized party status. Registered voters do not
have to disclose their party affiliation. This requirement
could be seen as a compulsory disclosure of political
affiliation. He noted that these kinds of limitation are
upheld only when there is nothing less intrusive to serve
this interest. He acknowledged that an attorney of the
Republican Party has challenged his interpretation.
Co-Chair Therriault noted that voter registration would not
be the only route to obtain recognition as a political
3
party.
Representative Kelly observed that if the Green Party gets 3
percent of the vote in a general election for governor they
would retain their status.
Co-Chair Therriault emphasized that no rights are being
taken away.
Co-Chair Hanley noted that the Court ruled in Vogler versus
Miller that the standard was too high. He asked if 3
percent is a defendable amount. Mr. Baldwin stated that the
Court indicated that 3 percent would be acceptable.
GAIL FENUMIAI, DIVISION OF ELECTION, OFFICE OF THE
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR noted that 213,404 votes were cast in
the last general election. Three percent of those that voted
is 6402. Co-Chair Hanley noted that the 10,000 requirement
is higher than 3 percent.
Mr. Baldwin noted that 10,000 is an arbitrary number. He
emphasized that the Department would like to have some
rationale to defend the number. Co-Chair Hanley spoke in
support of setting the limit at 3 percent of the previous
election.
In response to a question by Representative Grussendorf, Ms.
Fenumiai noted that there are 420,000 registered voters in
the State of Alaska. Representative Grussendorf expressed
concern that a fixed number would not grow with the
population.
Co-Chair Therriault noted that the Green Party had 3,088
registered voters. Representative Grussendorf suggested
that the legislation grandfather in all the major recognized
parties in the State. Co-Chair Therriault noted that 3,088
is less than 1 percent of the registered voters in the
State.
Representative Martin observed that the State of Alaska has
a high percentage of voter's registration due to the
Permanent Fund Dividend Program. He spoke in support of
basing political party status on a percentage of those that
voted, rather than on registered voters.
Representative Davies cited statistics of other states
requirements for the granting of political party. He
demonstrated that other requirements by other states vary
from one-twentieth of one percent to one percent of
registered voters.
4
JACK COGHILL, CHAIRMAN, ALASKA INDEPENDENT PARTY, testified
via the teleconference network in support of HB 112. He
observed that the legislation provides two avenues to retain
political party status. He stressed that there would be
savings in the Division of Elections if small parties do not
have to run a candidate. He noted that it is the goal of
AIP to build political strength. He observed that AIP would
not run a candidate, in the next gubernatorial election, if
they did not have to do so to retain their status.
Representative Davies noted that AIP could support the
Republican candidate for Governor and still retain their
status. He observed that, under the legislation, the Green
Party would have to run a candidate to retain their status
as a political party.
Mr. Coghill noted that AIP wants to be able to build a
foundation for a political structure, in order to challenge
the political process in future years.
In response to a question by Representative Davies, Mr.
Coghill noted that he would support the substitution of one-
percent of registered voters.
In response to a question by Representative Grussendorf, Ms.
Fenumiai explained that supports of the Liberation Party and
the Constitutional Party are listed under the "other"
category. Representative Grussendorf observed that these
parties would not be likely to support AIP since they will
be busy trying to gain recognition for their own party.
SCOTT KOHLHASS, ALASKA LIBERTARIAN PARTY, FAIRBANKS
testified via the teleconference network in support of HB
112. He noted that the legislation opens new avenues for
obtaining political party status. He pointed out that
Alaska is one of the more difficult states to obtain ballot
access. He noted that in some other states sufficient
ballot signatures result in full party status. He asked why
small parties are required to petition for each office as a
limited political party.
In response to a question by Representative Davies, Mr.
Kohlhass noted that he would support the substitution of
one-percent of the registered voters. He maintained that
requiring 10,000 registered voters, for a political party to
retain its legal status without running a gubernatorial
candidate, is "oppressive."
Co-Chair Therriault noted that the Division of Elections
would need computer modifications.
Mr. Kohlhass observed that the Alaska Civil Liberties Union
5
has advocated that one-tenth of one percent of the vote be
required to maintain ballot status.
KEVIN MORFORD, MEMBER, GREEN PARTY testified via the
teleconference network. He noted that he is an attorney.
He emphasized that the legislation addresses important
constitutional rights.
(Tape Change, HFC 97-52, Side 2)
Mr. Morford noted that there are two ways to get on the
ballot. A candidate can run as a member of a recognized
political party with ballot access or by nominating
petition. The legislation will not change the manner in
which political parties are able to initially qualify for
ballot access. He observed that a party could register
voters until they have ballot access. He noted that the
Green Party is the only registered party that could not
maintain its status without running a candidate for
governor. He stressed the importance of maintaining a level
playing field.
Mr. Morford referred to the sponsor statement for HB 112.
He noted that the sponsor statement concludes that the
legislation would result in Alaska's governors being elected
by a larger plurality of voters. He observed the intent of
the bill is to cut down on the number of candidates for
governor, and thereby achieve elections in which governors
are more likely to be elected by a majority. He maintained
that it is not legitimate to try to cut down on the number
of candidates by limited ballot access. He suggested that
multiple ballots could be utilized to achieve plurality. He
maintained that the 10,000 requirement is not justified. He
pointed out that 50 percent of Alaskan registered voters are
not affiliated with a party. He noted that there were more
votes cast for the Green Party than were registered members
of the party. He stated that it does not make sense to
require a higher number to be registered for a party than
the amount it received in a general election.
Mr. Morford suggested the adoption of uniform rules, an even
playing field and that ballot access be based on reasonable
numbers. He supported the use of 3 percent of the vote or a
smaller number of registered voters.
JIM SYKES, GREEN PARTY testified via the teleconference
network. He acknowledged the need for other criteria to be
considered. He questioned why other statewide races are not
counted equally. He provided members with a memorandum
presenting three options for amendment to HB 112 (attachment
1). He spoke in support of the amendments. He noted that
AIP and the Green Party received more than 3 percent of the
6
vote in several previous statewide races. Option B, under
the proposed amendments, would require that a political
party run at least three legislative races and receive 3
percent of the vote. He agreed that it takes a lot of time
and energy to run races. He maintained that a requirement
for 10,000 registered voters is different from the way any
other states operate. He spoke in support of a registration
requirement of one percent of the registered voters. He
observed that the Alaska Supreme Court has a record of
striking down unreasonable ballot access requirements. He
urged the Committee to replace the requirement for 10,000
with the suggestions contained in Attachment 1. He noted
that there are ballot options that would allow voters to
prioritize their choices to allow a majority to be obtained.
He emphasized that the Green Party should receive the same
treatment as other parties.
Representative Vezey clarified that the 10,000 requirement
was based on, what was at that time, 3 percent of the
registered voters. He clarified that the legislation is not
about ballot access. He maintained that the legislation is
about the ability to maintain political party status without
being on the ballot. He observed that political parties
could have any number of gaming permits. He questioned if
the Legislature wants to make it easy for inactive political
parties to have access to gaming permits.
Representative Martin agreed with comments by Representative
Vezey. He suggested that political parties not be allowed
to have pull-tab permits.
Representative Davies provided members with Amendment 1
(copy on file). Representative Davies MOVED to adopt
Amendment 1. Representative Martin OBJECTED.
Representative Davies explained that Amendment 1 would allow
a political party to run in three other statewide races as a
means to validate its status as a party. Representative
Vezey spoke against the amendment. A roll call vote was
taken on the MOTION.
IN FAVOR: Davies Grussendorf, Moses
OPPOSED: Davis, Foster, Kelly, Martin, Therriault, Hanley
Representatives Mulder and Kohring were absent for the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (3-6).
Co-Chair Hanley MOVED to adopt Amendment 2 (copy on file).
He explained that Amendment 2 would provide that a political
party have registered voters equal to 3 percent of the votes
cast for governor at the proceeding general election. He
observed that this is a lower standard than three percent of
7
the registered voters. The number would fluctuate based on
the number of registered voters.
Representative Davies MOVED to AMEND Amendment 2; delete
"three-percent" and insert "one-percent." Co-Chair
Therriault OBJECTED. Representative Davies spoke in support
of the amendment. He noted that the amount would require
that a party have 6,400 registered voters, before it could
retain its legal status without running a gubernatorial
candidate. He stressed that 6,400 would be greater than the
Green Party currently has registered. He observed that one-
percent would require that a party have 2,200 registered
voters. He stated that this would be equal to the highest
standard of any state in the nation.
Co-Chair Hanley spoke against the amendment. He pointed out
that one-percent of the registered voters is more than one-
percent of the vote. He maintained that three-percent is a
defensible number. He stressed that it is less restrictive.
Representative Martin spoke against the amendment.
Representative Davies emphasized that the Green Party has
consistently received more votes than its share of
registered voters. He maintained that Alaskans value their
privacy.
A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION to amend Amendment
2.
IN FAVOR: Davies Grussendorf, Moses
OPPOSED: Davis, Foster, Kelly, Martin, Therriault, Hanley
Representatives Mulder and Kohring were absent for the vote.
The MOTION FAILED (3-6).
Co-Chair Hanley clarified that the amendment pertains to
votes at the last gubernatorial election. There being NO
OBJECTION, Amendment 2 was adopted.
Representative Davies MOVED to adopt Amendment 3 (copy on
file). Co-Chair Therriault OBJECTED. He explained that the
amendment clarifies that, once a party reaches legal status,
it retains legal status until it fails to have registered
numbers equal to that percentage.
Representative Vezey spoke against the amendment.
Representative Davies MOVED to AMEND Amendment 3, delete
"one-percent" and insert "three-percent" on lines 6 and 9.
Co-Chair Hanley observed that the amendment is based on
registered voters. He summarized that the amendment
8
eliminates the ability to qualify with the 3-percent of the
votes cast for a gubernatorial candidate. He stressed that
the amendment would be more limiting. He observed that,
under the amendment, the Green Party would not be able to
put up a candidate for governor.
While Representative Davies considered Amendment 3, Ms.
Fenumiai discussed the fiscal note by the Office of the
Lieutenant Governor. She explained that the Division would
need to modify their computer system to track additional
parties. In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault,
Ms. Fenumiai explained that the code table would require
updates. She observed that voter registration reports and
voter cards would also have to be modified. She clarified
that the Division could not retrace voter records.
Representative Davies suggested that the amendment should be
worded to allow the current provision or the provision
contained in Amendment 3. He WITHDREW Amendment 3.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CSHB 112 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. Representative Davies OBJECTED.
He maintained that the legislation would allow AIP to not
run a candidate and require the Green Party to run a
candidate. The Green Party would be required to registered
50 percent more voters in order to not run a candidate. He
stated that the bill could be interpreted to have political
intent.
A roll call vote was taken on the MOTION.
IN FAVOR: Davis, Foster, Kelly, Kohring, Martin, Therriault,
Hanley OPPOSED: Davies, Grussendorf, Moses
Representative Mulder was absent for the vote.
HB 112 was reported out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with a fiscal impact note by the Office
of the Lieutenant Governor, dated 2/26/97; and with a zero
fiscal note by the Department of Revenue, dated 2/26/97.
HOUSE BILL NO. 145
"An Act relating to certification of teachers."
REPRESENTATIVE CON BUNDE, SPONSOR testified on behalf of HB
145. He maintained that there is a lack of faith in the
system. He was a participant in an Anchorage education
focus group. The focus group agreed on the importance of
public confidence in teachers and the quality of education.
He observed that the legislation is a screening devise to
9
remove teachers who are not well qualified. Teachers must
pass a basic screening test before they can receive their
Type A teaching certificate in Alaska. He observed that,
currently, the only requirement for a Type A teaching
certificate is a college degree. In addition to the
screening test, school districts apply their own criteria
for teachers. He clarified that the legislation does not
represent an attempt to tell local districts who they must
hire. He emphasized that the legislation will provide
assurance that applicants are competent. Teachers will
still be chosen through an interview process.
In response to a question by Representative Martin,
Representative Bunde clarified that a Bachelors of Science
degree in Education does not provide a teaching certificate
in the State of Alaska. The graduate still has to come to
the State of Alaska and demonstrate that they have a
teaching certificate.
Representative Martin assumed that graduates of the
University of Alaska would be competent. Co-Chair
Therriault observed that the test would also screen out-of-
state candidates.
Representative Martin noted that attitude and experience are
needed to make a good teacher. He thought that the
legislation would make it more difficult to get qualified
teachers.
Representative Grussendorf suggested that teachers be
required to pass the examination within their first year of
employment. He expressed concern that there would be a
bottleneck during hiring.
Representative Bunde observed that most hiring takes place
in early spring. Candidates would have 4 - 5 months to pass
the examination.
Representative Bunde stated that openings occur during mid-
year. He noted that available teachers, in Alaska today,
number in the hundreds. He acknowledged that there needs to
be flexibility for short-term emergency contracts.
Representative Grussendorf observed that there are
situations where teachers provide notification that they
will not fulfill their contract just before the school year.
Representative Bunde added that additional teachers might be
needed in the beginning of the school year due to an
increase in enrollment. He emphasized that the intent is
not to "tie the hands of school districts." He maintained
that the examination would be part of the process of
achieving a Type A teaching certificate.
10
JOHN CYR, NEA-ALASKA, explained that if a district can
demonstrate that they cannot find a person who is certified,
they can ask for an emergency certificate. Emergency
teaching certificates are issued for one year.
Representative Grussendorf reiterated concerns that school
boards have plenty of time to field a full academic team.
NANCY BUEHL, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION explained that there is
an emergency certificate process. The District would have
to demonstrate that they advertised for a person and could
not secure a qualified applicant. She noted that the
Department receives 3 to 4 emergency applicants a year.
Emergency certificates tend to be mid-year and from rural
districts. She stressed that it is possible to make
provisions for emergency situations in regulations. She
observed that the commissioner can issue a provisional
certificate for Alaskan studies if there are extenuating
circumstances. She stated that similar regulations can be
written in response to the legislation.
Representative Martin asked how the test would be
implemented. Representative Bunde interjected that the
legislation would only pertain to those that have not
received their Type A certificate. Ms. Buehl added that the
Department does not intend to administer the test. The
Department, through the Board of Education, would select a
nationally recognized test that is administered by a testing
company. She stated that the test would be administered
similar to the bar exam. Representative Bunde noted that 40
other states have some form of certification test.
Representative Therriault noted that most states use the
Praxis test. Ms. Buehl observed that the Praxis test is
undergoing revision.
In response to a question by Representative Martin, Mr. Cyr
explained that there are two types of substitute teachers.
certificated substitute teachers hold a valid Alaskan Type A
certificate. Districts also have non-certificated
substitutes that are under supervision of the site
supervisor. The legislation only applies to those that are
seeking initial certification.
In response to a question by Representative Davis,
Representative Bunde explained that those with Type A
teaching certificates would not be affected by the
legislation.
Representative Martin noted that rural communities might not
have replacements to fill vacancies. Representative Bunde
11
emphasized that screen tests are important in emergency
situations.
Ms. Buehl reviewed the emergency certification process. The
superintendent sends a letter to the commissioner of the
Department of Environmental Conservation. Generally,
requests are acted on the same day that they are received.
Emergency certifications are used when a district can not
locate a certified teacher but has located someone that has
some qualification. The commissioner acts on each case
separately. She could did not remember a case that was not
granted within a couple of days. The district must
advertise the position for two weeks as a condition of the
regulation.
In response to a question by Representative Davis, Ms. Buehl
noted that tests are commonly given four times a year.
Representative Davis stressed that there are a lot of
intangibles that teachers need. Representative Bunde
discussed alternative routes to certification. He noted
that a program for alternative certification was dropped due
to a lack of interest.
Ms. Buehl noted that a high percentage of minorities do not
pass these tests on the first or second attempt. She
observed that Oregon discovered that a similar requirement
lowered the available pool. She emphasized that the
Department will make sure that the test that is chosen does
not suffer from inherent bias and is available to those with
disabilities. She stressed that the test must be carefully
chosen. She clarified that the alternative certification
program was discontinued due to a lack of funding. She
thought that there would be interest in the program if
funding were available.
Representative Davies asked if there are tests available in
multiform that address the issue of inherent bias. Ms.
Buehl observed that there are at least two other states that
have engaged in development with test companies to lower
bias for student populations. She was not aware of a
teacher screening test that would eliminate bias. She
acknowledged that it is a significant concern.
Representative Davies asked if there is evidence that
similar screening requirements have resulted in an increase
in competency and public confidence in the educational
process.
Representative Bunde observed that the State of California
found that some applicants could not spell at the sixth
grade level. He spoke in support of a minimum level of
literacy.
12
Representative Martin expressed concern that the examination
will be an obstacle to Native applicants. He spoke in
support of encouraging Nataive teachers.
Mr. Cyr noted that there are only five states that do not
have some type of assessment for an initial certificate. He
emphasized that the way to get minority teachers is to work
with them within their community. He stressed that it is a
disservice to the Native community to say that the Native
community cannot take a test.
In response to a question by Representative Davies, Mr. Cyr
maintained that an initial screening is important. Ms.
Buehl did not think that the requirement would be
particularly controversial.
Representative Davies discussed the tenure process.
Representative Bunde maintained that three years is too long
to employ an incompetent teacher. Mr. Cyr observed that the
examination provides the initial license. School districts
would still evaluate practicing teachers for tenure.
(Tape Change, HFC 97-53, Side 2)
Representative Bunde observed that the test would be
administered in two levels. The first level would
demonstrate competency for elementary subjects. The second
level would test competency to teach math, English, or
science. He acknowledged that good teachers have a
"calling". He observed that students are screened during
the college process.
Co-Chair Therriault referred to the fiscal note by the
Department of Education. He observed that the Department
has reduced the fiscal note. Ms. Buehl explained that the
fiscal note was revised to reflect that the Department will
not administer the test.
Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that the Department would
still control the contract with the private sector. He
stated that fees would be paid to the Department, then the
Department would contract with the test provider. Program
receipts would come and contractual money would be
appropriated. Ms. Buehl stated that the original fiscal
note dated 3/5/97 would reflect this process.
In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Ms. Buehl
explained that the Board of Education would need to meet
more frequently in order to select the test and establish
cut-off scores. She emphasized that the cut-off must be a
legally defensible cut-off. She emphasized the complexity
13
of validating the test. She clarified that the $40 thousand
dollar travel request would pay for the Board, staff and
technical advisors. The second page of the fiscal note
details the travel costs.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned the request of $77 thousand
dollars for personal services. Ms. Buehl noted that several
positions are associated with this request. She observed
that a portion of this request would go to test selection
and review. She stated that the request is spread over
existing people plus a temporary position during the
selection period. A temporary education associate will be
hired for part of the year. Co-Chair Therriault pointed
out that part of their request funds personnel that are
already contained in the budget.
In response to a question by Representative Martin, Ms.
Buehl noted that certification fees could be raised. She
stated that the current fee is not sufficient to support the
costs. She noted that 4,500 applicants would be affected
per year.
In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Ms. Buehl
explained that continuing personal service costs were
included to cover additional data input. She stated that
existing staff would have to be taken off of some other
task. Co-Chair Therriault observed that the State does not
pay for the same position more than once.
Ms. Buehl noted that options available to the Department;
existing personnel would have to quit doing something,
redeploy a clerk that is in some other division, add a long
term non-permanent position, or add a new position. Co-
Chair Therriault stressed that fiscal notes are supposed to
reflect new general fund dollars.
HB 145 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m.
14
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|