Legislature(2001 - 2002)
04/28/2001 09:10 AM 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
April 28, 2001
9:10 A.M.
TAPE HFC 01 - 104, Side A
TAPE HFC 01 - 104, Side B
TAPE HFC 01 - 105, Side A
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Williams called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 9:10 A.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bill Williams, Co-Chair
Representative Eldon Mulder, Co-Chair
Representative Con Bunde, Vice-Chair
Representative Eric Croft
Representative John Davies
Representative Carl Moses
Representative Richard Foster
Representative John Harris
Representative Bill Hudson
Representative Ken Lancaster
Representative Jim Whitaker
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Norman Rokeberg; Representative Gary Stevens;
Representative Beth Kerttula; Representative Joe Green;
Janet Seitz, Staff, Representative Norman Rokeberg; Elmer
Lindstrom, Special Assistant to the Commissioner, Department
of Health and Social Services; Larry LaBolle, Staff,
Representative Richard Foster; Guy Bell, Director, Division
of Retirement and Benefits, Department of Administration;
Melanie Lesh, Staff, Representative Bill Hudson.
SUMMARY
HB 4 An Act relating to offenses involving operating a
motor vehicle, aircraft, or watercraft while under
the influence of an alcoholic beverage or
controlled substance; relating to implied consent
to take a chemical test; relating to registration
of motor vehicles; relating to presumptions
arising from the amount of alcohol in a person's
breath or blood; and providing for an effective
date.
CS HB 4 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with
"individual" recommendations and with fiscal notes
#5, #6, #11, and #12 by the Department of Health &
Social Services and #16 by the Alaska Court System
and new fiscal notes by the Department of Public
Safety, the Department of Law, the Department of
Corrections and two new notes by the Department of
Administration.
HB 37 An Act relating to reimbursement of certain
student loans; and providing for an effective
date.
HB 37 was POSTPONDED for hearing at a latter date.
HB 43 An Act relating to reimbursement of certain
student loans; and providing for an effective
date.
HB 43 was HELD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HB 53 An Act establishing the Alaska Seismic Hazards
Safety Commission.
HB 53 was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with a fiscal note #1 by
Department of Natural Resources dated 3/30/01.
HB 198 An Act relating to a post-retirement pension
adjustment and cost-of-living allowance for
persons receiving benefits under the Elected
Public Officers Retirement System; and increasing
the compensation of the governor.
CS HB 198 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with
"individual" recommendations and with a fiscal
note by Department of Administration #1 dated
4/16/01 and a zero fiscal note #2 by the Office of
the Governor dated 4/16/01.
HB 239 An Act establishing a pilot program for a regional
learning center.
HB 239 was reported out of Committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with a fiscal note by
Department of Education & Early Development #1
dated 4/25/01.
HB 260 An Act requiring the owners or operators of
certain passenger vessels operating in the marine
waters of the state to register the vessels;
establishing information-gathering, record
keeping, and reporting requirements relating to
the vessels' graywater and sewage; prohibiting the
discharge of untreated sewage from the vessels
unless exempted; placing limits on discharges of
treated sewage and graywater from the vessels
unless exempted; establishing a commercial
passenger vessel coastal protection fund;
establishing a fee on commercial passenger
vessels, that are not exempt from the fee, for
each voyage during which the vessels operate in
the marine waters of the state based on the
overnight accommodation capacity of the vessels
determined with reference to the number of lower
berths; establishing penalties for failure to
comply with certain laws relating to the vessels;
authorizing the Department of Environmental
Conservation to encourage and recognize superior
environmental protection efforts related to
commercial passenger vessels; authorizing
exemptions from some laws relating to discharges
from the vessels and from the fee requirements
related to the vessels; requiring a report from
the Department of Environmental Conservation
concerning matters relating to the vessels; and
providing for an effective date.
HB 260 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 260
An Act requiring the owners or operators of certain
passenger vessels operating in the marine waters of the
state to register the vessels; establishing
information-gathering, record keeping, and reporting
requirements relating to the vessels' graywater and
sewage; prohibiting the discharge of untreated sewage
from the vessels unless exempted; placing limits on
discharges of treated sewage and graywater from the
vessels unless exempted; establishing a commercial
passenger vessel coastal protection fund; establishing
a fee on commercial passenger vessels, that are not
exempt from the fee, for each voyage during which the
vessels operate in the marine waters of the state based
on the overnight accommodation capacity of the vessels
determined with reference to the number of lower
berths; establishing penalties for failure to comply
with certain laws relating to the vessels; authorizing
the Department of Environmental Conservation to
encourage and recognize superior environmental
protection efforts related to commercial passenger
vessels; authorizing exemptions from some laws relating
to discharges from the vessels and from the fee
requirements related to the vessels; requiring a report
from the Department of Environmental Conservation
concerning matters relating to the vessels; and
providing for an effective date.
Co-Chair Mulder pointed out that one amendment had been
incorrectly referenced during the previous meeting.
Co-Chair Mulder MOVED to RESCIND action taken on adoption of
Amendment #6. [Copy on File]. There being NO OBJECTION,
the action was rescinded.
Co-Chair Mulder MOVED to ADOPT the New Amendment #6 which
references AS 09.25.450. [Copy on File]. There being NO
OBJECTION, the amendment was adopted.
HB 260 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 4
An Act relating to offenses involving operating a motor
vehicle, aircraft, or watercraft while under the
influence of an alcoholic beverage or controlled
substance; relating to implied consent to take a
chemical test; relating to registration of motor
vehicles; relating to presumptions arising from the
amount of alcohol in a person's breath or blood; and
providing for an effective date.
REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG commented that Alaska has one
of the toughest drunk driving laws in the United States, but
many of drunk drivers are not getting the message. The
proposed legislation would create the toughest set of
driving under the influence laws in the country.
He added that poor judgment and chemical dependency are the
primary causes of habitual drinking and driving. Those
people kill, injure and maim Alaskans causing untold grief,
pain and suffering and economic loss. Estimates show that
the average 1998 alcohol-related fatality in Alaska cost
$5.1 million dollars, while the average 1998 injured
survivor experienced approximated $126,000 in costs. He
noted that those figures had been made available from the
Public Services Research Institute and were produced under a
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration partners with
the Progress Cooperative Agreement. The figures are for
Alaska.
Representative Rokeberg added that the legislation would
increase fines and jail time. The bill would:
· Lower the blood alcohol content limit from
.10 to .08;
· Mandate treatment for prisoners;
· Delete the five-year look-back provision
while phasing a ten-year look-back;
· Require immobilization or forfeiture of the
vehicle on the second offense;
· Forfeiture on third and subsequent offenses;
· Require seizure of license plates;
· Increase fees, fines, and cost caps in
various areas of the law to enhance revenue
to offset associated costs.
Representative Rokeberg stated that HB 4 contains both the
"stick" (punitive revision of law) in the House Majority's
alcohol package and the "carrot" (flexibility for the
judicial system to in giving out sentences and fines). The
bill has several enhancements for the treatment of
offenders. Enactment of the legislation would send a strong
and clear message to "Not Drink and Drive". He noted that
the fiscal impact was significant and urged support of the
legislation.
Representative Davies noted that Section 8 would change
"intoxicated" to "under the influence of". He voiced
concern that language could create a "loop-hole".
Representative Rokeberg explained that consideration had
been made in the House Judiciary Committee. He believed
that the change was appropriate. He acknowledged that the
net had been expanded.
Representative Croft asked where the definition of
intoxicated had previously been located. Representative
Rokeberg replied that it was placed in Section 28, Page 16.
Representative Davies stated that he would be more
comfortable with a definitional clause being included which
would identify "those things". He reiterated his concern
with creating a specific list.
JANET SEITZ, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG, pointed
out that under the current statute, a person would commit a
crime listed in current law under AS 28.35.03(a): "While
intoxicated if they are operating while under the influence
of intoxicating liquor or any controlled substance". The
expanded language would extend it to "under the influence of
an alcoholic beverage, inhalant or controlled substance" and
lowering the alcohol level to .08.
Vice-Chair Bunde questioned that in expanding the definition
of "driving while under the influence", would any person
then, using any alcohol at all, be guilty. Representative
Rokeberg replied that the bill establishes the blood alcohol
content baseline. Vice-Chair Bunde voiced concern that even
a tablespoon of alcohol would enter the blood stream.
Representative Rokeberg explained that it was a matter of
semantics. Vice-Chair Bunde discussed that even a
responsible drinker could be "under the influence".
Representative Rokeberg stated that there would have to be a
certain level present for that indication.
Vice-Chair Bunde questioned if there would be an increase of
arrest when the blood alcohol amount was changed.
Representative Rokeberg responded that there could be as
much as a 10% increase. He added that the standards for
apprehension would be provided and that there would need to
be "probable cause" for the pull over. He believed that the
number of arrests would be lower than projected by the
Department and recommended that the Committee adopt the
fiscal note which reflects only a 5% increase.
Vice-Chair Bunde agreed that the public is concerned about
the serious crimes associated with drunk driving. If there
was an increase in drunk driving arrests, that would result
from action taken by the Legislature. Representative
Rokeberg pointed out that the bill would have substantial
impact to current law. Representative Rokeberg reiterated
the reasons for sponsoring the proposed legislation. He
argued that the bar was not being lowered. Vice-Chair Bunde
responded that the net was being widened, and stressed that
would not impact behavior.
Representative Croft asked the location of the impairment
statute. Ms. Seitz replied that it was housed in Section
49, Page 31.
Representative Croft questioned the chemical levels for
controlled substances. He asked if case law had been well
defined. Representative Rokeberg commented that there are
occasional cases in current statute.
Vice-Chair Bunde referenced the penalty phase. He asked
about "probable cause" and impounding of the vehicle at that
time. Representative Rokeberg replied that there would be
no forfeiture until after the court hearing. For the public
safety, there would be an immediate vehicle impoundment.
The bill provides for a seizure of the license plate.
Within seven days, there would have to be an administrative
hearing. He pointed out that forfeiture was at the
discretion of the third offense.
Vice-Chair Bunde questioned if forfeiture would expand to
all motorized vehicles. Representative Rokeberg replied
that the bill would include all vehicles including
watercraft and airplanes.
Vice-Chair Bunde stated that he supported taking the license
plates from the cars. He maintained that it would be
difficult to know if a person was driving without a license,
however, it is more visibly obvious if they are driving
without a license plate. He questioned the interim step
before conviction. Representative Rokeberg responded that
testimony had not been received regarding that issue yet.
Representative Lancaster asked if controlled substance would
include prescription drugs or medication. Representative
Rokeberg replied that it would not unless it was statutorily
listed. He added that if a person was impaired while
driving because being under the influence of any drug, would
be determined by the police officer. Representative
Lancaster discussed that under current law, the person would
have had to commit a crime before they were charged.
Representative Rokeberg suggested that the Committee adopt a
lower fiscal note.
Vice-Chair Bunde MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #1. [Copy on
File]. Co-Chair Williams OBJECTED for discussion purposes.
Representative Rokeberg explained that the amendment would
change the fiscal notes. Representative Whitaker asked if
there was data available to back up the fact that the change
would be a fair reflection of the true costs.
Representative Rokeberg responded that the amendment would
only be a reduction to the fiscal notes.
Representative Davies voiced concern with making that
change. He advised that the information from which the
change was based was a simplistic assumption. He pointed
out that other states have indicated that there have been
substantial increases in arrests and fatalities. He
recommended that the Committee hear testimony from each of
the departments affected by the change. Representative
Rokeberg responded that his office had looked into the crime
thoroughly, advising that it would be difficult to look into
a one to one comparison. He referenced the enclosed fiscal
changes to the bill.
Representative Davies acknowledged that the change would
signal a message regarding drunk driving behavior to the
public. Also, he pointed out that this is the House Finance
Committee and that it is the place where the fiscal impacts
should be thoroughly discussed and determined.
Representative Croft echoed Representative J. Davies'
concern regarding departmental testimony on the fiscal
notes. He asked, under the higher standards, what would the
proposed changes be. He noted that there would be more
tests in lowering the standards. Representative Croft
stressed that if the Legislature is proposing the change,
the funding must accompany implementing it.
Vice-Chair Bunde suggested that the departments would do
what needs to be done if the legislation is made into law.
He added that the note would not keep the changes in law
from going into effect. He added, then that the department
could request supplemental funding.
ELMER LINDSTROM, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE COMMISSIONER,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES, made comments to
the fiscal note. He stressed that it was imperative to
consider the Memo dated March 21, 2001, from the Department
to Representative Rokeberg regarding treatment for the
proposed concerns. He stressed the wait listed associated
with treatment. He noted that no one on the Committee
should assume that any given person convicted of a Drinking
While Intoxicated (DWI) charge, might be able to participate
in treatment, as it may not be available. There are waiting
lists throughout the State for outpatient treatment and
those waiting lists greatly understate the real demand for
treatment. He stressed that the Department's fiscal note
number was conservative.
TAPE HFC 01 - 104, Side B
Mr. Lindstrom stressed that Department of Health and Social
Services is seriously struggling with the issue of drug and
alcohol funding at this time. He warned that if HB 4 moves
forward, the fiscal note, which has been submitted must
accompany it.
Recess: 9:55 A.M.
Reconvene: 10:55 A.M.
Representative Rokeberg indicated that he would work with
the departments in order to refine the fiscal concerns.
Vice-Chair Bunde MOVED to WITHDRAW Amendment #1. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was withdrawn.
Representative Harris MOVED to adopt Amendment #2, Page 1,
Lines 1-9. There being NO OBJECTION, it was adopted.
Representative Hudson MOVED to report CS HB 4 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CS HB 4 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with a
"individual" recommendations and with fiscal notes #5, #6,
#11, and #12 by the Department of Health & Social Services
and note #16 by the Alaska Court System and new fiscal notes
by the Department of Public Safety, the Department of Law,
the Department of Corrections and two new notes by the
Department of Administration.
HOUSE BILL NO. 239
An Act establishing a pilot program for a regional
learning center.
LARRY LABOLLE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD FOSTER,
st
explained that the 21 Legislature through the Legislative
Budget and Audit Committee (LBA) hearings, found indications
of broad support for regional learning centers. Several
communities have expressed interest in creating regional
boarding programs focused on the special interests of their
regions.
He noted that the Bering Strait School District and the Nome
City School District have been exploring the feasibility of
a cooperative program that would utilize the existing Nome
Beltz School complex to develop and operate a pilot regional
learning program. Both these districts have taken actions
to support the creation of a pilot program and to seek
federal funding to help cover program planning and the
initial operation costs.
Mr. LaBolle pointed out that a conceptual overview of the
program was contained in the March 20, 2001 letter from Dr.
John Davis, Superintendent of the Bering Strait School
District. [Copy on File]. That letter helps to define and
support the concept proposed in the legislation.
Representative Lancaster asked if the Department's report
would be available to the Legislature. Mr. LaBolle replied
that there would be a report available. He added that the
program was accompanied by a sunset clause in order to
review the concept. He noted that the districts had
consented to provide a third party evaluation to the
Department and to the Legislature.
Representative Davies asked if the proposal would be similar
to the boarding school concept as Mt. Edgecumbe. Mr.
LaBolle explained that in the proposed program, the student
would not be leaving their home village for any extended
length of time. They would be learning independent living
skills during short periods of time away from their homes.
These skills would help the student with the transition from
village life to larger community living.
Representative Davies inquired the time frame, which the
student would be living in the program. Mr. LaBolle replied
that the initial program would look something like what the
Bering Strait School district has been running but expanded.
The legislation would expand that program and bring it into
Nome, where there is a larger population.
Representative J. Davies spoke in support of the program.
Representative Foster MOVED to report HB 239 out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
HB 239 was reported out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with a fiscal note by Department of
Education & Early Development #1 dated 4/25/01.
#HB198
HOUSE BILL NO. 198
An Act relating to a post-retirement pension adjustment
and cost-of-living allowance for persons receiving
benefits under the Elected Public Officers Retirement
System; and increasing the compensation of the
governor.
REPRESENTATIVE BILL HUDSON explained that the proposed bill
had resulted from an effort to contain costs on the most
extreme cases requiring inequity correction between
retirement benefit calculations for the Elected Public
Officials Retirement System (EPORS) and Public Employees'
Retirement System (PERS) members. A statistical review of
EPORS retirees, or their surviving spouses, revealed that
many members have or will be receiving a benefit adjustment
but rather from changes in the salaries or additional
allowances in the position from which they retired.
The current language concentrates on narrowing the focus to
members who have not had any cost of living or other benefit
adjustments to their EPORS retirement benefits, as have
their peers who retired under the PERS retirement system.
Representative Hudson stated that HB 198 is a fair bill
designed to equalize future benefits only of the few EPORS
retirees and their surviving spouses who have not otherwise
seen any change in retirement received for their service to
the State of Alaska.
Vice-Chair Bunde asked how many people would be involved
with passage of the legislation. Representative Hudson
replied five or less. He reiterated that the bill was an
issue of "fairness".
Vice-Chair Bunde MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #1. [Copy on
File]. Representative Croft OBJECTED for an explanation.
Vice-Chair Bunde explained that the Division of Retirement
and Benefits had proposed the amendment. The amendment
would limit the bill to the five people mentioned.
In response to Representative J. Davies, Representative
Hudson stated that there are only a few who have not
received an increase in the last years. The language
provided in Amendment #1 is necessary to isolate those five.
There are approximately twenty-two EPORS retirees that have
continued their employment with the State. Those people
have been receiving their annual cost-of-living increases
under the programs. The other five have not received
anything for fifteen years and they would be covered under
this bill.
Co-Chair Mulder interjected that the legislation would be
restricted. Representative Davies commented that he did not
want it to be restrictive to only the favorites.
Representative Hudson replied that some are still under the
EPORS system, which has been responsible for those costs.
Initially, there were 35 and now there are five.
GUY BELL, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF RETIREMENT AND BENEFITS,
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, explained that the bill was
designed to cover those people that have not received an
increase for fifteen years. Effectively, there are only two
people in that category. The retirement and benefit is
based on the salary of the position that person last held.
Those benefits have been fixed. All other EPORS members
have received some increase. The increase is based on the
salary and other compensation of the position that the
person left.
Representative Croft commented that it rest on the fact that
the Governor's salary had not been increased since 1983.
The legislation would provide a retirement benefit roughly
equal to what Governor Hammond would have received if he had
gone on to another system or his salary was raised.
Mr. Bell replied that the legislation would provide a 75%
change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) since that benefit
was last changed in 1983. The original bill raised the
Governor's salary, which would have effectively increased
the benefit, however, that section was dropped. He added,
Section 2 of the bill guarantees that there is no "double
dipping".
Representative Croft inquired the situation of the other 25-
30 people that are on a similar track. Mr. Bell replied
that the general theory behind EPORS was that overtime and
salaries would increase. He noted that system was based on
the judicial retirement system, which is effectively the
same. The way that it works is that a person's retirement
benefit is based on current salary of the position that they
vacated. For the EPORS members that has been more erratic
and for some, non-existent. He added that legislative
salaries have increased.
Mr. Bell explained that there was a challenge ballot
measure, which was disapproved. There was an option to stay
in. Some of those people have not yet retired and the
remainder are drawing benefits for public service.
Discussion followed between Representative Croft and Mr.
Bell regarding the history of the Judicial Retirement
statute.
Vice-Chair Bunde clarified that the amendment would only
effect retired persons under the EPORS system. Mr. Bell
interjected that the person would have had to been retired
for at least 15 years. Representative Hudson emphasized
that the bill would provide equal treatment for the retiree
and would bring those few people up to "speed".
Representative Davies asked if the amendment would be
excluding anyone. Mr. Bell stated that the Department was
comfortable with the amendment because excluded persons
would be eligible for an increased amount at a future date.
He reiterated that there would a benefit at sometime in the
future.
There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment #1 was adopted.
Representative Croft MOVED a conceptual amendment to the
bill. He stated that the root of the problem was that the
Governor's salary had not been increased in twenty years.
He suggested that the language indicate that the Governor's
salary be $100,000 dollars, effective with the swearing in
of the next Governor.
Representative Hudson OBJECTED. He commented that the bill
simply was trying to make parity and pointed out that there
is a salary bill to address other concerns.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Croft, Davies, Moses
OPPOSED: Foster, Harris, Hudson, Lancaster, Whitaker,
Bunde, Mulder, Williams
The MOTION FAILED (3-8).
Representative Hudson MOVED to report CS HB 198 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. Representative Whitaker OBJECTED
for further discussion.
Representative Whitaker voiced concern if equality was being
created with passage of the legislation. Mr. Bell responded
that the system had been classified as EPORS.
Representative Whitaker asked if the three persons who made
the decision to stay, had been placed into that category
with the option to "opt out". Mr. Bell acknowledged that
was correct. Representative Whitaker indicated that he
maintained his objection.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Davies, Foster, Harris, Hudson, Lancaster,
Moses, Bunde, Williams, Mulder
OPPOSED: Whitaker, Croft
The MOTION PASSED (9-2).
CS HB 198 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with
"individual" recommendations and with a fiscal note by
Department of Administration #1 dated 4/16/01 and a zero
fiscal note #2 by the Office of the Governor dated 4/16/01.
#HB53
HOUSE BILL NO. 53
An Act establishing the Alaska Seismic Hazards Safety
Commission.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES explained that HB 53 would create
a Seismic Hazards Safety commission. The Commission would
be situated in the Governor's office. The Commissioner
would be established to address pressing needs in providing
a consistent policy framework and a means for ongoing
coordination of programs and public safety practices related
to seismic hazards. Current needs are not being addressed
by any state government organization. The seismic Hazard
Safety Commission would encourage long-term progress toward
mitigating the effects of earthquakes.
TAPE HFC 01 - 105, Side A
Representative J. Davies emphasized that there should be
people within the State focusing on building code needs,
which are cost effective.
Members of the commission would be appointed by the Governor
to represent the University, various governmental agencies,
as well as members of the public who are knowledgeable in
earthquake hazard mitigation. The Commission would
recommend to the public and governmental sector goals and
priorities for reducing earthquake effects. The authority
and responsibility of other various state agencies, boards,
councils, commissions and/or local governments would not be
intended to be transferred to the Alaska Seismic Hazards
Safety Commission.
Co-Chair Williams pointed out that last year, the bill had
passed through the House and made it to Senate Rules
Committee.
Representative Davies MOVED to report HB 53 out of Committee
with individual recommendations and with the accompanying
fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
HB 53 was reported out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with a fiscal note #1 by Department of
Natural Resources dated 3/30/01.
HOUSE BILL NO. 43
An Act relating to reimbursement of certain student
loans; and providing for an effective date.
REPRESENTATIVE JOE GREEN commented that Alaska is facing a
serious shortage of qualified teachers in both rural and
urban areas. The shortage affects the quality of education
for our young people and jeopardizes their ability to meet
the challenges that lay ahead.
Representative Green declared that the proposed legislation
would be a method to attract and retain education
professionals. In addition to attracting qualified
teachers, it would provide an incentive for individuals to
attend a college or university located within the State of
Alaska.
To be eligible for the forgiveness program an individual
would have had to:
· Have completed 60 credit hours;
· Obtain a degree or take coursework towards a
teaching certificate or endorsement from an
in-state college or university;
· Be employed in the teaching profession at a
public elementary or secondary school;
· Teach in a geographical area where there is a
shortage or in a subject matter that is
undeserved.
The amount forgiven would be up to 100% on any loan taken
after the individual had accumulated the 60 credit hours.
He summarized that passage of the bill would ease the
financial burden of post-secondary education, aide the
recruitment efforts for teachers by making Alaska a more
desirable place for teachers to stay and earn a living and
it would make significant strides in relieving the current
teacher shortage in Alaska.
Representative Lancaster questioned the fiscal indication
for FY2001. Representative Green explained that his office
had nothing to do with that.
Representative Croft referenced the fiscal note. He asked
if only students who had gotten their degree from an Alaskan
University, had been captured. Representative Green
explained that HB 43 does not require a prior degree. He
pointed out that there was a representative from the Alaska
Student Loan Program who could better answer that question.
Representative Hudson inquired if the legislation would
bring more Alaskans back to the State in lieu of offering
other recruitment attractions. Representative Green
believed that it would. He suggested that the legislation
was an additional application in how to get Alaska out of
the current teaching dilemma. He acknowledged that the
program was experimental. The program would help the State
to focus on teaching, nursing and the engineering fields.
All those fields are in great need of further incentive for
the State of Alaska.
HB 43 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 11:05 A.M.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|