03/15/2001 03:05 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES
STANDING COMMITTEE
March 15, 2001
3:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Fred Dyson, Chair
Representative Peggy Wilson, Vice Chair
Representative John Coghill
Representative Vic Kohring
Representative Sharon Cissna
Representative Reggie Joule
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Gary Stevens
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 114
"An Act relating to abuse of inhalants."
- MOVED CSHB 114(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 54
"An Act relating to reimbursement of student loans; and
providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 54(EDU) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 124
"An Act prohibiting nursing facilities and assisted living homes
from employing or allowing access by persons with certain
criminal backgrounds, with exceptions."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 114
SHORT TITLE:INHALANT ABUSE
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)KAPSNER
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/07/01 0263 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
02/07/01 0263 (H) HES, JUD, FIN
02/21/01 0392 (H) COSPONSOR(S): STEVENS
02/27/01 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
02/27/01 (H) Heard & Held
02/27/01 (H) MINUTE(HES)
02/28/01 0473 (H) COSPONSOR(S): MURKOWSKI
03/01/01 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/01/01 (H) Heard & Held
03/01/01 (H) MINUTE(HES)
03/07/01 0501 (H) COSPONSOR(S): FATE, DYSON
03/09/01 0529 (H) COSPONSOR(S): CISSNA, JOULE,
MEYER
03/15/01 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 54
SHORT TITLE:STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)DAVIES
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/10/01 0055 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/10/01 0055 (H) EDU, HES, FIN
01/12/01 0074 (H) COSPONSOR(S): KERTTULA
01/17/01 (H) EDU AT 9:00 AM HOUSE FINANCE
519
01/17/01 (H) MINUTE(EDU)
01/31/01 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
01/31/01 (H) Heard & Held
01/31/01 (H) MINUTE(EDU)
02/07/01 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/07/01 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
02/14/01 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/14/01 (H) Moved CSHB 54(EDU) Out of
Committee
02/14/01 (H) MINUTE(EDU)
02/16/01 0342 (H) EDU RPT CS(EDU) NT 2DP 1DNP
4NR
02/16/01 0342 (H) DP: JOULE, GUESS; DNP:
WILSON;
02/16/01 0342 (H) NR: PORTER, GREEN, STEVENS,
BUNDE
02/16/01 0342 (H) FN1: (EED)
03/15/01 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 124
SHORT TITLE: NURS.HOME/ASSISTED LIV. EMPLOYEES/VISITOR
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)HALCRO
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/09/01 0282 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
02/09/01 0282 (H) HES, JUD
02/09/01 0282 (H) REFERRED TO HES
03/07/01 0501 (H) COSPONSOR(S): DYSON
03/15/01 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE MARY KAPSNER
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 424
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 114.
ROBERT BUTTCANE, Legislative Administrative Liaison
Division of Juvenile Justice
Department of Health & Social Services
PO Box 110635
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 114.
THERESA TANOURY, Director
Division of Family & youth Services
Department of Health & Social Services
PO Box 110630
Juneau Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 114.
BLAIR McCUNE, Deputy Director
Public Defender Agency
Department of Administration
900 West 5th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 114.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 415
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 54.
DARRELL HARGRAVES, Executive Director
Alaska Council of School Administrators
326 4th Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 54.
DIANE BARRANS, Executive Director
Postsecondary Education Commission
Department of Education and Early Development
3030 Vintage Boulevard
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 54.
JOSEPH HARDENBROOK, Student
University of Alaska Fairbanks
(No address provided)
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 54.
REPRESENTATIVE ANDREW HALCRO
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 414
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 124.
ALISON ELGEE, Deputy Commissioner
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Administration
PO Box 110200
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 124.
ELMER LINDSTROM, Special Assistant
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Health & Social Services
PO Box 110601
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 124.
GARY WARD, Licensing Coordinator/Assisted Living Homes
Division of Senior Services
Department of Administration
3601 C Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 124.
AILEEN HERRING, Secretary Treasurer
CARING
8821 Emerald Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99502
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 124.
MELVIN RICHARDSON, Community Care Licensing Specialist
Mental Health & Developmental Disabilities
Department of Health & Social Services
701 East Tudor Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 124.
SUZAN ARMSTRONG-SILVA, Long term Care Ombudsman
Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority
Department of Revenue
550 West 7th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 124.
LISA CARESS-BEU, Board Member
CARING
2420 Chinook Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99516
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 124.
SHELBY LARSON, Administrator
Health Facilities Licensing & Certification
Division of Medical Assistance
Department of Health & Social Services
4730 Business Park Boulevard
Anchorage, Alaska 99503
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 124.
RANDALL LORENZ, Staff
to Representative Fred Dyson
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 104
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 124.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 01-28, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR FRED DYSON called the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:05 p.m.
Members present at the call to order were Representatives Dyson,
Wilson, Coghill, Joule, and Cissna. Representative Kohring
joined the meeting as it was in progress.
HB 114-INHALANT ABUSE
CHAIR DYSON announced that the committee would hear HOUSE BILL
NO. 114, "An Act relating to abuse of inhalants." [The bill had
been heard previously, and an amendment had been adopted.]
Number 0069
REPRESENTATIVE MARY KAPSNER, Alaska State Legislature, came
forth as sponsor of HB 114. She stated that HB 114 would make
inhalant abuse a violation punishable by a $300 fine, which
could be waived at the judge's discretion if the person entered
into treatment. She noted that there is a treatment facility
being built in Bethel, scheduled to open August 31, 2001.
Number 0119
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER informed members that she had two
amendments to HB 114. The first broadens the title by
inserting, "and relating to minors under the influence of
alcohol, inhalants, or drugs". She explained that this allows
peace officers to take minors into custody if they have
reasonable cause to believe that [the minors] are under the
influence of alcohol, inhalants, or drugs. The child would then
be returned to the parent or guardian. If [the parent or
guardian] is not available, then [the minor is taken] to a
relative, shelter, program, or suitable facility. [The peace
officer] should promptly notify the Department of Health &
Social Services of those placements. She added that this
permits the peace officer to take a person into custody even if
he or she is intoxicated to the point of incapacitation.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked under what circumstances a person
can be taken into custody by a police officer.
Number 0354
ROBERT BUTTCANE, Legislative Administrative Liaison, Division of
Juvenile Justice (DJJ), Department of Health & Social Services
(DHSS), came forth and responded that there are other examples
where [a minor is taken into custody]. For example, in the case
of a runaway youth, the child would not actually be under
arrest, but the police officer could take custody and bring the
child to a parent or suitable placement to ensure his or her
safety and well-being. He added that, in all probability, the
alternative placement might be an emergency shelter or with a
social worker. He stated that without effecting an arrest,
which triggers a criminal "due process," this would still allow
a peace officer to intervene in order to interrupt the
inappropriate behaviors and get the kid back to the parent.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked whether this type of detainment is
not available to the police officer now.
MR. BUTTCANE answered that that is correct. However, he said,
good law enforcement practice is that when [someone] sees a kid
who is involved in mischievous behaviors that need intervention,
it is not uncommon for a police officer, at present, to be able
to take the child physically to the parent. He remarked that
this [bill] codifies what is good practice in the field and
gives additional authority to law enforcement to actually
intervene in these cases. He added that [DJJ] has tried to find
a way of doing this without "criminalization" whereby the child
wouldn't be taken under arrest but law enforcement would still
be empowered, at the street level, to intervene when necessary
to ameliorate the situation.
Number 0546
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER informed the committee that at a meeting
with three commissioners, the commissioner of the Department of
Public Safety indicated willingness to include this kind of
training for village public safety officers (VPSOs) as well as
troopers, but would like some direction from the legislature.
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE remarked that last week [the committee]
heard about an incident [in Juneau] at a skateboard facility
where the cops said that they didn't have to [intervene]. He
asked if this [amendment] would get [the officers] over there to
take action.
MR. BUTTCANE answered that he would hope so. He stated that
this language would give [police officers] the authority to
intervene and take corrective action to interrupt the inhalant
abuse and then bring the kid to the parent.
Number 0660
THERESA TANOURY, Director, Division of Family & youth Services,
Department of Health & Social Services, came forth and stated
that [the Division of Family & Youth Services] supports [HB 114]
and sees it as a matter of child safety. She stated that
situations that come to the attention of [the Division of Family
& Youth Services] are evaluated with the whole family to see
what types of services are available. She remarked that many
times these are situations in which the family is in crisis.
Number 0707
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE made a motion to adopt Amendment 22-
LS0130\C.2, Luckhaupt, 4/04/01, which read:
Page 1, line 1, following "inhalants":
Insert "; and relating to minors under the
influence of alcohol, inhalants, or drugs"
Page 2, following line 3:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 2. AS 47.10 is amended by adding a new
section to read:
Page 1, line 1, following "inhalants":
Insert "; and relating to minors under the influence
of alcohol, inhalants, or drugs"
Page 2, following line 3:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 2. AS 47.10 is amended by adding a new
section to read:
Sec. 47.10.137. Intoxicated minors. (a) A peace
officer shall take into protective custody a minor who
the peace officer has reasonable cause to believe is
under the influence of alcohol, inhalants, or drugs if
the minor is not otherwise subject to arrest or
detention.
(b) A peace officer taking into protective custody a
minor under (a) of this section shall
(1) return the minor to the minor's parent or
guardian or, if the minor's parent or guardian is
unknown or unavailable, take the child to a relative
or to a shelter, program, or facility suitable for the
minor;
(2) use the procedures provided in AS 47.37.170 for a
person incapacitated by alcohol, inhalants, or drugs
if the minor appears to be incapacitated, and the
peace officer may use the procedures provided in
AS 47.37.170 for an intoxicated person if the minor
appears to be intoxicated; in this paragraph,
"incapacitated by alcohol, inhalants, or drugs" and
"intoxicated person" have the meanings given in
AS 47.37.270;
(3) deliver the minor to another suitable location
and promptly notify the Department of Health and
Social Services of the placement."
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
There being no objection, Amendment 22-LS0130\C.2, Luckhaupt,
4/04/01, was adopted.
Number 0776
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE made a motion to adopt Amendment 22-
LS0130\C.3, Luckhaupt, 3/14/01, which read:
Page 5, lines 26 - 31:
Delete
"(1) "alcoholic or inhalant or drug abuser"
means a person who demonstrates increased tolerance to
alcohol, inhalants, or drugs, who suffers from
withdrawal when alcohol, inhalants, or drugs are not
available, whose habitual lack of self-control
concerning the use of alcohol, inhalants, or drugs
causes significant hazard to the person's health, and
who continues to use alcohol, inhalants, or drugs
despite the adverse consequences;"
Insert
"(1) "alcoholic or inhalant or drug abuser"
means a person who (A) demonstrates increased
tolerance to alcohol, inhalants, or drugs, who suffers
from withdrawal when alcohol, inhalants, or drugs are
not available, whose habitual lack of self-control
concerning the use of alcohol, inhalants, or drugs
causes significant hazard to the person's health, and
who continues to use alcohol, inhalants, or drugs
despite the adverse consequences; or
(B) uses inhalants on a more than occasional
basis, whose use of inhalants has caused significant
adverse consequences to the person's health or whose
use of inhalants is likely to cause a significant
hazard to the person's life or health, and whose use
of inhalants impairs the person's judgment to such a
degree that the person continues to use inhalants
despite the adverse consequences or hazards;"
There being no objection, Amendment 22-LS0130\C.3, Luckhaupt,
3/14/01, was adopted.
Number 0818
BLAIR McCUNE, Deputy Director, Public Defender Agency,
Department of Administration, testified via teleconference. He
stated that the [Public Defender Agency] appreciates the change
in the bill, which no longer makes [inhalant abuse] a
misdemeanor. He remarked that he is familiar with the runaway
youth statute in Title 47, but he is not clear on other
circumstances for a child to be picked up by the police officer.
CHAIR DYSON explained that a peace officer can take a minor into
protective custody if the peace officer has reasonable cause to
believe that he or she is under the influence of alcohol,
inhalants, or drugs.
MR. McCUNE replied that he thinks that is a good idea. He added
that he believes the other alternative is an arrest if it
involves minors consuming alcohol.
Number 0960
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL made a motion to move HB 114 as amended
from committee with individual recommendations and zero fiscal
notes. There being no objection, CSHB 114(HES) moved from the
House Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee.
HB 54-STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS
CHAIR DYSON announced that the committee would hear HOUSE BILL
NO. 54, "An Act relating to reimbursement of student loans; and
providing for an effective date." [Before the committee was
CSHB 54(EDU).]
Number 1011
REPRESENTATIVE JOHN DAVIES, Alaska State Legislature, came forth
as sponsor of HB 54. He stated that HB 54 is an attempt to
encourage students who have taken advantage of the student loan
program by either remaining in the state or returning to the
state to work. He said, "The broader goal is to look at what
seems to be a brain drain that we have in our state, and a
situation where our student loan program unintentionally
encourages that situation to continue." This bill originally
started off as a forgiveness approach; however, in looking at
the fiscal note attached to that, he began to rethink the idea.
He remarked that it seemed possible to restructure the fiscal
impact and still have a substantial amount of the beneficial
aspects of the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES explained that [CSHB 54(EDU)] has now
taken an interest rate reduction approach. After graduation, if
a student either returns to the state or stays in the state and
is employed, he or she would be credited between a .5 percent
and a 1 percent interest rate reduction on his or her loan. He
clarified that this would be in effect as long as the student
stayed in the state.
Number 1210
CHAIR DYSON asked Representative Davies whether it is not that
it will cost the state any money but that the state will make a
little less off the loans.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES replied that it could be looked at in a
variety of ways. He stated that the Student Loan Corporation
has done a good job of managing the program with twin
objectives. One is to put the loan program on a more sound
fiscal structure so that it is like a bank. There would be more
screening of the student loans in the first place to make the
expectation clear that the loans are to be paid off on time. He
stated that this has resulted in a significant reduction in the
default rates. At the same time, by managing the portfolio
wisely, [the Student Loan Corporation] has been able to bring
down the interest rate a little. He remarked that one thing
that he is trying to do is to have [the Student Loan
Corporation] bring down the interest rate a little more rapidly
for those who stay in the state. He explained that this does
cost money and the lower rates have to be subsidized in some
way. The bottom line for that to happen is that under the
current fiscal year the Student Loan Corporation is expected to
pay a dividend to the state in the amount of about $4 million.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES expressed that his fundamental concern is
that the children stay here. One of the advantages of that is
that families tend to stay closer together; if this happens;
there are all sorts of benefits - socially and fiscally.
Number 1362
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL referred to Section 3 concerning the
interest rate being determined by the [Postsecondary Education]
Commission and asked if Representative Davies has anticipated
any kind of a scale on the rate reduction.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES replied that he asked that the calculation
to be done based on either a .5 percent or a 1 percent
[reduction]. He explained that if the typical loan were 8
percent, the reduction of 1 percent would make it a 7 percent
loan.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked if this is given the discretion
based on bonds.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES answered that there wouldn't be any
differential amount. He said that he doesn't want to ask the
Student Loan Corporation to do something that is fiscally
difficult to accomplish.
CHAIR DYSON informed Representative Davies that the committee is
trying to get all of the loan-forgiveness-incentive bills
together at one time in [the House Finance Committee].
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES remarked that the other two [loan
forgiveness bills] are focused on forgiveness [for loans for
teachers] and that [HB 54] is the only one that applies to all
the student loan programs.
Number 1520
DARRELL HARGRAVES, Executive Director, Alaska Council of School
Administrators, came forth to testify on HB 54. He stated that
when the oil revenues first were a big item in this state, many
people thought that the highest and best use of some of that oil
revenue was to educate the population. He remarked that HB 54
will be an encouragement and inducement to get some of that
population that's leaving back into the state. He stated that
it is his opinion that that is a much bigger problem than what
he is hearing discussed. Half a dozen college students that he
knows are suffering severe anxiety about whether they can come
back to Alaska and get the kind of jobs that they are seeing
"out there." Nationwide, legislators and governors, according
to material that he has read, are in a rush to try to encourage
people to come into their school districts to be teachers and
administrators and are offering "exotic" rewards.
MR. HARGRAVES referred to two handouts about the shortage of
teachers and superintendents in Alaska and stated that perhaps
the same thing could be said about other areas. For example, he
mentioned that he had talked to some small contractors around
the Matanuska-Susitna Valley that are asking questions such as:
"Where are the kids that used to graduate who could come on site
with a nail apron and a tool belt and start helping us do house
framing?" He remarked: "It looks to me like we're getting
short of everything but legislators." He concluded that
anything the [committee] could do to look at the shortage of
qualified eligible teachers and school administrators would be
highly commendable.
Number 1883
DIANE BARRANS, Executive Director, Postsecondary Education
Commission, Department of Education and Early Development, came
forth to answer questions on HB 54. She remarked that the
objectives of this legislation are consistent with those of the
[Postsecondary Education Commission] and the Student Loan
Corporation. She said she thinks that in addition to the
incentives for returning or remaining and working in Alaska is
the incentive to complete the credential for which the loan was
borrowed.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked how this is going to affect the
shift from year to year concerning when a loan is given with an
expected contract.
MS. BARRANS answered that it really won't. She explained that
the way the bill is structured this would not necessarily be
written into the contract with the borrowers. In the new
program [the Postsecondary Education Commission] would receive
the fund, from either the general fund or potentially a portion
of the dividend that would be returned to the corporation and
would pay the cost of this reduction. As funds are made
available to the corporation, [the Postsecondary Education
Commission] would make that reduction available to the
qualifying pool of borrowers.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked, given the amount of students who
may take advantage of this, whether there could be a case in
which [the Postsecondary Education Commission] might not be able
to fulfill this obligation.
MS. BARRANS replied that there really isn't, with the way the
bill is constructed. She remarked that Representative Davies
was concerned about not putting the [Student Loan] Corporation
at risk of having a reduction in rating or any other problem in
impairing the ability to issue new bonds. She stated that if
there was no funding available, the benefit would not be paid to
borrowers.
Number 1800
CHAIR DYSON asked whether the student loan is not subsidized by
general fund dollars.
MS. BARRANS said that is correct.
CHAIR DYSON asked whether the student loan just makes a dividend
or contribution to the general fund based on some formula.
MS. BARRANS said that is correct as well.
Number 1827
JOSEPH HARDENBROOK, Student, University of Alaska Fairbanks,
came forth to testify in support of HB 54. He stated that in
1998 George Washington University awarded an honorary degree to
Bill Cosby, who spoke at the commencement exercises, offering
the following ending remarks: "Congratulations. Now get out
there and pay back your student loans." Mr. Hardenbrook said
the student part of the audience was very quiet, while the
parents were laughing and applauding. He stated:
You talked about the sticker shock that you
experienced the first time you saw HB 54 ... There's
quite a few students who experience similar sticker
shock when they get their degree and then receive
their little planning book from Sally Mae telling them
exactly how much they're going to owe every month for
the next 20 or so years.
MR. HARDENBROOK remarked that he knows students who are
graduating $30,000 in debt. He shared that two students, one
who is graduating $20,000 in debt and one who is graduating
$30,000 in debt, got married and greeted the world as "Mr. and
Mrs. Peterson, with $50,000 in debt hanging over their heads."
He said this bill is not going to solve all of those "sticker
shocks," but it is a step in the right direction, it will help
Alaska students to "stick around", and it will help a little bit
with financial planning and making life career choices.
Number 2009
CHAIR DYSON asked if there is a way for the committee to tinker
with the fiscal note to make it clearer.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES responded that there are a number of
different ways to think about how the bill works. He stated
that he did change the mechanism of the bill after the request
of the Student Loan Corporation to avoid a situation that would
impact the bond rating. He explained that that's why the amount
of the subsidy is going to be paid out of the general fund. He
remarked that if the [Student] Loan Corporation sends $4 million
to the general fund and [the state] sends $1 million back, then
it's the equivalent of the [Student Loan] Corporation sending $3
million. He stated that he thinks, for reasons relating to the
bond ratings, it is better to be structured this way.
CHAIR DYSON asked if it would be clearer if the Fund Source [of
the fiscal note] was on the 1005 line with a minus, showing less
program receipts.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES explained that the reason why it wasn't
done that way was to make clear to the bondholders that the
funds are going to be there. He stated that the full
expectation is that the Student Loan Corporation dividend will
be larger than the GF (general fund) subsidy required;
therefore, in net it would work the way [Chair Dyson] is
thinking.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked if there was any discussion about
retroactivity.
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES answered yes, but that this bill is not
retroactive.
Number 2090
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON made a motion to move [CSHB 54(EDU)] from
committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal
notes. There being no objection, CSHB 54(EDU) moved from the
House Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee.
HB 124-NURS.HOME/ASSISTED LIV. EMPLOYEES/VISITOR
[Contains discussion of HB 107, which was combined with HB 124]
CHAIR DYSON announced that the committee would hear HOUSE BILL
NO. 124, "An Act prohibiting nursing facilities and assisted
living homes from employing or allowing access by persons with
certain criminal backgrounds, with exceptions."
Number 2150
REPRESENTATIVE ANDREW HALCRO, Alaska State Legislature, came
forth as sponsor of HB 124. He indicated HB 124 has been
combined with HB [107], a similar bill that protects seniors and
vulnerable adults. He remarked that the number of seniors and
vulnerable adults living in assisted living facilities is
growing in Alaska and is projected to double by the year 2015.
He said currently the Division of Senior Services has 123 homes
and almost 1,400 beds, while the Division of Mental Health and
Disabilities has 156 homes and 558 beds. He stressed that it is
necessary to be proactive in offering ideas and ways to protect
[seniors and vulnerable adults].
REPRESENTATIVE DAVIES noted that the statute outlines so-called
barrier crimes to ensure the safety of residents from those who
have immediate access to or reside in the home. He explained
that [the bill] requires all assisted living facilities that
receive public funding, regardless of the number of residents,
to be licensed. It allows for emergency termination of a
housing contract for a resident presenting a danger to himself
or herself or to other residents in the home. It establishes
immunity from liability or acts of omissions in the licensing,
monitoring, and supervision of a licensed home. Finally, it
provides a course of action for the state to take over the
operation of a home when the home is noncompliant, thereby
leaving its residents at risk. He concluded that he thinks the
need for this bill is outlined in a [Legislative Budget & Audit]
audit dated October 8, 1999, which states: "We have also found
that the Pioneers' Home employs several sex offenders. Again,
the risks to the residents, staff, and the state have not been
assessed."
Number 2295
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE made a motion to adopt the proposed
committee substitute (CS), version 22-LS008\L, Lauterbach,
3/14/01, as a work draft. There being no objection, Version L
was before the committee.
Number 2323
ALISON ELGEE, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Administration, came forth and stated that the
provisions contained in the work draft are the results of a
number of months of work on the part of the staff from the
Department of Administration's Division of Senior Services and
the Department of Health & Social Services. She remarked that
the review of the entire assisted living and regulatory
structure began about 18 months ago, when the assisted living
law was five years old, to see what needed to be modified,
amended, and improved in order to continue viability of the
industry and safety for the residents. She explained that in
the course of [reviewing] the regulations a number of areas
where statutory modifications needed to be addressed were
discovered. She noted that Representative Halcro has picked up
those recommendations in his proposed CS for HB 124.
TAPE 01-28, SIDE B
Number 2368
MS. ELGEE stated that there are a few areas with some
difficulties. One is subsection (1) of Section 1, which would
require [the Department of Administration] to look at whether or
not the victim of a crime was a resident of an assisted living
home or a nursing home at the time the crime was committed. She
explained that this is not information contained in the
background check but is information that the [Department of
Administration] would have to acquire in an independent
investigation if a criminal background check required further
review. She added that this is the section that generates the
cost for the Department of Administration in the fiscal note.
CHAIR DYSON asked: If any home that is in the business of
taking care of vulnerable adults or seniors wanted to employ
somebody, would the home not only have to do a background check
but also contact all previous similar employers to see if there
had been a victimization during the time that this candidate was
employed?
MS. ELGEE replied that there would need to be an investigation
as to who the victim of the crime was, in order to see if the
victim was a resident of a nursing home or assisted living home.
Number 2314
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked whether this implies that a person
could have [been convicted of] an offense somewhere else, as
long as it wasn't against a resident of a nursing home.
MS. ELGEE answered that a variety of crimes are barriers to
employment in long-term care. Those crimes, listed on page 2
[of the bill], include any unclassified felony, a class A
felony, or an offense under the laws of another jurisdiction
that would have met [Alaska's] standards of what is a class A
felony. She added that there are subsequent crimes that are a
time barrier, so that a class B felony committed within the
previous ten years is an automatic barrier to employment in a
long-term care facility. She explained that these would all
come up in a criminal background check.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked why it is necessary to know who the
victim was.
MS. ELGEE responded that the legislation, as proposed, would say
that any crime committed against a resident of a nursing home or
an assisted living home is an automatic barrier. Otherwise, it
might be a crime that is time-sensitive.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked for an example of something that
would not show up on a criminal check.
MS. ELGEE answered that the criminal background check would
identify if somebody had committed a class C felony in the
previous five years.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked which [crimes the bill would be
addressing].
MS. ELGEE answered that it would be any crime against an
individual who was a resident of a nursing home or an assisted
living home at the time the crime was committed. She explained
that if a background check stated that somebody was convicted of
a class C felony, but it was 15 years ago, it would not be a
barrier under the proposal. The [proposed bill] states that a
class C felony has to have been committed in the last five
years. She explained that regardless of when it was committed,
if it was committed against a resident of a nursing home or an
assisted living home, it would be a barrier to employment.
Therefore, [the Department of Administration] would have to
research what the class C felony was.
Number 2189
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked why there wouldn't be a record of
[the crime].
CHAIR DYSON said there would be a record, but it wouldn't state
whether the victim was living in a nursing home.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked whether it makes any difference,
since the person would not be allowed to work anyway [if he or
she had a record].
CHAIR DYSON replied that if indeed it had been 15 years, the
person wouldn't automatically be disqualified. He said he
understands that the provision on page 1, line 11, would make
[the home] get the court records and find out where the victim
was residing at the time of the offense.
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE added to Chair Dyson's remarks that if the
victim was in one of these residential facilities, then the
person would not be eligible for hire.
CHAIR DYSON stated that he thinks the sponsor is not only
looking for the crimes, but is looking at whether the crimes
follow a pattern of [victimizing] vulnerable adults, as well as
going beyond the statutory year limits.
Number 2120
ELMER LINDSTROM, Special Assistant, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Health & Social Services (DHSS), stated that if a
crime was committed against a person who had been residing in a
nursing home or assisted living home, it would be a barrier for
any offense.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said sometimes restraining someone
becomes an offense. He shared that he has been places where he
has had to restrain people, and he has been charged with a
fourth-degree offense, which stays on the record for a long
time. He said there are many people with varying degrees of
mental health problems, and he wonders if this is driving people
"into a box" because of spurious charges.
MS. ELGEE replied that she believes an individual has to be
convicted, not just charged with a crime. She explained that
presently, as proposed, the language includes all class A
misdemeanors. She said [the Department of Administration] would
recommend that it be class A misdemeanors as defined by
regulation, because the class A misdemeanor statutes are
extraordinarily broad. She noted that some examples of class A
misdemeanors, from page 2, line 11, that [the Department of
Administration] would not consider as barriers to employment are
unlawful marrying, failure to control a fire, or issuing a bad
check. She added that there are some meaningful class A
misdemeanors that are proposed in regulations and that would be
barriers, such as failure to register as a sex offender or
misconduct involving a corpse.
Number 1922
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA remarked that she applauds the efforts
made with this legislation. Most of her adult work has been
with youth, oftentimes in institutions, but as she ages, she
said, she has become more sensitive to the aging population.
She said there appear to be some similarities between
residential caretakers of children and seniors. She remarked
that she has witnessed the danger of vulnerability of the senior
population and people who prey upon that. She added that there
has been a case involving children who had been sexually abused
by a caretaker in every institution that she has worked in. She
also asked if there is any component in the bill about restraint
training requirements.
MS. ELGEE responded that the regulations that are out for public
comment right now cover very specific training requirements for
the administrator of an assisted living home and for certified
nursing assistants. She added that there are also very specific
proposals in [the Department of Administration's] budget this
year, funded by the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority, to
expand training for in-home care providers and for people who
are part of the medical community specific to folks with
dementia.
CHAIR DYSON asked who would bear the cost of the investigations
under the bill.
MS. ELGEE answered that the cost of the background checks for
[the Department of Administration] are done by the Division of
Senior Services. The assisted living facilities, other than the
Pioneers' Home, would do their own.
Number 1750
CHAIR DYSON asked why there is a zero fiscal note.
MS. ELGEE responded that the fiscal note from the Division of
Senior Services reflects the extensive reviews required to find
out who the victim was. She said she suspects that the people
from the Pioneers' Home didn't pick up on that section and would
have anticipated some cost, as well, if that were the case.
CHAIR DYSON asked who is going to bear the cost of the small
assisted homes when they have to get a background check of their
prospective employees.
MS. ELGEE answered that the Division of Senior Services gets the
background checks, since only a state agency can obtain that
information.
CHAIR DYSON asked how long [the background check] would take if
a private provider advertises to get staff and turns the
applications over to the Division of Senior Services.
MS. ELGEE responded that she thinks 30 days, but that there are
other people who could better answer that.
CHAIR DYSON asked if she knew how many people employed presently
would be covered in this category if they were applying for a
job.
MS. ELGEE noted that there are approximate 600 employees at the
Pioneers' Home.
Number 1665
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON stated that she doesn't understand why
there is a zero fiscal note. She asked if [the Department of
Administration] anticipates an increase.
MS. ELGEE replied that [the Department of Administration]
currently performs background checks, and that [HB 54] just
provides better definition of what a barrier crime is. She
added that [the Department of Administration] is already bearing
that cost.
CHAIR DYSON asked if there would be no increase.
MS. ELGEE answered that the increase would only come as there
continues to be a growth in the industry.
CHAIR DYSON asked whether this bill does not increase the number
of categories of employees that need to have background checks.
Number 1008
MS. ELGEE answered that there are some new categories of people
contained in this legislation. Right now [the Department of
Administration] does background checks on employees who are
involved in the direct provision of long-term care. She
explained that this legislation proposes an expansion to those
individuals who have access to the residents of the home in an
unsupervised capacity who could also be capable of causing harm
such as a contractor of the home, a regular volunteer, and
family members who live in the home.
CHAIR DYSON asked if this refers to family members of the owner
of the home.
MS. ELGEE replied yes.
Number 1514
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he understands that those submitting
to a background check are required to submit to fingerprinting;
therefore, this is not done without their knowledge.
MR. LINDSTROM responded that he believes the background check
does include a fingerprint check.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL remarked that he just wanted to make sure
that people know about all the information that is being
collected about them.
Number 1454
MR. LINDSTROM noted that the work draft is really a marriage of
two bills: Representative Halcro's original bill, HB 124, and
HB 107, introduced by the governor. He pointed out that in
combining them, an element fell between the cracks. He said
that DHSS would like to see added to the nursing home section
language that is parallel to what is already in the committee
substitute on assisted living, specifying that the contractor
and other additional people be subject to background checks. He
clarified that subsections (a) and (b) would be just as in the
work draft and subsection (c) on the last page would have to be
tweaked a little bit. He added that he has had some questions
relative to the governor's bill on the background checks
regarding whether a resident's family that is visiting would be
subject to the checks. He noted that the beginning on page 4 of
the work draft specifies when the section applies and tries to
address other kinds of contractors who are in the home, but not
on a recurring basis, as well.
MR. LINDSTROM added that DHSS did prepare a fiscal note of
$30,400 specific to the research needed on whether or not the
victim of the offense was in a nursing home or an assisted
living home. The governor's bill has a fiscal note of $100,000
for additional licensing staff for the Division of Mental Health
and Developmental Disabilities. He noted that one section in
the bill eliminates the exemption for facilities that have fewer
than three residents from licensing.
CHAIR DYSON asked whether the governor's bill extended the
background checks for all homes, including those with under
three [residents].
MR. LINDSTROM responded that [the governor's bill extended] the
basic licensing to all homes, homes with less than three
residents are not necessarily licensed.
CHAIR DYSON asked if the governor's bill brings the law into
congruence with what DHSS has been doing and forces DHSS to do
similarly.
MR. LINDSTROM said that is correct.
Number 1221
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked how much it costs for a facility to
get licensed. She also asked how many times a fingerprint check
would turn up [a criminal history], since a person who knew that
his or her fingerprints would show [a criminal record] wouldn't
bother to get his or her fingerprints taken.
MS. ELGEE said someone else would be more capable of answering
those questions.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL offered that he has driven a van to pick
people up from assisted living homes and take them to church.
He asked if those administering in that area would have to have
a background check.
MR. LINDSTROM answered that a regular volunteer would be subject
to a background check. A qualifier is a person who is working
or providing a service in the home; therefore, he said, it would
be a little ambiguous if the person was actually picking the
person up at the home and going elsewhere.
Number 1019
GARY WARD, Licensing Coordinator/Assisted Living Homes, Division
of Senior Services, Department of Administration, testified via
teleconference. He clarified that the background check is a
requirement of employment and the process begins when someone
approaches the home as an applicant. Prior to being hired [the
applicant] must submit to the administrator of the home a sworn
statement attesting to whether or not he or she has been
convicted of a crime as well as an interested-party name check.
He explained that the person would have to go to the local
police department, show a picture ID (identification) and obtain
a computerized printout of any criminal history the person may
have had in the state of Alaska, and bring it to the
administrator.
MR. WARD remarked that in some cases an administrator of a home
would not hire the person based on that criminal history. If
there is no criminal history, or if there is a minor conviction
from a number of years ago that the administrator doesn't feel
precludes this person from being an employee or being a
potential risk to the health and safety of the residents of the
home, the person can be hired. Within 30 days of being hired
the person must submit to the Department of Public Safety two
sets of fingerprints: one set to remain with the Department of
Public Safety and the other to go to the FBI (Federal Bureau of
Investigation). Those results take six to eight weeks to come
back from the FBI
MR. WARD continued, stating that in terms of the costs it
varies. In many cases the employee [of an independent home]
bears the burden. It is usually $20 for the name check, $25 for
the fingerprints, and $59 for the prints to be processed by the
Department of Public Safety and the FBI. He stated that in some
cases the home does pay for it, and in other cases the home may
pay and deduct it from a subsequent paycheck of the employee.
He explained that results from the FBI check go to the Division
of Senior Services if there was a criminal history. They do not
go to the home unless that home is acting as its own agent. He
clarified that the Pioneers' Home system does its own background
checks, and that information would come back to their HR (human
resources) office. He added that the records go back at least
30 years.
MR. WARD stated that if the [Division of Senior Services] is
concerned with a background check, it informs the home that the
employee has a criminal conviction and [the Division of Senior
Services] will then conduct an interview with the employee. He
noted that [the Division of Senior Services] is not allowed to
share the specifics of the convictions with the administrator of
the home, but does have the authority to tell the administrator
of the home that he or she has to dismiss the employee. He
clarified that [the Division of Senior Services] looks at
convictions, not charges.
Number 0712
MR. WARD explained that licensing fees generally turn out to be
about $25 per bed space for a two-year period. It would be very
difficult to track whether the victim was a resident from a
nursing home or an assisted living home because the results [of
the background check] would just say what the person was charged
with and convicted of and whether he or she was sentenced.
Therefore, in order to get information on the victim, [the
Division of Senior Services] would have to contact the court or
local law enforcement agency of the specific jurisdiction and
make a request to ascertain who the victim was. He explained
that it would be very cumbersome and time-consuming to try to
track the victim.
Number 0529
CHAIR DYSON asked if it was Mr. Ward's sense that this provision
would catch many "bad guys" that wouldn't be caught by the other
provisions.
MR. WARD replied that it is hard to predict.
CHAIR DYSON said he thinks the sponsor is after a discernible or
demonstrative pattern of victimization of seniors or helpless
people, but said he is wondering whether that would demonstrate
a pattern if the perpetrator had taken a ten-year recess. He
asked whether, if the applicant were asked to give a concurrent
employment history that was verifiable and it was laid next to
the criminal background check, that would help in tracking a
pattern of victimizing seniors.
MR. WARD answered that [the Division of Senior Services]
wouldn't know if the crime was committed in the home necessarily
or outside the home. He added that [the Division of Senior
Services] could probably contact the home but that he has found
that many times the employers won't talk.
Number 0268
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked if a pattern of reports would show
up with no convictions.
MR. WARD answered that, in his experience, he hasn't seen very
many [reports] where there is a lengthy list [of convictions].
He mentioned that usually when there are that many charges,
there is a pattern and somewhere along the line there is a
conviction. He added that when there is a conviction [the
Division of Senior Services] looks at how long ago it occurred,
how many there were, the severity of the conviction, and what
actions - in terms of rehabilitation - the person had to take.
CHAIR DYSON asked whether it is the practice of employers to put
the applicant to work while the background check is being
conducted.
MR. WARD responded yes, if there is nothing on the name check,
which only supplies any criminal history within the state of
Alaska. He added that it would be very difficult to get
employees if they had to wait eight weeks before the
fingerprints came back.
TAPE 01-29, SIDE A
Number 0015
AILEEN HERRING, Secretary Treasurer, CARING, testified via
teleconference. She stated that she has a very personal
interest in HB 124, since a family member was beaten at the
Pioneers' Home and died the following day. She remarked:
If you have never had to place a loved one in the care
of others, then it is impossible to relate to how it
feels to lose a parent to abuse and neglect, under the
care of a professional caregiver. ... The loss of a
parent or loved one in a long-term care facility is
just not acceptable, and the inability to change the
system that created the injury and the inability to
protect the other residents in these facilities leads
to mass frustration. The family member [who] placed
the resident in the home carries a great burden of
guilt forever. My father was totally dependent on his
caregivers. It is unacceptable to employ caregivers
or continue to employ caregivers that have a history
of abusive or criminal behavior that place[s] the
residents at risk.
CHAIR DYSON asked if a background check would have caught the
perpetrator who killed her father.
MS. HERRING answered that she didn't know. She said several
employees have had multiple cases brought against them for
abuse, and there seems to be something really wrong with the
system.
CHAIR DYSON asked if the perpetrator in her father's case had a
prior record.
MS. HERRING said that hasn't been established. She added:
The legislative audit done October 8, 1999, states
that the Pioneers' Home employs several sex offenders
... and, "Again, the risks to the residents, staff,
and the state have not been assessed." And then it
says, "The commissioners of the Departments of
Administration and Health & Social Services should
adopt regulations to prohibit employment of certain
criminals in assisted living homes."
Number 0254
CHAIR DYSON called for an at-ease at 4:44 p.m. The meeting was
called back to order at 4:45 p.m.
Number 0363
MELVIN RICHARDSON, Community Care Licensing Specialist, Mental
Health & Developmental Disabilities, Department of Health &
Social Services, testified via teleconference. He said there is
an extremely high turnover rate - between 50 and 60 percent - of
[care providers] who have to have fingerprinting done each year.
The average number [of care providers] each year that are
fingerprinted is between 500 and 600.
Number 0444
SUZAN ARMSTRONG-SILVA, Long-term Care Ombudsman, Alaska Mental
Health Trust Authority, Department of Revenue, testified via
teleconference. She stated that, with one exception, all the
offenses listed as barriers in the proposed statute would
greatly enhance residents' safety and welfare. She emphasized
that persons who have victimized residents in the past must be
prohibited from ever working in long-term care, regardless of
whether the crime was a felony or a misdemeanor. She remarked
that the Long-Term Care Ombudsman's office would not like to see
a five-year ban on class A misdemeanors, but prefers to have
exceptions through regulations that the Department of
Administration has already outlined.
MS. ARMSTRONG-SILVA stated that assisted living home operators
would not be required to provide 30 days' notice when
terminating a resident's contract against his or her will, on an
emergency basis, under the new section of the bill. She
explained that the proposed language [on page 8, line 10, of the
work draft] states that that the provision of written notice
shall be provided within 72 hours but not less than 24 hours for
termination of a resident. She remarked that she believes this
language should be amended to read: "Written notice shall be
provided not less than 72 hours before termination of the
resident." She expressed that 72 hours is a more realistic
timeframe than allowing a scant 24 hours to find alternative
placement for a resident.
MS. ARMSTRONG-SILVA concluded that this section [page 8, line
10] does not contain any language about the appropriateness of
the termination and has no vehicle by which the resident or
anyone else may contest this type of termination. She remarked
that she believes this kind of language should be written into
the new section and that all existing sections to the law should
address termination and be strengthened to allow for an
emergency appeal process for residents.
Number 0767
LISA CARESS-BEU, Board Member, CARING, testified via
teleconference. She shared that her mother was the resident of
Anchorage Pioneer's Home for five years and is well acquainted
with the vulnerability of long-term care residents. She
remarked that she is deeply concerned with Section 9, regarding
involuntary termination of residents' contracts and how it will
affect resident rights. She asked if this would provide
assisted living homes an easier way to discharge residents that
are difficult - residents with dementia through no fault of
their own who sometimes exhibit very difficult behaviors. She
added that there are often shortages of available, appropriate
housing for seniors suffering from dementia, and this would put
residents at risk of not finding competent care.
Number 0865
SHELBY LARSON, Administrator, Health Facilities Licensing &
Certification, Division of Medical Assistance, Department of
Health & Social Services, testified via teleconference. He
stated that [the Division of Medical Assistance] supports this
legislation and recommends changes protecting the welfare of
vulnerable adults.
RANDALL LORENZ, Staff to Representative Fred Dyson, Alaska State
Legislature, came forth and stated that five years ago he was
shocked to hear that Rio Linda High School [in California] was
in the news as the result of a child being murdered. He
explained that [the school] had hired an individual at the time
when California allowed individuals to be employed while a
background check was being done. After two weeks of employment,
this [employee] took the girl into a classroom and raped and
murdered her, two weeks before the background check came in. He
said he knew that child very well and strongly encourages that
people not be allowed to go into these settings without first
completing the background check. Since [the incident in
California], California now requires [the background check
first].
[HB 124 was held over.]
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee meeting
was adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|