Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/17/2000 02:05 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
April 17, 2000
2:05 P.M.
TAPE HFC 00 - 123, Side 1
TAPE HFC 00 - 123, Side 2
TAPE HFC 00 - 124, Side 1
TAPE HFC 00 - 124, Side 2
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Therriault called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 2:05 p.m.
PRESENT
Co-Chair Mulder
Co-Chair Therriault Representative Foster
Vice Chair Bunde Representative Grussendorf
Representative Austerman Representative Moses
Representative J. Davies Representative Phillips
Representative G. Davis Representative Williams
ALSO PRESENT
Senator, Dave Donley; Elmer Lindstrom, Special Assistant,
Department of Health and Social Services; Bob Loeffler,
Director, Division of Mining, Land and Water, Department of
Natural Resources; Al Dwyer, Director, Division of Labor
Standards and Safety, Department of Labor and Workforce
Development; Alison Elgee, Deputy Commissioner, Department
of Administration; Shari Paul, Alaska Children's Trust;
Janice Adair, Director, Division of Environmental Health,
Department of Environmental Conservation; Diana Rhoades,
Staff, Senator Ellis; Jane Deminert, Executive Director,
Alaska Commission on Aging, Department of Administration;
Angie Schmitz, Staff, Senator Elton; Sharon Clark, Staff,
Senator Miller; Jerry Burnett, Staff, Senator Green; Michael
Pauley, Staff, Senator Leman; Anne Carpeneti, Assistant
Attorney General, Legal Services Section, Criminal Division,
Department of Law; Al Dwyer, Director, Division of Labor
Standards and Safety, Department of Labor and Workforce
Development; Al Zangri, State Registrar, Chief, Bureau Vital
Statistics, Department of Administration; Marie Darlin,
Juneau.
TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE
Kendall Thomas, Alaska Hepatitis C Coalition, Anchorage;
Chris Kennedy, Anchorage, Dale Bondurant, Kenai; Sandy
Umlauf, President, Ugashik Set Netter Association; Karl
Kircher, Executive Director, Kenai Peninsula Fisherman's
Association, Kenai; Paul Shadura, Kenai; Roger Kuchenbecker,
MatSu; Dan Challup, Kachemak Bay Salmon Producers
Cooperative Homer; Dwight Becker, Program Coordinator,
Division of Senior Services, Department of Administration,
Anchorage; Kay Burrows, Director, Division of Senior
Services, Department of Administration Anchorage.
SUMMARY
CSSB 26(FIN)
"An Act relating to hindering prosecution and to
providing false information or reports to a peace
officer."
CSSB 26(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with
"no recommendation" and a fiscal impact note by
the Department of Public Safety; a fiscal impact
note by the Department of Corrections; a zero
fiscal note by the Department of Public Safety;
and a zero fiscal note by the Department of Law.
CSSB 34(FIN)
"An Act relating to tattooing, body piercing, and
ear piercing; relating to other occupations
regulated by the Board of Barbers and
Hairdressers; relating to fees charged by the
Board of Barbers and Hairdressers; and providing
for an effective date."
SB 34(FIN) was heard and HELD in Committee for
further consideration.
CSSB 73(FIN)
"An Act relating to assisted living homes; and
providing for an effective date."
CSSB 73(FIN) was heard and HELD in Committee for
further consideration.
SB 204 "An Act extending the termination date of the
Alaska Commission on Aging; and providing for an
effective date."
HSB 204 was heard and HELD in Committee for
further consideration.
CSSB 254(HES)
"An Act relating to heirloom certificates of
marriage."
CSSB 254(HES) was REPORTED out of Committee with a
"do pass" recommendation and with a fiscal impact
note by the Department of Health and Social
Services, published 4/13/00.
SB 257 "An Act relating to notice requirements for
certain final findings concerning the disposal of
an interest in state land or resources for oil and
gas; relating to administrative appeals and
petitions for reconsideration of decisions of the
Department of Natural Resources; and providing for
an effective date."
SB 257 was REPORTED out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and a zero fiscal note by the
Department of Natural Resources, published 2/9/00.
CSSB 261(FIN)
"An Act relating to needle stick and sharps injury
protections and the use of safe needles by health
care facilities and health care professionals;
relating to the vaccination of health care workers
against diseases transmitted by bloodborne
pathogens; and providing for an effective date."
CSSB 261(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a
"do pass" recommendation and with three zero
fiscal notes: Department of Labor and Workforce
Development, Department of Corrections and
Department of Health and Social Services.
CSSB 283(RES)
"An Act establishing the shore fisheries
development lease program account and the timber
receipts account; relating to the accounting for
and appropriation of revenue from the state land
disposal program, the shore fisheries development
lease program, and the state timber disposal
program; and providing for an effective date."
CSSB 283(RES) was REPORTED out of Committee with a
"do pass" recommendation and with two fiscal
impact note by the Department of Natural
Resources, published 3/31/00.
SJR 27 am Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the
State of Alaska relating to revisions of the state
constitution and providing that a court may not
change language of a proposed constitutional
amendment or revision.
SJR 27 am was REPORTED out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and with a fiscal impact note by
the Office of the Governor, published 1/24/00.
HCR 23 Suspending Rules 24©, 35, 41(b), and 42(e),
Uniform Rules of the Alaska State Legislature,
concerning Senate Joint Resolution No. 27,
proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the
State of Alaska concerning revisions of the state
constitution and a court's power with respect to
constitutional amendments and revisions.
HCR 23 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
HCR 25 Suspending Rules 24©, 35, 41(b), and 42(e),
Uniform Rules of the Alaska State Legislature,
concerning Senate Bill No. 204, relating to the
Alaska Commission on Aging.
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 27 am
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State
of Alaska relating to revisions of the state
constitution and providing that a court may not change
language of a proposed constitutional amendment or
revision.
Co-Chair Therriault provided members with proposed committee
substitute, work draft 1-LS0078\N, 4/11/00 (copy on file).
SENATOR DAVE DONLEY, SPONSOR spoke in support of the
legislation. He noted that SJR 27 amends Article XIII, sec.
1 of the Alaska State Constitution by making it possible for
the legislature to place constitutional revisions as well
as amendments before Alaskans for a vote. SJR 27 also adds a
new section to Article XIII, which would prohibit a court
from changing the wording of constitutional amendments or
revisions proposed by the legislature or constitutional
convention.
Senator Donley maintained that the legislation corrects the
problem created by Bess v. Ulmer. The Bess case was a
challenge to the proposed constitutional amendment on the
definition of marriage, approved in 1998. On appeal the
Supreme Court ruled that the legislature is not able to do
revisions to the Constitution and adopted a test for
revisions. He maintained that the test of "revision" is
onerous. He observed that the state constitutional
convention debated the definition of revision to no avail.
Senator Donley noted that the Court based its decision in
part on a initiative to the state of California's
Constitution. He argued that the California initiative was
more substantial. The Court removed a legislatively proposed
constitutional amendment from the ballot on the Amendment to
Limit Prisoners' Rights and changed the wording of the
Definition of Marriage Amendment. He maintained that there
is no legal precedent for a court to modify language of a
constitutional amendment proposed by elected legislators
before it was placed on the ballot for a vote of the people.
He maintained that the court should not propose
constitutional amendments.
The proposed committee substitute would allow the
legislature to do revisions, but revisions would have to be
on a single subject. This would be consistent with the
existing constitutional provision for legislation.
Senator Donley provided members with a memorandum, Analysis
of Bess v. Ulmer - Revisions vs. Amendments dated 4/11/00
from legislative counsel (copy on file). He quoted page 7.
Senator Donley observed that there have been other
constitutional amendments, which would not have met the Bess
test. He maintained that the right to privacy and limited
entry amendments would have failed the Bess test. He added
that the question of subsistence would also fail under the
Bess test because of the number of provisions affected under
the Constitution, even though it is a single subject. He
concluded that without the legislation everything done on
the constitutional realm comes into question.
Vice Chair Bunde MOVED to ADOPT work draft 1-LS0078\N,
4/11/00. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
DALE BONDURANT, KENAI testified via teleconference in
opposition to the legislation. He maintained that
constitutional amendments are affected by politics. He
maintained that court are not as subject to political
pressures. There are laws that are not judicially valid. He
suggested that judicial comments on the constitutionality be
open. Citizens want to know how the judicial branch views
constitutional amendments. He maintained that no one is
above the law, not even the legislature.
Representative Phillips questioned if it is appropriate for
the courts to decide what question goes on the ballot. Mr.
Bondurant responded that the public would have to suffer
unconstitutional amendments if the courts are not allowed to
comment.
Representative Grussendorf observed that the court is
concerned with the curtailing of rights not the expansion of
rights. The prisoners' rights were being curtailed by the
amendment.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned if an expansion that touches
on many aspects of the Constitution would be allowed.
Representative Grussendorf observed that there would not be
a challenge unless rights were reduced.
Senator Donley maintained that the legislation does not take
away the court's right to address the issue. The court would
not have the right to modify the language, but they could
take the amendment off the ballot. He observed that limited
entry amendment took rights away from the general population
and gave them to a limited number of Alaskans. Subsistence
also takes rights away from the general population and gives
a higher priority to other Alaskans. These would be called
into questioned by the criteria under Bess.
Vice Chair Bunde summarized that the legislation creates an
all or nothing situation. The court could not chose bits and
pieces of a constitutional question to put on the ballot. He
maintained that the expansion of rights for one group often
results in the loss of rights by others.
Senator Donley responded that the legislation would allow
the Court to chose items that would be allowed on a ballot.
He added that single subject criteria is easier to
understand than a qualitative or quantitative standard. A
single subject standard is a logical expansion to narrow the
problem of amendment versus revision.
Representative Grussendorf referred to limited entry. He
observed that sustained yield and protection of the resource
were also involved.
Representative Austerman MOVED to report HCS SJR 27 (FIN)
out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There
being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
SJR 27 am was REPORTED out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and with a fiscal impact note by the Office
of the Governor, published 1/24/00.
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 23
Suspending Rules 24©, 35, 41(b), and 42(e), Uniform
Rules of the Alaska State Legislature, concerning
Senate Joint Resolution No. 27, proposing an amendment
to the Constitution of the State of Alaska concerning
revisions of the state constitution and a court's power
with respect to constitutional amendments and
revisions.
Co-Chair Therriault explained that the resolution would not
be needed since the title of SJR 27 would not be changed by
the committee substitute.
HCR 23 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 283(RES)
"An Act establishing the shore fisheries development
lease program account and the timber receipts account;
relating to the accounting for and appropriation of
revenue from the state land disposal program, the shore
fisheries development lease program, and the state
timber disposal program; and providing for an effective
date."
BOB LOEFFLER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF MINING, LAND AND WATER,
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES testified in support of the
legislation. The legislation creates a land disposal income
fund, which would be a statutory designated program receipt
fund for the purpose of land disposal. The legislation also
creates separate funds for shore fisheries and timber
harvest receipts. The income fund would allow income
generated from the 1,200 leases to supply a level of
services that the fisherman and department believe are
deserved, to run the program. A moderate land disposal
program would be funded from revenues generated by land
disposals. The income would pay for the cost and allow
programs to be stabilized. The same would apply to the
timber harvest program.
In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr.
Loeffler observed that the shore fisheries program was cut
from $300 to $100 thousand dollars. This was not enough to
run the program. Income from the leases would provide $300
thousand dollars to run the program.
In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr.
Loeffler observed that the department recommended a self-
executing registration process to deal with budget
reductions. The fisherman objected to the self-executing
registration process and pointed out that it was a
reductions of services below the revenues from the leases.
SANDY UMLAUF, PRESIDENT, UGASHIK SET NETTER ASSOCIATION,
Kenai testified via teleconference in support of the
legislation. She observed the Association represents
approximately 65 set net permits. The legislation reinstates
a self-sustaining, income producing program that offers
organization and stability for statewide shore fish leases
and provides a means for conflict resolution. The program
has an income of $350 thousand dollars from leases and a
cost of $300 thousand dollars. She observed that set net
sites are frequently hotly contested.
KARL KIRCHER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, KENAI PENINSULA
FISHERMAN'S ASSOCIATION, KENAI testified via teleconference
in support of SB 283. He observed that AS 38.05 stipulates
that the director shall establish a reasonable rent
structure for shore fishing development leases equal to the
administrative cost for processing the leasehold
application. He observed that the program has generated more
revenue than it has cost to operate the program since 1993.
He stressed that fees should be reduced if the level of
service is reduced. He spoke against the self-executing
registration.
PAUL SHADURA, KENAI testified via teleconference in support
of section 3 of SB 283. His family has set netted for over
60 years.
ROGER KUCHENBECKER, MATSU testified via teleconference in
support of the legislation. He has set-netted for 13 years.
He spoke in support of full funding of the shore fisheries
lease program. He stressed that the program more than pays
for itself.
DAN CHALLUP, KACHEMAK BAY SALMON PRODUCERS COOPERATIVE,
HOMER testified via teleconference in support of the
legislation. He hoped that the legislation would protect the
program from future budget reductions.
In response to a question by Vice Chair Bunde, Mr. Loeffler
stated that the program is limited to anyone who owns a
valid limited entry permit.
In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr.
Loeffler explained that there is no timber program fiscal
note. He noted that the timber program has an erratic
history and is difficult to predict.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CSSB 283(RES) out of
Committee with the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSSB 283(RES) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with two fiscal impact note by the
Department of Natural Resources, published 3/31/00.
SENATE BILL NO. 257
"An Act relating to notice requirements for certain
final findings concerning the disposal of an interest
in state land or resources for oil and gas; relating to
administrative appeals and petitions for
reconsideration of decisions of the Department of
Natural Resources; and providing for an effective
date."
BOB LOEFFLER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF MINING, LAND AND WATER,
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES testified in support of the
legislation. The legislation creates a uniform appeals
process for the Department of Natural Resources and solves a
technical problem that is unique to public notice of oil and
gas sales. He explained that different laws passed at
different times have created a variety of appeal schedules.
He gave examples of appeal timelines, which vary from 15 to
30 days. The appeal process would be uniform with a 20-day
deadline. The legislation would also delete the requirement
to send a second notice to notify that a third notice is
close at hand.
Representative Grussendorf clarified that only one appeal
can be made to the commissioner or the department.
Mr. Loeffler noted that disposals would retain the status
quo. Other permits can be appealed up to three times under
the present system. Appeals are allowed to the director,
then the commissioner and then to the commissioner again.
Representative Grussendorf questioned if one appeal is
sufficient. Mr. Loeffler responded that multiple appeals do
not add value. He maintained that multiple appeals frustrate
the applicant.
Representative Phillips spoke in support of the legislation
and maintained that it would make government more efficient.
Mr. Loeffler explained that the division director makes the
decision. All decisions are appealed to the commissioner.
The commissioner's decision can be reconsidered under the
same schedule. Further disputes go to court.
(TAPE CHANGE, HFC 00 - 123, SIDE 2)
Representative Foster MOVED to report SB 257 out of
Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered. There being NO OBJECTION, it
was so ordered.
SB 257 was REPORTED out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and a zero fiscal note by the Department of
Natural Resources, published 2/9/00.
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 26 (FIN)
"An Act relating to hindering prosecution and to
providing false information or reports to a peace
officer."
MICHAEL PAULEY, STAFF, SENATOR LEMAN testified in support of
the legislation. A detective in the Anchorage Police
Department suggested the legislation as a useful tool for
law enforcement and prosecutors to counteract those who use
deception to thwart the criminal justice system. He observed
that the Alaska State Troopers Alaska Association of Chiefs
of Police, the Alaska Peace Officers Association, and
Victims for Justice support the legislation.
Mr. Pauley asserted that, in the criminal justice context,
people typically employ deception in two ways: they lie to
protect another person who has committed a crime, or they
lie to protect themselves. The first situation of lying to
protect another is addressed in section 1 of the bill;
section 2 addresses the issue of lying to protect oneself.
Mr. Pauley reviewed the legislation by section. He noted
that section 1 makes it a crime to hinder prosecution by
rendering assistance to another person who has committed a
crime, with the intention of hindering the apprehension,
prosecution, conviction, or punishment of the other person.
The definition of "rendering assistance to another" includes
using deception to prevent or obstruct the discovery or
apprehension of that person. Under current statutes it would
be a crime if a person lies to a police officer in order to
stop another person who has committed a crime from being
apprehended.
Mr. Pauley explained that this statute applies only if a
person lies to prevent apprehension of a person who has
committed a crime that is punishable by imprisonment of
greater than 90 days. This means that class B misdemeanors
are not covered under existing law. class B misdemeanors
include such offenses as disorderly conduct, harassment,
misconduct involving weapons in the fifth degree, and
criminal mischief in the fourth degree. Although these
crimes are not the most serious offenses on the books, they
do consume a significant amount of time and resources of
both law enforcement agencies and the court system. It is
the Sponsor's view that it is not appropriate for the
statute to sanction deception under these circumstances.
Senate Bill 26 amends the existing law to applies to all
crimes, including class B misdemeanors.
Section 2 of SB 26 amends current statute on making false
reports (AS 11 .56.800). Under existing law, it is a crime
to give false information to a police officer with the
intent of implicating another in a crime. It is also a crime
to give a false report to police that a crime has occurred
or is about to occur. The legislation adds an additional
provision, stating that it is a crime to provide false
identity information to a peace officer while the person is
under arrest, detention, or investigation for a crime, or
while the person is being served with an arrest warrant of
being issued a citation.
Mr. Pauley observed that according to law enforcement
personnel, false identity information can be a significant
impediment to successful investigations and prosecutions.
The law should not sanction this type of behavior.
ANNE CARPENETI, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, LEGAL SERVICES
SECTION, CRIMINAL DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW noted that
concerns by the department have been addressed and that the
Department of Law supports the legislation in its present
form.
Representative Foster questioned if there are any provisions
that would preclude someone from having to give testimony,
such as in the case of a spouse testifying against a spouse.
Ms. Carpeneti noted that a spousal exception is contained
under another statute and explained that the legislation
addresses the person himself or herself that is under
investigation or arrest for a crime from giving false
information.
In response to a question by Representative Foster, Ms.
Carpeneti explained that it is against the law to hinder the
apprehension of a person who has committed a misdemeanor.
Representative Foster concluded that it would be better to
say nothing rather than lie.
Co-Chair Therriault observed that the legislation would
address the issue of a person lying about their identity to
a process server.
In response to questions regarding a situation where a
person lies about the presence of their spouse, Mr. Pauley
referred to AS 11.56.770:
(a) A person commits the crime of hindering prosecution
in the first degree if the person renders assistance to
a person who has committed a crime punishable as a
felony with intent to
(1) hinder the apprehension, prosecution, conviction, or
punishment of that person; or
(2) assist that person in profiting or benefiting from
the commission of the crime.
(b) For purposes of this section, a person "renders
assistance" to another if the person
(1) harbors or conceals the other person;
Mr. Pauley observed that the statute requires demonstration
of intent. Ms. Carpeneti added that the statue includes
harboring or concealing another person.
Co-Chair Therriault noted that this provision is under the
existing law. The legislation would not change the elements
of defense in any other way.
Representative Grussendorf questioned how intimidation would
affect the provision. Ms. Carpeneti observed that coercion
would be a defense; the legislation does not change any of
the defenses to hindering prosecution. Representative
Grussendorf questioned if the burden of proof would be with
the defender. Ms. Carpeneti responded that the state would
have to demonstrate that there was intent.
Vice Chair Bunde asked if there were specific cases that led
to the legislation. Mr. Pauley responded that law
enforcement officers contacted the sponsor with concerns
regarding specific cases. He gave an example where a person
was arrested and refused to give his identity. He lied about
his identity in court. Vice Chair Bunde noted that it was
the perpetrator that lied.
Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that many of the Committee's
questions and concerns are with existing law and not with
the application of the law to all misdemeanors.
Vice Chair Bunde MOVED to report CSSB 26 (FIN) out of
Committee with the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSSB 26(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with "no
recommendation" and a fiscal impact note by the Department
of Public Safety; a fiscal impact note by the Department of
Corrections; a zero fiscal note by the Department of Public
Safety; and a zero fiscal note by the Department of Law.
SENATE BILL NO. 204
"An Act extending the termination date of the Alaska
Commission on Aging; and providing for an effective
date."
SHARON CLARK, STAFF, SENATOR MILLER testified in support of
SB 204, on behalf of the sponsor Senator Leman. She observed
that SB 204 extends the termination date of the Alaska
Commission on Aging. The Alaska Commission on Aging was
first established as a single Planning and Service Area
(PSA) in the Department of Administration, Older Alaskans
Commission, July of 1981 under AS 44.21. As a PSA, the
Commission is the only agency in the state that plans,
funds, and oversees services to seniors statewide. The
Commission's name was changed to the Alaska Commission on
Aging in 1994, (Chapter 131,SLA 1994).
The Commission is authorized to administer and coordinate
state programs for older Alaskans and to administer federal
programs provided under the Older Americans Act, 42 U.S.
Code 300 1-30451, as amended. The provisions of AS 44.21 and
the Older Americans Act establish the Commission's
authority, purpose, and scope of work.
Ms. Clark observed that a special report on the
Department of Administration, Alaska Commission on Aging
(ACA) by the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee,
September 17, 1999 concluded that the expiration date of ACA
should be extended.
Ms. Clark maintained that the ACA has demonstrated that
there is a public need for this commission. According to AS
44.66.010, the Commission is scheduled to expire June,
30,2000. The legislation would extend ACA's expiration date
to June 30,2004.
Ms. Clark noted that the legislation was amended (in the
House HESS committee). She noted that the amendment
separated the Long-Term Care Ombudsman's office from the
Department of Administration and put it in a separate
entity. The sponsor does not oppose the amendment. She noted
that Senator Green expressed concerns, in the Senate Finance
Committee, that the Office of the Long-Term Care Ombudsman
would be under the Department of Administration.
Representative Phillips questioned if there was testimony on
the feasibility of merging the two ombudsman offices. Ms.
Clark stated that there had been discussions with the
sponsor. The issue was not discussed in Committee.
Representative Grussendorf questioned if the Department of
Administration testified on the amendment.
Representative Phillips expressed concern with the amendment
adopted in the House HESS committee. She noted that the
Legislative Council has been downsizing the Office of the
Ombudsman. She noted that the Legislative Council did not
discuss the amendment. Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that
Senator Miller is the chairman of the Legislative Council.
Co-Chair Mulder noted that the Office of Long-Term Care
Ombudsman is federally funded.
JERRY BURNETT, STAFF, SENATOR GREEN provided information on
the amendment adopted in the House HESS Committee. He noted
that Representative Dyson offered the amendment on behalf of
Senator Green. He observed that the Office of the Long-Term
Care Ombudsman would be separate from the legislative
ombudsman.
Co-Chair Therriault read from a letter by Representative
Dyson:
It is not possible for the Director of the Commission
on Aging to neutrally monitor the Long Term Care
Ombudsman who may be investigating actions of that
Director, his/her employees, and colleagues within the
Department of Administration.
Mr. Burnett clarified that there would be two ombudsman
offices with separate staffs. He observed that the Long-Term
Care Ombudsman has a distinct function and that the funding
come from the Older Americans Act. He pointed out that the
provision was discussed with the Department of
Administration, the Executive Director of Legislative
Affairs Agency and the chairman of the Legislative Council.
Representative Grussendorf asked for the Department of
Administration's position on the merger.
JANE DEMINERT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA COMMISSION ON
AGING, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION provided information on
the legislation. She noted that the Commission has been in
existence for many years. The Commission is a grant-making
agency and has been involved in educational issues affecting
older Alaskans. The Commission is also involved in the
operation of the Office of Long-Term Care Ombudsman. The
Older American's Act provides that each state shall have a
Long-Term Care Ombudsman. The Long-Term Care Ombudsman is an
advocate for people in long-term care and conducts
investigations regarding the quality of care or allegations
of abuse and neglect.
Ms. Deminert observed that there are different
organizational structures to conduct the function. The
Commission has done an extensive amount of structuring in
its by laws to accommodate the function. She acknowledged
that there are several viable models to conduct the
function. If the function were transferred it would maintain
its current staff: one paralegal II and a clerk. The office
would continue to be in Anchorage. She did not know if it
would be physically relocated. There would not be a
significant change in the way the office is operated. A
reimbursable services agreement would occur for the on-going
operation of the office. She observed that the Commission is
closing in on the final stage for a long-term care
ombudsman. She recommended that their search be halted if
the legislation goes forward. The position is currently a
range 20 within the state personnel system. She acknowledged
that the position would also be effective under the
Legislative Budget and Audit Committee.
Representative Grussendorf observed that the change was not
requested by the Commission and questioned where the office
would be most effective. Ms. Deminert affirmed that it is a
new development, but noted that it was discussed in the
previous session. She added that the function is distinct
from the traditional governmental ombudsman. She felt that
there would be a learning curve and investment would need to
be made by the new oversight group.
ALISON ELGEE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION provided information on the legislation. The
LBA audit pointed out that housing of the position in the
Department of Administration could be perceived as a
conflict of interest. The Commission could not find an
entity that would voluntarily accept placement of the
office. The Commission adopted bylaws to exclude those on
the Commission that have association with pioneer home
programs from direct oversight of the ombudsman. She
reiterated that there would be a heavy learning curve with
transfer of the function, but added that the department
understands the perceived conflict of interest and would be
happy to see the function externally located.
Vice Chair Bunde spoke in support of the legislation and
noted that concerned constituents have contacted him.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned if the Legislative Council
membership supported the move.
Ms. Clark did not believe that discussions occurred with the
current Council. Discussions did occur with the previous
chair, Senator Miller. Senator Miller did not express
objections.
MARIE DARLIN, AARP, JUNEAU testified in support of the
legislation and extension of the Commission on Aging.
HB 204 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 254(HES)
"An Act relating to heirloom certificates of marriage."
ELMER LINDSTROM, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
SOCIAL SERVICES testified in support of the legislation. He
explained that legislation was enacted to allow the issuance
of heirloom birth certificates. That program has been quite
successful and has generated thousands of dollars for the
Alaska Children's Trust. He observed that SB 254 expands the
program to allow the sale of heirloom marriage certificates.
Revenue from the sale of the certificates would be available
to the legislature for appropriation to the Alaska
Children's Trust.
(TAPE CHANGE, HFC 00 - 124, SIDE 1)
Mr. Lindstrom estimated that the sale of certificates would
net $270 thousand dollars in revenue. There is a first year
operating cost of $55 thousand dollars.
Vice Chair Bunde questioned why the money would go into the
Children's Trust rather than martial counseling.
Mr. Lindstrom stated that the legislation was viewed as an
opportunity to generate additional revenues for the
Children's Trust. He pointed out that purchase of the more
expensive heirloom certificates is not required.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned why "the state registrar
shall issue" was added on page 1, line 6. Mr. Lindstrom
responded that the language notes that if someone requests
the certificate that it shall be issued.
In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr.
Lindstrom noted the legislation was modeled on the birth
certificate statute.
AL ZANGRI, STATE REGISTRAR, CHIEF, BUREAU VITAL STATISTICS,
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION provided information on the
legislation. He noted that the language mirrors exactly the
birth certificate language and that both use the word
"shall". Approximately $50 thousand dollars has been
generated from the heirloom birth certificates. The money
has been set aside for deposit into the Alaska Children's
Trust. Money has been deposited into the Trust on a regular
basis from the heirloom birth certificates.
Representative Phillips echoed concerns by Vice Chair Bunde.
Co-Chair Therriault reviewed the fiscal notes.
Vice Chair Bunde questioned why there would not be a payback
from the Trust for the costs. Co-Chair Therriault clarified
that the fiscal note would not be changed. He observed that
the legislation does generate program receipts.
Mr. Lindstrom explained that $270 dollars in program
receipts would be generated. Approximately $55 thousand
dollars of the program receipts would be necessary to
establish the program. The legislation would be revenue
neutral. Co-Chair Therriault added that the cost of the
program would be $47.7 thousand dollars after the initial
year.
Vice Chair Bunde MOVED to report CSSB 254(HES) out of
Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSSB 254(HES) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with a fiscal impact note by the
Department of Health and Social Services, published 4/13/00.
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 34(FIN)
"An Act relating to tattooing, body piercing, and ear
piercing; relating to other occupations regulated by
the Board of Barbers and Hairdressers; relating to fees
charged by the Board of Barbers and Hairdressers; and
providing for an effective date."
SENATOR JOHNNY ELLIS, SPONSOR testified in support. He
offered the legislation on behalf of a constituent whose
child was injured from body piercing that was not done in a
sanitary manner. The state of Alaska is the only state in
the union that does not license the procedure. Injured
clients have no recourse. There can be serious public health
implications. National standards were used to craft the
legislation. The Division of Occupational Licensing will
license and test. The Department of Environmental
Conservation, Division of Public Health will handle
inspections.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned the level of support from
industry. Senator Ellis observed that there is support from
industry.
Representative G. Davis spoke in support of the legislation.
Senator Ellis explained that the legislation was expanded to
include permanent cosmetics at the request of a Fairbanks
practitioner. Permanent cosmetics are used to paint
permanent eyebrows on burn victims.
Vice Chair Bunde spoke in support of the legislation. He
pointed out that serious illnesses can result from unsafe
practices. Senator Ellis observed that the Hepatitis C
Coalition supports the legislation.
In response to a question by Representative Phillips,
Senator Ellis expressed support for the House Labor and
Commerce version of SB 34. Parental permission was added to
the legislation.
DAINA RHOADES, STAFF, SENATOR JOHNNY ELLIS responded to a
questioned by Representative Grussendorf. Temporary shop
license could be used to operate temporary sites such as the
Palmer Fair. Temporary shops would be inspected by the
Department of Environmental Conservation and would have to
comply with regulation requirements. The legislation does
not address animals.
Co-Chair Therriault referenced page 13, line 30. The
legislation distinguishes between ear piercing and piercing
of body parts. Senator Ellis noted that shops that do ear
piercing would not be required to go through an
apprenticeship and testing. The Department of Environmental
Conservation would form regulations covering the guns used
in ear piercing. She emphasized that greater oversight is
required when other body parts are pierced.
Co-Chair Therriault asked if the Department of Environmental
Conservation would charge the fees and questioned the cost
of travel.
JANICE ADAIR, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH,
DEC provided information on the fiscal cost. She observed
that there are approximately 10 tattoo parlors. No travel
costs have been included. Ear piercing would only require
regulations. Those regulations would cover basic sanitation
issues. She added that there would be a fiscal note to cover
the cost of locating ear-piercing locations. There are 675
ear-piercing establishments in the State.
Co-Chair Therriault asked if there was a problem with ear
piercing. Ms. Rhoades replied that most establishments do
not like the guns. There is a growing concern that the
needles on the guns are dangerous. National standards
indicate that the guns are okay. Guns could be inspected
under the regulations. She urged that the provision be
retained and noted that many people are concerned about
continued use of ear piercing guns. Senator Ellis agreed
that it would be good to have some review regarding the use
of ear piercing guns.
Ms. Adair clarified that the occupational licensing fee
would cover the oversight of the industry. Food inspectors
would be used for the inspections.
In response to a question by Vice Chair Bunde, Senator Ellis
explained that the regulation would not apply to
noncommercial practices. Vice Chair Bunde questioned if
Native practices, which are noncommercial but involve one
person tattooing another, would be covered under the
legislation. Senator Ellis thought that the tattooing would
have to be done in a safe and sanitary way, but suggested
that the Board could address the issue.
KENDALL THOMAS, ALASKA HEPATITIS C COALITION, ANCHORAGE
testified via teleconference in support.
SB 34 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
CS FOR SENATE BILL 261(FIN)
"An Act relating to needle stick and sharps injury
protections and the use of safe needles by health care
facilities and health care professionals; relating to
the vaccination of health care workers against diseases
transmitted by bloodborne pathogens; and providing for
an effective date."
SENATOR KIM ELTON, SPONSOR testified in support of the
legislation. He noted that the legislation brings needed
protection to health care workers from accidental needle
stick injuries. There are between 600,000 and a million
accidental sticks a year. The affect of these sticks is that
there have been 50,000 - 60,000 cases of serious disease
contracted by health care workers over the last decade. On
the average, at least one health care worker per week is
exposed to HIV. Health care workers are at risk from
Hepatitis C contracted from accidental sticks. Health care
workers are four times more likely than a police officer to
be injured on the job. There are a number of safe needle
devices that could reduce this risk.
Senator Elton observed that the bill requires an evaluation
of safe needle devices. Management working with front line
health workers, like nurses would evaluate the devices. The
use of safe needles would be required with a few exceptions:
devices would not be required if it were demonstrated that
they would jeopardize the safety or care to the patient and
if the provider can demonstrate that the safety device is
not more affective in preventing accidental needle stick
exposures. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) requires all facilities to use safe needle devices.
Senator Elton explained the difference between the bill and
the OSHA requirements. The legislation sets up an accidental
sharp needle injury log, which would allow health facilities
to identify accidental sticks. The legislation would also
require the involvement of front line health workers in
evaluating the devices.
Senator Elton pointed out that the legislation was amended
to exempt facilities or employers with fewer than 25
employees. The employers would still have to use safe needle
devices because of the OSHA requirement, but they would not
be required to set up an evaluation committee and maintain a
log.
In response to a question by Vice Chair Bunde, Senator Elton
observed that the log requirement was based on practices of
other states. The intent is to maintain a log of the
critical points for accidental needle sticks in order to
determine the action of the health facility in response to
sticks. This would help to further advances in health care.
Co-Chair Mulder expressed concern that the Department of
Labor and Workforce Development would have authority to
establish regulations for training and education. Senator
Elton noted that there is a zero fiscal note and observed
that the Department of Labor and Workforce Development would
collect information.
AL DWYER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS AND SAFETY,
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT clarified that
the they are federal requirements. He did not anticipate
additional regulations. The bill clarifies federal
requirements that are enforced by the department.
Representative Phillips expressed concern with the exemption
for employers with less than 25 employees.
Senator Elton noted that the change was made in the Senate
Finance Committee. The exemption would not affect the use of
safe needle devices because employers would still be
required by OSHA to use safe needle devices. The employers
would not be required to set up an evaluation committee with
frontline health care workers or maintain a log.
In response to a question by Representative Foster, Senator
Elton acknowledged that tired health care workers are
responsible for many of the accidental sticks that they
receive. He pointed out that the devices are self-
retracting. Problems also occur with bedding where needles
may have been lost.
Senator Elton stated that there are zero fiscal notes
reflecting the fact that the devices are already required
under OSHA.
ANGIE SCHMITZ, STAFF, SENATOR ELTON provided information on
the fiscal notes. She observed that there were three zero
fiscal notes: Department of Labor and Workforce Development,
Department of Corrections and Department of Health and
Social Services.
Representative Foster MOVED to report CSSB 261(FIN) out of
Committee with the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO
OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSSB 261(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with three zero fiscal notes: Department
of Labor and Workforce Development, Department of
Corrections and Department of Health and Social Services.
(TAPE CHANGE, HFC 00 - 124, SIDE 2)
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 73(FIN)
"An Act relating to assisted living homes; and
providing for an effective date."
SHARON CLARK, STAFF, SENATOR MILLER testified in support of
the legislation, on behalf of the sponsor. She observed that
the State of Alaska with its scattered population represents
a unique challenge to provide services to residents who need
assisted living supports. The intent of this bill is to
provide good health care for long-term care residents in
assisted living homes. While the term Assisted Living in
Alaska includes smaller and larger facilities, the primary
focus is on smaller facilities (15 beds or less.) Assisted
living homes, which were formerly called adult foster care
homes, provide a cost effective alternative to institutional
care. The program is regulated by the old general assistance
regulations, which need to be revisited and updated to be in
line with the standard of care that is practiced by the
other assisted living programs.
The rate was established in 1983 at $35 dollars a day. The
Alaska Rate Study Report completed December 1998 found that
the value of $35 dollars in 1983 would be equal to $68.30 in
1998 dollars. The rate study concludes that the general
relief rate be increased by $38.31.
Ms. Clark reiterated that the purpose and intent of the
legislation was to increase the daily rate paid to the "mom
and pop" (15 beds and less) facilities by the state for the
vulnerable adults that are unable to provide safely for
their own medical, emotional and personal care needs. She
noted that the original intent by Senator Miller was to
increase the base rate from $34.50 dollars to $70.00 dollars
per day, based on individual care needs. Senator Miller
acknowledged that the increase to $70 dollars was not
supportable with the current budget. He therefore supports a
base rate of $42.25 dollars a day the first year and $51.00
dollars a day for the second and following years. This would
include a geographical cost of living differential.
Ms. Clark observed that Senator Miller has a personal
interest in the legislation as the result of the care of his
father.
Ms. Clark referred to a report published by the from the
Alaska Commission on Aging "Alaska Seniors', Living Longer,
Growing Strong" February 1998. "Alaska is second in the
nation in a proportional growth of our senior population-
with a 42% increase in people age 65+ in only 6 years (1990-
1996... Equally impressive is the anticipated long-term
growth of Alaska Senior population. In 1980, there were 11,
547 people over the age of 65. Using moderated growth
projections, population experts agree this number may reach
80,927 by the year 2015. This is a cost of 600% increase in
only 35 years."
Ms. Clark maintained that caregivers cannot afford to remain
in business. She questioned how care would be given to
Alaska's seniors. Nursing homes and hospitals cost over $300
dollars a day. She stressed that an increase in the rate
would keep people in their own communities and in smaller
homes.
Representative Phillips noted that the rate was increased to
$75 dollars in the House HESS Committee. Ms. Clark stated
that the sponsor supports the increase.
Co-Chair Therriault observed that the issue is the overall
cost. The Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority will cover a
portion for the first two years. The Trust indicated that
they would cover an additional year at a smaller amount.
Representative Phillips observed that the Trust and the
Division of Mental Health have requested in the fiscal note
that the payment be increased to $100 dollars.
DWIGHT BECKER, PROGRAM COORDINATOR, DIVISION OF SENIOR
SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, ANCHORAGE provided
information on the legislation. He responded to a question
by Vice Chair Bunde. He agreed that closer of the "mom and
pop" organizations would result in increased state support
and cost.
KAY BURROWS, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF SENIOR SERVICES,
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION ANCHORAGE testified via
teleconference in support of the legislation. She stressed
the need for small assisted living homes to receive an
increased rate.
ALISON ELGEE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION testified in support of the legislation. The
legislation impacts both the Division of Senior Citizens and
Division of Mental Health clientele. General relief payments
do not go to every assisted living client. Personal
resources are offset. The department also looks at other
forms of public assistance and waivers.
Vice Chair Bunde questioned the impact of the loss of small
assisted living homes.
Ms. Elgee responded that the information was not currently
available. She clarified that the concern is that the
existing assisted living providers would refuse to accept
general relief clients. These clients are vulnerable and
subject to abuse. More expensive alternatives would be
required if they were not cared for by the smaller private
providers. Assisted living homes cost approximately $70
dollars a day versus $300 dollars a day in a nursing home.
Not all of the placements would be eligible for nursing home
assistance. She explained that the Department of
Administration initiated a study in response to complaints
that the rates ($35 dollars a day) were insufficient. She
explained that the 1998 study identified a cost of $70
dollars a day. Individuals in assisted living are allowed to
keep $75 to $100 dollars a day in personal needs allowance
before the department offsets the cost.
Vice Chair Bunde questioned if people could be feed for $35
dollars a day, let alone be cared for at that rate.
SB 73 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|