Legislature(2003 - 2004)

04/23/2004 02:12 PM JUD

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
                    ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE                                                                                  
               HOUSE JUDICIARY STANDING COMMITTEE                                                                             
                         April 23, 2004                                                                                         
                           2:12 p.m.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS PRESENT                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Representative Lesil McGuire, Chair                                                                                             
Representative Tom Anderson, Vice Chair                                                                                         
Representative Dan Ogg                                                                                                          
Representative Ralph Samuels                                                                                                    
Representative Les Gara                                                                                                         
Representative Max Gruenberg                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MEMBERS ABSENT                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
Representative Jim Holm                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 309(JUD) am                                                                                              
"An Act relating  to testing the blood of prisoners  and those in                                                               
custody for bloodborne pathogens."                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED HCS CSSB 309(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CONFIRMATION HEARING                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Board of Governors of the Alaska Bar                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     Joseph N. Faulhaber - Fairbanks                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     - CONFIRMATION ADVANCED                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 551                                                                                                              
"An Act relating  to the issuance of teacher  certificates to and                                                               
revocation  of  teacher  certificates  of  persons  convicted  of                                                               
felony  drug offenses  and  to the  issuance  of limited  teacher                                                               
certificates to  persons convicted of certain  crimes involving a                                                               
minor and felony drug offenses."                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 551(JUD) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
HOUSE BILL NO. 545                                                                                                              
"An Act  relating to  the extension  under the  State Procurement                                                               
Code of  terms for leases for  real estate and certain  terms for                                                               
certain state contracts for goods and services; and providing                                                                   
for an effective date."                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     - MOVED CSHB 545(L&C) OUT OF COMMITTEE                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATE BILL NO. 316                                                                                                             
"An Act relating to motor vehicle safety belt violations."                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     - BILL HEARING POSTPONED                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BILL: SB 309                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: BLOOD PATHOGENS TESTING OF PRISONERS                                                                               
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) WAGONER                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
02/09/04       (S)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
02/09/04       (S)       STA, JUD                                                                                               
03/04/04       (S)       STA AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 211                                                                               
03/04/04       (S)       Moved SB 309 Out of Committee                                                                          
03/04/04       (S)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
03/05/04       (S)       STA RPT 3DP                                                                                            
03/05/04       (S)       DP: STEVENS G, COWDERY, STEDMAN                                                                        
03/17/04       (S)       JUD RPT CS  4DP  SAME TITLE                                                                            
03/17/04       (S)       DP: SEEKINS, FRENCH, OGAN, THERRIAULT                                                                  
03/17/04       (S)       JUD AT 8:00 AM BUTROVICH 205                                                                           
03/17/04       (S)       Moved CSSB 309(JUD) Out of Committee                                                                   
03/17/04       (S)       MINUTE(JUD)                                                                                            
03/22/04       (S)       TRANSMITTED TO (H)                                                                                     
03/22/04       (S)       VERSION: CSSB 309(JUD) AM                                                                              
03/24/04       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/24/04       (H)       STA, JUD                                                                                               
04/08/04       (H)       STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                                                                             
04/08/04       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/08/04       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
04/15/04       (H)       STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 102                                                                             
04/15/04       (H)       Moved   HCS   CSSB   309(STA)   Out   of                                                               
                         Committee                                                                                              
04/15/04       (H)       MINUTE(STA)                                                                                            
04/19/04       (H)       STA RPT HCS(STA) 3DP 2NR                                                                               
04/19/04       (H)       DP: SEATON, LYNN, HOLM; NR: COGHILL,                                                                   
04/19/04       (H)       WEYHRAUCH                                                                                              
04/23/04       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 551                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: DRUG FELONY DISQUALIFIES TEACHER                                                                                   
SPONSOR(S): JUDICIARY                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
04/05/04       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
04/05/04       (H)       EDU, JUD                                                                                               
04/13/04       (H)       EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124                                                                            
04/13/04       (H)       Scheduled But Not Heard                                                                                
04/15/04       (H)       EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124                                                                            
04/15/04       (H)       Moved Out of Committee                                                                                 
04/15/04       (H)       MINUTE(EDU)                                                                                            
04/19/04       (H)       EDU RPT 1DP 1NR 2AM                                                                                    
04/19/04       (H)       DP: WOLF; NR: OGG; AM: SEATON, GATTO                                                                   
04/22/04       (H)       FIN REFERRAL ADDED AFTER JUD                                                                           
04/23/04       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
BILL: HB 545                                                                                                                  
SHORT TITLE: STATE LEASE AND CONTRACT EXTENSIONS                                                                                
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
03/25/04       (H)       READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS                                                                        
03/25/04       (H)       L&C, JUD                                                                                               
04/07/04       (H)       L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17                                                                              
04/07/04       (H)       <Bill Hearing Postponed to 4/14>                                                                       
04/14/04       (H)       L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17                                                                              
04/14/04       (H)       Heard & Held                                                                                           
04/14/04       (H)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
04/16/04       (H)       L&C AT 3:15 PM CAPITOL 17                                                                              
04/16/04       (H)       Moved CSHB 545(L&C) Out of Committee                                                                   
04/16/04       (H)       MINUTE(L&C)                                                                                            
04/21/04       (H)       L&C RPT CS(L&C) NT 5DP 1AM                                                                             
04/21/04       (H)       DP: CRAWFORD, LYNN, ROKEBERG,                                                                          
04/21/04       (H)       DAHLSTROM, GATTO; AM: GUTTENBERG                                                                       
04/21/04       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
04/21/04       (H)       <Bill Hearing Postponed 4/23/04>                                                                       
04/23/04       (H)       JUD AT 1:00 PM CAPITOL 120                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
WITNESS REGISTER                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR TOM WAGONER                                                                                                             
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Sponsor of SB 309.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
KURT OLSON, Staff                                                                                                               
to Senator Tom Wagoner                                                                                                          
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Presented SB 309 on behalf of Senator                                                                      
Wagoner, sponsor, and responded to questions.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
PORTIA PARKER, Deputy Commissioner                                                                                              
Office of the Commissioner                                                                                                      
Department of Corrections (DOC)                                                                                                 
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION STATEMENT:  Responded to  questions during discussion of                                                               
SB 309.                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
JOSEPH N. FAULHABER, Appointee                                                                                                  
Board of Governors of the Alaska Bar                                                                                            
Fairbanks, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION  STATEMENT:   Testified  as appointee  to  the Board  of                                                               
Governors of the Alaska Bar.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
RYAN MAKINSTER, Staff                                                                                                           
to Representative Lesil McGuire                                                                                                 
Alaska State Legislature                                                                                                        
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION   STATEMENT:      Presented   HB  551   on   behalf   of                                                               
Representative   McGuire,   Chair,   House   Judiciary   Standing                                                               
Committee, sponsor.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
LARRY WIGET, Executive Director                                                                                                 
Public Affairs                                                                                                                  
Anchorage School District (ASD)                                                                                                 
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   Provided testimony during  discussion of HB                                                               
551.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
BONNIE BARBER, Executive Director                                                                                               
Professional Teaching Practices Commission (PTPC)                                                                               
Anchorage, Alaska                                                                                                               
POSITION STATEMENT:   Provided testimony during  discussion of HB                                                               
551.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
LAWRENCE LEE OLDAKER, Chair                                                                                                     
Professional Teaching Practices Commission (PTPC)                                                                               
Auke Bay, Alaska                                                                                                                
POSITION STATEMENT:  Testified in opposition to HB 551.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
VERN JONES, Chief Procurement Officer                                                                                           
Division of General Services                                                                                                    
Department of Administration (DOA)                                                                                              
Juneau, Alaska                                                                                                                  
POSITION  STATEMENT:     Presented  HB  545  on   behalf  of  the                                                               
administration.                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
ACTION NARRATIVE                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
TAPE 04-71, SIDE A                                                                                                            
Number 0001                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  LESIL   McGUIRE  called   the  House   Judiciary  Standing                                                             
Committee  meeting  to  order  at   2:12  p.m.    Representatives                                                               
McGuire,  Ogg, Samuels,  and Gara  were  present at  the call  to                                                               
order.   Representatives  Anderson and  Gruenberg arrived  as the                                                               
meeting was in progress.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
SB 309 - BLOOD PATHOGENS TESTING OF PRISONERS                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Number 0043                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  announced that the  first order of  business would                                                               
be  CS FOR  SENATE  BILL NO.  309(JUD) am,  "An  Act relating  to                                                               
testing  the  blood  of  prisoners   and  those  in  custody  for                                                               
bloodborne  pathogens."    [Before  the committee  was  HCS  CSSB                                                               
309(STA).]                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 0080                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR   TOM  WAGONER,   Alaska   State  Legislature,   sponsor,                                                               
indicated that a member of his staff would present SB 309.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 0083                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
KURT  OLSON,   Staff  to  Senator   Tom  Wagoner,   Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature, sponsor,  relayed that currently, Alaska  law allows                                                               
only  rape  victims  to  request the  testing  of  prisoners  for                                                               
bloodborne pathogens;  SB 309  would allow  correctional officers                                                               
who have been exposed to blood  or other bodily fluids to request                                                               
testing   of  the   prisoner   responsible   for  the   exposure.                                                               
Specifically,  AS 18.15  would  be amended  to  include five  new                                                               
sections:    proposed  AS 18.15.400  authorizes  the  process  of                                                               
testing;  proposed  AS  18.15.410  provides  consent  provisions;                                                               
proposed   AS  18.15.420   addresses  testing   without  consent;                                                               
proposed  AS  18.15.430   addresses  confidentiality  issues  and                                                               
provides penalties  for unauthorized disclosure; and  proposed AS                                                               
18.15.450  defines the  terms  used in  proposed  AS 18.15.400  -                                                               
18.15.440.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. OLSON remarked that last  year, 41 correctional officers were                                                               
potentially  exposed to  bloodborne pathogens;  in most  of these                                                               
cases  the  exposure was  intentional.    He noted  that  Senator                                                               
Wagoner first  became aware of  this problem when it  was brought                                                               
to  his  attention  by  a   correctional  officer  from  Wildwood                                                               
Correctional Center.   Mr. Olson  offered his  understanding that                                                               
the correctional officer  had been bitten by a  prisoner who told                                                               
the  correctional officer  that he  was sick  but refused  to say                                                               
what with.   In such  situations, when  the exact illness  is not                                                               
known, correctional officers undergo  treatment with a variety of                                                               
medications and  are sometimes not fit  for duty for a  period of                                                               
time  because of  side effects  and  drug interactions.   In  the                                                               
aforementioned instance,  the correctional officer was  unable to                                                               
work for  two and a half  weeks, and the cost  of the medications                                                               
given was approximately $3,000.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Number 0307                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR.  OLSON  explained  that  there  are  two  zero  fiscal  notes                                                               
attached to  SB 309, one from  the DOC and one  from the Division                                                               
of  Risk Management,  Department  of Administration  (DOA).   The                                                               
latter fiscal note  makes reference to a possible  savings to the                                                               
state  should  the legislation  pass,  but  that savings  is  not                                                               
quantifiable.  In conclusion, he  remarked that passage of SB 309                                                               
will bring  Alaska in line with  24 other states and  the federal                                                               
government, all  of which  have similar  provisions.   He offered                                                               
his belief  that SB 309  is supported  by the DOC,  and mentioned                                                               
that a representative from the DOC would be testifying.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS noted that  he's toured facilities in both                                                               
Alaska and  in Arizona,  and concurred  that there  are instances                                                               
where   inmates  intentionally   attempt  to   spread  bloodborne                                                               
pathogens to  guards.  He characterized  SB 309 as a  pretty good                                                               
protective  measure  that  might  mitigate  the  results  of  the                                                               
problem.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA  asked whether  the  state,  when trying  to                                                               
prove  a  criminal  case,  is allowed  to  take  someone's  blood                                                               
without his/her consent.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR WAGONER  said that  such can  only be  done with  a court                                                               
order, and relayed that there is such a provision in the bill.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA noted  that according  to that  provision, a                                                               
physician  must  state that  he/she  needs  the information  that                                                               
would be provided by the test.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Number 0501                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
PORTIA PARKER,  Deputy Commissioner, Office of  the Commissioner,                                                               
Department  of Corrections  (DOC), noted  that the  provisions of                                                               
the bill  preclude test results  from blood that's  collected for                                                               
this purpose from being used in a criminal proceeding.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  OGG  mentioned that  federal  law  on this  issue                                                               
states:   "(d)  The  results of  a test  under  this section  are                                                               
inadmissible against  the person tested  in any Federal  or State                                                               
civil or criminal case or proceeding."                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA pointed  out that  there is  a provision  on                                                               
page  2  [lines 5-13]  requiring  that  notice  be given  to  the                                                               
prisoner and that that notice must include similar language.                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  noted  that  language  on  page  5  [lines  4-16]                                                               
provides  penalties  for  unauthorized  disclosure;  unauthorized                                                               
disclosure  being disclosure  for any  purpose other  than what's                                                               
provided in the bill.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS. PARKER offered  her belief that the  protection against using                                                               
the test results  in civil or criminal proceedings  is located on                                                               
page 2.   She added  that this is the  DOC's intent; it  does not                                                               
want the results used in civil or criminal proceedings.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE surmised,  then, that the language on  page 2 works                                                               
together with the language on page 5.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  shared his  concern that the  bill does                                                               
not specifically  provide protection  to third parties  who might                                                               
be exposed to  a bloodborne pathogen, for example,  the spouse of                                                               
a correctional  officer who gets bitten  by a prisoner.   He said                                                               
he  would  want  the  spouse  or the  spouse's  physician  to  be                                                               
informed of the results of the test.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
Number 0869                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS. PARKER pointed out, however,  that the DOC must follow Health                                                               
Insurance   Portability  and   Accountability  Act   (HIPAA)  and                                                               
Occupational Safety and  Health Administration (OSHA) regulations                                                               
with regard  to disclosing information, particularly  any kind of                                                               
medical information.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  said he  would like  something inserted                                                               
into  the bill  that would  ensure that  the maximum  protections                                                               
allowed under HIPAA and OSHA are extended to third parties.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MS.  PARKER  relayed  that  she  would  have  the  DOC's  medical                                                               
director  address  that issue  either  via  teleconference or  in                                                               
writing.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG   noted  that  Doug   Bruce,  Director,                                                               
Central Office,  Division of Public Health,  Department of Health                                                               
and Social  Services (DHSS),  has provided  the committee  with a                                                               
bill analysis wherein  he suggests some changes  to the [original                                                               
version of the] bill.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  directed attention  back to the  language on                                                               
page  2 regarding  the notice  provision's  requirement that  the                                                               
prisoner be  informed that  test results  are not  to be  used in                                                               
criminal  or civil  proceedings, and  asked whether  test results                                                               
could  be provided  to  the prosecution  informally  even if  the                                                               
results are not to be used as evidence in court.                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR.  OLSON offered  his belief  that that  issue is  addressed on                                                               
page 2, lines  26-29, which says in part:   "The department shall                                                               
disclose  the  prisoner's   existing  bloodborne  pathogens  test                                                               
results to  the correctional officer without  the prisoner's name                                                               
or other uniquely identifying information.".                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG,  directing  attention to  Mr.  Bruce's                                                               
suggested changes  [to the  original version  of the  bill], read                                                               
one of them as follows [original punctuation provided]:                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
     Page 2,  Line 12 indicates  that test results  "may not                                                                    
     be  used as  evidence  in any  criminal proceedings  or                                                                    
     civil  proceedings."    In  some  cases,  it  could  be                                                                    
     appropriate to charge a prisoner  in an institution who                                                                    
     has intentionally  attempted to infect a  staff member.                                                                    
     Test results would be necessary evidence.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Number 1088                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG   [referring  to  HCS   CSSB  309(STA)]                                                               
indicated that he agrees with  DHSS's analysis of this issue, and                                                               
said he is  prepared to offer an amendment that  would delete, on                                                               
page  2,  lines 12-13,  the  words:   "and  may  not  be used  as                                                               
evidence in any  criminal proceedings or civil  proceedings."  He                                                               
opined that inclusion  of that language does  not constitute good                                                               
policy,  and  added, "It  seems  to  me  that if  somebody  bites                                                               
somebody else, and they have to take  a blood test as a result of                                                               
that, ... they can hardly complain  if that evidence comes in and                                                               
is used in a legitimate judicial or administrative proceeding."                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
MS. PARKER [referring to HCS CSSB 309(STA)] responded:                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     The reason  that we actually  prefer it to be  this way                                                                    
     is, we think that there  will be more problems with the                                                                    
     blood  test that  we have  done, by  the Department  of                                                                    
     Corrections,  where ...  the  correctional officer  has                                                                    
     asked that  the sample  be taken for  medical purposes;                                                                    
     we would rather have it  done again by their own doctor                                                                    
     and  to have  it done  so [that]  there is  a chain  of                                                                    
     evidence with that if it's going  to be used in a court                                                                    
     proceeding.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MS. PARKER,  in response to a  comment, said that the  DOC has no                                                               
objection to  the collection  of the  blood; rather,  its concern                                                               
centers on the fact that once  the DOC collects it and stores it,                                                               
questions may  arise regarding the  validity of the sample.   She                                                               
added, "We would prefer that if it's  going to be used in a court                                                               
proceeding, that the blood be drawn independently of us."                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  indicated  that  his  concern  is  now                                                               
satisfied.  He then directed  attention to another of Mr. Bruce's                                                               
suggested  changes [to  the original  version of  the bill]  that                                                               
read as follows [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
     Page  2,  Line 25  indicates  that  the facility  "must                                                                    
     first attempt  to get existing test  results under this                                                                    
     subsection before  taking any  steps to obtain  a blood                                                                    
     sample or  to test.[sic]"   This seems  unnecessary, as                                                                    
     previous  test results  are  most  likely irrelevant  -                                                                    
     current  test results  are what's  needed.   And,  even                                                                    
     current test results could be  irrelevant, given that a                                                                    
     person could  still be infected with  HIV, for example,                                                                    
     and  the test  would  not show  it right  away.   At  a                                                                    
     minimum, there  should be  a timeframe  associated with                                                                    
     the prior test result.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Number 1240                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG [referring to  HCS CSSB 309(STA)] called                                                               
the  forgoing  suggestion a  well-taken  point,  and said  he  is                                                               
considering offering an amendment that  would delete from page 2,                                                               
lines 24-26,  the words:   "The department must first  attempt to                                                               
get  existing test  results under  this subsection  before taking                                                               
any steps  to obtain  a blood  sample or  to test  for bloodborne                                                               
pathogens.".                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
MR.  OLSON  suggested  that  the  DOC's  medical  director  could                                                               
address the issue of relevancy of test results.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS said he would hate  to force the DOC to do                                                               
a  search for  existing test  results if  those results  can't be                                                               
used anyway because they are found to be too old.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  indicated that she  wanted to hear from  the DOC's                                                               
medical director.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  mentioned  that   he  also  wanted  to                                                               
address  the  rest  of  Mr. Bruce's  suggested  changes  [to  the                                                               
original version of the bill].                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA,   turning  to   Representative  Gruenberg's                                                               
concern regarding  third parties and HIPAA  and OSHA regulations,                                                               
offered his belief that if  a correctional officer is bitten, for                                                               
example,  and then  requests that  the prisoner  get tested,  the                                                               
correctional  officer can  then share  the results  of that  test                                                               
with his/her spouse.                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRUENBERG  pointed   out,   however,  that   the                                                               
correctional  officer, for  whatever reason,  may not  share that                                                               
information  with his/her  spouse;  therefore, he  said he  would                                                               
like to  see something inserted  into the bill that  would ensure                                                               
that  needed information  is relayed  to the  spouse and  his/her                                                               
physician.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 1449                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE announced that SB 309  would be set aside.  [SB 309                                                               
was heard again later in this same meeting.]                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
^CONFIRMATION HEARING                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
^Board of Governors of the Alaska Bar                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Number 1457                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  announced that the  committee would  next consider                                                               
the appointment of Joseph N.  Faulhaber to the Board of Governors                                                               
of the Alaska Bar.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Number 1471                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
JOSEPH N. FAULHABER, Appointee, Board  of Governors of the Alaska                                                               
Bar, in  response to the  question of why  he wished to  serve on                                                               
the Board  of Governors of  the Alaska  Bar, relayed that  he has                                                               
already served over  seven years, and that  he'd initially become                                                               
involved with  the Board of  Governors of the Alaska  Bar because                                                               
he'd "had a  cause," a desire, stemming from  a frivolous lawsuit                                                               
filed against  him, to see changes  in the Alaska Rules  of Civil                                                               
Procedure.   He added,  "At any  rate, I guess  I sort  of became                                                               
converted  and infatuated  with the  legal process  ..., so  I've                                                               
enjoyed it  and I'd  like to  think I've  contributed something."                                                               
He shared his  belief that the members of the  Board of Governors                                                               
of the  Alaska Bar and  its staff are  some of the  finest people                                                               
he's met, adding that he has enjoyed working with them.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG asked  Mr. Faulhaber  whether he  feels                                                               
that there should be mandatory continuing legal education (CLE).                                                                
                                                                                                                                
[Chair McGuire turned the gavel over to Vice Chair Anderson.]                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR.  FAULHABER mentioned  that several  years ago,  he and  other                                                               
members  of  the  Board  of  Governors of  the  Alaska  Bar  were                                                               
responsible  for  [instituting  the  continuing  legal  education                                                               
program].                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG said  he  strongly supports  continuing                                                               
legal education.                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
MR. FAULHABER  said he believes  that the public  expects lawyers                                                               
to have  continuing legal  education, and that  the public  has a                                                               
right to demand  a given level of expertise.   He noted, however,                                                               
that the current continuing legal  education program is voluntary                                                               
due to [a ruling by] the Alaska Supreme Court.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG posited that  many members of the Alaska                                                               
Bar support continuing legal education.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Number 1683                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. FAULHABER, on the issue of "Bar dues," relayed:                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
     The  cost of  the Bar  can be  paid for  by yesterday's                                                                    
     lawyers,  today's lawyers,  or tomorrow's  lawyers. ...                                                                    
     We  inherited an  aggressive  dues  structure that  was                                                                    
     meant to build a fund and  then kind of use it until it                                                                    
     diminishes  as  costs   increase  due  [to]  inflation.                                                                    
     Well, I  would make  the argument  that in  a mandatory                                                                    
     Bar,  the  Board of  Governors  should,  first of  all,                                                                    
     determine that all the services  are necessary and that                                                                    
     we're  meeting our  mission  statement  and that  we're                                                                    
     doing  it   ...  in  a  fiscally   responsible  manner.                                                                    
     Second, you  take what  it costs and  you divide  it by                                                                    
     the number of members, and  you have a breakeven budget                                                                    
     every year.   And then I  guess the third point  that I                                                                    
     would make  is, it's not the  end of the world  that we                                                                    
     do have some money in  the bank, because, if you've got                                                                    
     less than one  year's costs in the bank,  I don't think                                                                    
     that means that you're too fat.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
[Vice Chair Anderson returned the gavel to Chair McGuire.]                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he agrees.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  offered his understanding that  Alaska's Bar                                                               
dues are the highest in the country.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
MR. FAULHABER said  he did not see that argument  as relevant; if                                                               
an organization starts out with  "a zero-based budget" every year                                                               
and  wants to  accomplish  its mission  statement,  then what  it                                                               
costs to do that is what it costs.                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA opined  that the  high rate  of Bar  dues is                                                               
relevant, and  said his concern  centers on whether the  Board of                                                               
Governors  of  the Alaska  Bar  is  operating as  efficiently  as                                                               
possible, and whether such high Bar dues are really necessary.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR. FAULHABER said that during  the budget process this year, the                                                               
Board  of  Governors  of  the   Alaska  Bar  was  brutal  in  its                                                               
examination of  the budget, and  that he is satisfied  that there                                                               
didn't seem to be any waste to cut.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Number 1944                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  offered the suggestion that  eliminating the                                                               
quarterly  newspaper the  Board of  Governors of  the Alaska  Bar                                                               
puts out  or allowing members to  stop receiving it would  be one                                                               
place  to  cut  expenses,  surmising  that  about  $50  of  every                                                               
member's Bar  dues goes towards publishing  and distributing that                                                               
newsletter.   After  mentioning that  he is  no longer  an active                                                               
member of the Bar because for  a while he only did volunteer work                                                               
and didn't want to  pay $600 a year in Bar  dues to continue that                                                               
practice, he said  he has approached the  "Bar Association" about                                                               
providing  an exemption  from Bar  dues  to lawyers  who only  do                                                               
volunteer  work, but  was told,  "No."   Now, he  relayed, as  an                                                               
inactive  member  he  only  pays  $100  a  year  and  he  is  not                                                               
regulated.    All of  these  points,  he  remarked, lead  him  to                                                               
believe that perhaps the Board of  Governors of the Alaska Bar is                                                               
not being run as efficiently as possible.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR. FAULHABER  said that he  used to have similar  thoughts about                                                               
the aforementioned  newspaper, The Alaska  Bar Rag, but  after an                                                             
investigation of the matter, came  to the conclusion that it "was                                                               
run cheap."  Because the Board  of Governors of the Alaska Bar is                                                               
required to  publish changes in Bar  rules as well as  publish "a                                                               
number  of other  things," continuing  to publish  and distribute                                                               
The Alaska Bar  Rag is probably the cheapest way  to go about it.                                                             
He  remarked, however,  that perhaps  looking into  an electronic                                                               
format for  those required  items might prove  to be  cheaper and                                                               
more  efficient, and  offered to  research that  issue.   He then                                                               
asked Representative Gara  how long ago he'd raised  the issue of                                                               
eliminating  or reducing  fees for  those  who only  do pro  bono                                                               
work.                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GARA   offered   his  recollection   that   he'd                                                               
approached the  Alaska Bar Association  with this issue  in 2001-                                                               
2002.   He elaborated:   The  response was that  you had  to show                                                               
that  you were  doing something  like 40  hours a  month of  free                                                               
work, ... and frankly all I was  doing was about 5 hours a month,                                                               
... so I didn't meet the time threshold."                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR.  FAULHABER  offered  his  understanding  that  currently,  if                                                               
someone only does pro bono work  and does it through Alaska Legal                                                               
Services, the  membership is  either free or  Bar dues  have been                                                               
reduced  considerably.   He  said he  would  research that  issue                                                               
further and inform the committee of his findings.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
Number 2103                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE said  that one of her concerns centers  on the fact                                                               
that when  people get out of  law school they are  often short of                                                               
money and  have no income but  are still required to  pay to take                                                               
the Bar  exam, which, she relayed,  is assessed a very  high fee,                                                               
by far one  of the highest in the nation  surpassing even the New                                                               
York Bar exam  fee.  She asked Mr. Faulhaber  to consider looking                                                               
into ways  in which the  costs of and for  the Bar exam  could be                                                               
reduced,  and to  particularly keep  in mind  those with  limited                                                               
resources who  are fresh out of  law school.  She  added that she                                                               
thinks the current  Bar dues are too high and  that she has heard                                                               
similar thoughts from other practicing attorneys.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MR. FAULHABER responded:                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     I guess the  question I would ask [is],  ... who should                                                                    
     pay for the costs?  The  charges for the Bar exam [are]                                                                    
     cost-driven, so  it's not  a thing  that we  make money                                                                    
     on.   So the question  is, would  you be willing,  as a                                                                    
     sitting  attorney, as  a member,  to subsidize  the Bar                                                                    
     exam for  new lawyers or new  [want-to-be] lawyers? ...                                                                    
     If  the membership  wanted  that,  I probably  wouldn't                                                                    
     have a  problem with it,  but in  my heart of  hearts I                                                                    
     think  that any  time you  can actually  nail down  the                                                                    
     cost  of a  service and  pass it  on to  the recipient,                                                                    
     it's probably a way (indisc.).                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  pointed  out, however,  that  currently  the  Bar                                                               
associations  in  all  other  states,   even  small  states  like                                                               
Wyoming, find  ways to "make  it work more efficiently"  and keep                                                               
costs  down.    She  reiterated  her request  for  the  Board  of                                                               
Governors of  the Alaska Bar  to look  into ways of  reducing the                                                               
cost of  administering the  Bar exam.   For example,  holding the                                                               
Bar exam at  a cheap or donated location, rather  than holding it                                                               
at the Egan Center; or shorting  the Bar exam to two days, rather                                                               
than  keeping  it  at  two  and  a  half  days;  or  focusing  on                                                               
"standardization," rather  than subjective essay questions.   She                                                               
remarked  that for  people fresh  out  of law  school, having  to                                                               
contemplate spending [nearly] $1,000 to  take the Bar exam can be                                                               
rather daunting.  Perhaps having  an external audit conducted for                                                               
the purpose  looking at ways to  reduce the costs of  and for the                                                               
Bar exam might be in order, she suggested.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ANDERSON added  that if  a person  fails the  Bar                                                               
exam and  then waits three  years to retake  it, he thinks  it is                                                               
unfair  to  charge him/her  the  full  amount; instead,  the  fee                                                               
should remain  the same as  it is for  those who retake  it right                                                               
away.   The aforementioned would be  one way to contain  the cost                                                               
of taking the Bar exam.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  suggested allowing the Bar  exam fee to                                                               
be paid over time.                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
TAPE 04-71, SIDE B                                                                                                            
Number 2369                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. FAULHABER, in  response to questions, remarked  that the cost                                                               
of taking the Bar exam is "$800-plus."                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  suggested allowing that fee  to be paid                                                               
in two years.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR. FAULHABER relayed  that in the past, he has  been a proponent                                                               
of accepting payment via credit card.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  pointed out, however, that  credit card                                                               
interest can  be quite high.   On a different issue,  he remarked                                                               
that he  and others whom he  knows like receiving The  Alaska Bar                                                             
Rag.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE OGG declared a possible  conflict in that he is an                                                               
active member of  the Alaska Bar.   He said he would  like to see                                                               
Bar dues lowered for those who  don't practice in the large urban                                                               
areas of the  state.  He asked about the  possibility of allowing                                                               
sitting legislators  to obtain CLE  credit for  their legislative                                                               
service to the state.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. FAULHABER said he would  propose that suggestion to the Board                                                               
of Governors of the Alaska Bar.                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  suggested  also  allowing  legislative                                                               
staff to obtain CLE credit.                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. FAULHABER indicated  that that makes sense  and would propose                                                               
that suggestion as well.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   OGG   said   he  appreciates   Mr.   Faulhaber's                                                               
willingness to serve.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Number 2162                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said he feels  that Bar dues should be waived                                                               
or reduced for those who only  practice law on a volunteer basis,                                                               
even  if the  volunteer work  is  not done  through Alaska  Legal                                                               
Services.  He  noted that he has already made  suggestions to the                                                               
Alaska Bar  Association about changing  aspects of the  Bar Exam,                                                               
and opined that the Alaska  Bar Association was not as responsive                                                               
to  suggestions for  change as  it ought  to have  been, that  it                                                               
seemed to go out of its way to  resist change.  One of the things                                                               
he suggested to  the Alaska Bar Association in the  past was that                                                               
on  the standardized  portion of  the test,  if it  is taken  and                                                               
passed  elsewhere  in the  country,  it  should  not need  to  be                                                               
retaken when  a person  then takes the  Alaska Bar  exam, opining                                                               
that to require  such is a waste of time  and money; the response                                                               
to  this suggestion  was, "No."   In  fact, he  was told  that no                                                               
other states do that, and yet  his later research found that such                                                               
was not  true.  He asked  Mr. Faulhaber to raise  this issue with                                                               
the Board of Governors of the Alaska Bar.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
MR.  FAULHABER   indicated  that   he  would  do   some  research                                                               
regarding:   retaking the standardized  portion of the  Bar exam;                                                               
the  fee that's  charged for  retaking the  Bar exam;  waiving or                                                               
reducing  Bar dues  for  those who  only do  pro  bono work;  and                                                               
allowing CLE credits for legislative service.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE reminded Mr. Faulhaber  to also research the issues                                                               
of reducing the  cost of and for the Bar  exam - specifically, if                                                               
ways  are found  to reduce  the cost  of administering  the exam,                                                               
that savings should then be passed  on to those taking the exam -                                                               
and of  allowing the Bar exam  fee to paid over  time in hardship                                                               
cases.  She  remarked that the current fee for  taking the Alaska                                                               
Bar exam is twice that of the  Bar exam in some other states, and                                                               
opined that that is unreasonable.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MR. FAULHABER asked  whether the committee would like  to see the                                                               
Bar  exam fees  lowered even  if it  means requiring  the current                                                               
membership to subsidize the cost.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE said  that is  not  her intent,  and relayed  that                                                               
other  committee members  are  indicating that  they  are not  in                                                               
favor of  that option  either.   Instead, efficiencies  should be                                                               
found to reduce  the cost of administering the Bar  exam and then                                                               
those savings should be passed on to those that take it.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA  mentioned  that  he  is  not  in  favor  of                                                               
allowing  CLE credits  to be  obtained  for legislative  service,                                                               
because  practicing lawyers  do a  lot more  legal research  than                                                               
legislators and legislative  staff and yet do not  get CLE credit                                                               
for that  work.  In  conclusion, he  asked Mr. Faulhaber  to look                                                               
into  the issue  of making  the Alaska  Bar Association  a little                                                               
more flexible and responsive.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE   recapped  for  Mr.  Faulhaber   the  issues  the                                                               
committee  wanted the  Board of  Governors of  the Alaska  Bar to                                                               
consider,  and again  suggested perhaps  having an  outside audit                                                               
conducted to look for efficiencies.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
MR.  FAULHABER agreed  to  bring  those issues  to  the Board  of                                                               
Governors of the Alaska Bar.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Number 1779                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON  made a motion to  advance from committee                                                               
the nomination of  Joseph N. Faulhaber as appointee  to the Board                                                               
of Governors  of the Alaska Bar.   There being no  objection, the                                                               
confirmation  was  advanced  from the  House  Judiciary  Standing                                                               
Committee.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  ANDERSON   reminded  members  that   signing  the                                                               
reports regarding  appointments to  boards and commissions  in no                                                               
way reflects  individual members' approval or  disapproval of the                                                               
appointees, and that the nominations  are merely forwarded to the                                                               
full legislature for confirmation or rejection.                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  thanked  Mr. Faulhaber  for  his  willingness  to                                                               
serve.                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
SB 309 - BLOOD PATHOGENS TESTING OF PRISONERS                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
Number 1748                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  announced that  the  committee  would resume  the                                                               
hearing on  SB 309, CS FOR  SENATE BILL NO. 309(JUD)  am, "An Act                                                               
relating to testing  the blood of prisoners and  those in custody                                                               
for bloodborne  pathogens."  [Before  the committee was  HCS CSSB                                                               
309(STA).]                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 1731                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
PORTIA PARKER,  Deputy Commissioner, Office of  the Commissioner,                                                               
Department  of Corrections  (DOC),  remarked that  SB 309  merely                                                               
codifies the  DOC's current policies regarding  "protection from,                                                               
documentation of,  and response  to occupational  exposure," and,                                                               
thus,  there is  a  zero  fiscal note.    She  relayed that  most                                                               
prisoners  volunteer to  give a  blood sample  or notify  the DOC                                                               
that they have some kind of  condition.  When a prisoner does not                                                               
volunteer,  the DOC  is  able  to get  a  court order  reasonably                                                               
quickly and then draw the sample.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS. PARKER said  that the problem that SB 309  proposes to fix is                                                               
not a huge  problem; rather, the correctional  office involved in                                                               
the  incident that  generated this  legislation simply  felt that                                                               
the normal process  wasn't quick enough and that  he wasn't taken                                                               
care  of.   She  mentioned  that the  DOC's  medical director  is                                                               
currently out of  state, but had noted in his  analysis of SB 309                                                               
that  the DOC  is already  doing what  is outlined  in the  bill.                                                               
Referring to a  couple of the suggested changes  [to the original                                                               
bill] offered by Doug Bruce  - Director, Central Office, Division                                                               
of  Public  Health,  Department of  Health  and  Social  Services                                                               
(DHSS)  -  [text previously  provided  in  the first  portion  of                                                               
today's minutes on SB 309], she said:                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     The first  one about evidence, I  think we've discussed                                                                    
     that and why  we would prefer that not  be changed. ...                                                                    
     As far  as testing and  looking at results  that exist,                                                                    
     we don't store the  blood that's been drawn previously,                                                                    
     but we  do have  a record  of the  results, and  so the                                                                    
     [DOC  doesn't]  really  have   a  preference  on  that,                                                                    
     whether  it's a  new blood  sample or  [not] ....   The                                                                    
     reason we  would like  to look  at existing  results is                                                                    
     because it may be faster  to find out when someone does                                                                    
     have some  kind of  a bloodborne pathogen.   If  you go                                                                    
     and  look  at  a  result  and  they  had  hepatitis  or                                                                    
     [acquired   immunodeficiency  syndrome   (AIDS)]  three                                                                    
     months ago, they probably still have it.                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Now, it's  not going to  tell you what they  have right                                                                    
     now; even a  test right now may not tell  you what they                                                                    
     have  right now.   So  not  everything is  going to  be                                                                    
     guaranteed even if you  immediately draw blood, because                                                                    
     some people will  have something that will  not show up                                                                    
     in that  test yet but it  may two months from  now.  So                                                                    
     ...  nothing  is  guaranteed;  what we  do  is  try  to                                                                    
     provide the best protection we  can.  Now, if there was                                                                    
     a result  where nothing was  shown six months ago  or a                                                                    
     year ago, the officer can  still request, "I want blood                                                                    
     drawn now  - I've ...  had [an] exposure,  my physician                                                                    
     thinks  it's necessary  to draw,  this blood  sample is                                                                    
     too old,  the results are  too old -  I want to  have a                                                                    
     new  blood  sample to  make  sure  I  have not  had  an                                                                    
     exposure."  And we feel  that that's covered.  If there                                                                    
     are  concerns,   then  we  address  that,   but  that's                                                                    
     basically  what we're  doing  right  now, in  practice,                                                                    
     without this [proposed] statute.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Number 1565                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  said his  concern is that  the language                                                               
on page  2, lines 24-26  - The  department must first  attempt to                                                               
get  existing test  results under  this subsection  before taking                                                               
any steps  to obtain  a blood  sample or  to test  for bloodborne                                                               
pathogens  - seems  to [require]  the  DOC to  get existing  test                                                               
results before taking  a new sample, and he did  not want the DOC                                                               
impeded in  taking a new  sample; therefore, that  sentence ought                                                               
to be removed.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS. PARKER  reiterated that  the DOC doesn't  have an  opinion on                                                               
that language  either way;  if it  is the  will of  the committee                                                               
that a new sample be drawn  immediately, that would be fine.  She                                                               
then  turned  attention  to  another  of  Mr.  Bruce's  suggested                                                               
changes  [to the  original  version  of the  bill]  that read  as                                                               
follows [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
     On  Page 5,  Line  14, providing  test  results to  the                                                                    
     officer's   physician   without  specific   identifying                                                                    
     information   is   really   not   a   true   safeguard.                                                                    
     Obviously, the  physician will communicate  the results                                                                    
     to the  officer who will  then know the results  of the                                                                    
     test and [whom] the test is associated with.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
MS. PARKER [referring to HCS CSSB 309(STA)] said:                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     I don't  think that  there is anything  that we  can do                                                                    
     about that.   I believe  - and  I will get  this answer                                                                    
     definitively  -  ...  that we  cannot  release  ...  an                                                                    
     officer's  medical   records  without   their  consent;                                                                    
     unless the  other party gets  a court order  to release                                                                    
     that  information,   we  can't  even   release  medical                                                                    
     information  on  offenders  or   inmates.    It's  very                                                                    
     restrictive on what we can  do with any test results or                                                                    
     medical  information disclosed  to anyone,  even people                                                                    
     who are  employed in  the facility.   So I  think there                                                                    
     are restrictions there that are  in federal law that we                                                                    
     simple have to abide by.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 1449                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG [referring to HCS CSSB 309(STA)]                                                                       
offered the following about page 5, proposed subsections (b),                                                                   
lines 9-11, and (c), lines 12-16:                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     Many  of these  prisoners are  very litigious  and will                                                                    
     look at anything possible to  goof up the system ... by                                                                    
     bringing all kinds  of lawsuits, since they  have a lot                                                                    
     of time on  their hands. ... This seems  to invite some                                                                    
     lawsuits.    [For  proposed subsection  (c)],  I  guess                                                                    
     maybe  I didn't  understand what  [Mr. Bruce  meant]; I                                                                    
     was more  looking at  [proposed subsection  (b)], where                                                                    
     you  invite the  prisoner to  bring a  lawsuit, almost.                                                                    
     It looks to  me like ... we might want  to tighten that                                                                    
     down.   If  somebody  is bringing  a  lawsuit for  good                                                                    
     cause --  I don't  know, maybe  I'm speaking  too soon.                                                                    
     It says  releases - maybe  you want to  put "knowingly"                                                                    
     or "recklessly"  or something,  because you  could have                                                                    
     just an inadvertent release.                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS commented:  "'Malice'."                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Number 1357                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
KURT  OLSON,   Staff  to  Senator   Tom  Wagoner,   Alaska  State                                                               
Legislature, sponsor,  [referring to  HCS CSSB  309(STA)] offered                                                               
his  belief that  the wording  [in proposed  subsections (b)  and                                                               
(c)]  has been  tested in  other states,  particularly Wisconsin,                                                               
"or at least  modeled after that, and we didn't  feel like we had                                                               
to reinvent the wheel on (indisc.)."   In response to a question,                                                               
he  said  he did  not  know  whether federal  language  contained                                                               
anything  pertaining   to  civil  action  for   the  unauthorized                                                               
releasing of information.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  indicated that at a  minimum, there ought to  be a                                                               
mental intent.                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  referred to  language on page  5, lines                                                               
15-16, and  noted that  the standard specified  is "a  good faith                                                               
effort" to comply  with the statutes.  However,  no such standard                                                               
is currently on page 5, lines 9-11.                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE OGG  opined that SB  309 is a fairly  well crafted                                                               
bill.   Referring to federal law,  he offered his belief  that it                                                               
requires testing of  anyone convicted and sentenced  for a period                                                               
of six months  or more.  He remarked that  this requirement seems                                                               
like a good  health and safety measure, and  asked whether Alaska                                                               
could adopt something similar.                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MS.  PARKER offered  her belief  that  the DOC  is not  currently                                                               
testing every prisoner for the  presence of bloodborne pathogens,                                                               
one reason  being that it would  be very expensive to  test every                                                               
prisoner.   However,  if  there is  "any  indication" or  medical                                                               
reason to test, then a test is done.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE OGG  opined that testing all  prisoners could save                                                               
money  in the  long  run because,  if it  is  already known  what                                                               
bloodborne pathogens  any given prisoner has,  "you could isolate                                                               
that somehow."                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE, after  ascertaining that  no one  else wished  to                                                               
testify, closed public testimony on SB 309.                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  asked  whether  the  sponsor  has  any                                                               
objection  to  having  the  words,  "The  department  must  first                                                               
attempt  to  get  existing test  results  under  this  subsection                                                               
before taking any  steps to obtain a blood sample  or to test for                                                               
bloodborne  pathogens." removed  from page  2, lines  24-26.   He                                                               
suggested that  such a change  would give the DOC  the discretion                                                               
to "move quickly."                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Number 1088                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  TOM WAGONER,  Alaska  State  Legislature, sponsor,  said                                                               
that is  a good point,  but added that  much would depend  on how                                                               
recently an existing test result is.                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG remarked,  "This  just  gives them  the                                                               
discretion to do it or not."                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  offered  her  understanding  that  removing  that                                                               
language  doesn't  mean that  the  DOC  won't use  existing  test                                                               
results.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Number 1032                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG made  a motion to adopt  Amendment 1, to                                                               
delete from page 2, lines  24-26, the words, "The department must                                                               
first attempt to get existing  test results under this subsection                                                               
before taking any  steps to obtain a blood sample  or to test for                                                               
bloodborne pathogens.".   There  being no objection,  Amendment 1                                                               
was adopted.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Number 1017                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  referred to  page  5,  line 9-11,  and                                                               
indicated that  he wanted  to offer  a conceptual  amendment that                                                               
would  alter  the  language  so  that it  would  read,  in  part,                                                               
something along  the lines  of:   "A prisoner  may bring  a civil                                                               
action  against a  person  who releases  the  prisoner's name  or                                                               
other uniquely  identifying information with the  test results or                                                               
otherwise releases  the test  results if there  is no  good faith                                                               
effort made to comply with AS 18.15.400 - 18.15.450."                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SAMUELS  suggested  instead that  they  just  add                                                               
something like, "knowingly and with  malice", after "who" on line                                                               
9, page 5.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  indicated that  he  did  not want  the                                                               
provision  to  include  a  mental state  of  "malice",  but  that                                                               
perhaps adding  "knowingly" would  be sufficient.   Currently, he                                                               
opined, it seems  to imply an absolute - it  doesn't even have to                                                               
require a negligence standard."                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE remarked, "Strict liability, almost."                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said that adding "knowingly" makes sense.                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested  adding, "in knowing violation                                                               
of".                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE suggested, "knowingly".                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG  suggested, "who  knowingly  violates".                                                               
He  added, "That's  conceptual,"  and posited  that  with such  a                                                               
change,  a civil  action  may  be brought  against  a person  who                                                               
knowingly violates the provisions of  the bill.  [This version of                                                               
the suggested change became known  as Conceptual Amendment 2, and                                                               
was treated as moved.]                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR WAGONER indicated that such a change is fine with him.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG,  in response  to comments, said:   "The                                                               
Act itself says  ... who you can release the  information to, and                                                               
what I  want to prevent  is a correctional official  getting sued                                                               
because somebody technically violates this in non-knowing way."                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  offered her belief  that [Conceptual  Amendment 2]                                                               
"does get us  there."  She added, "We'll leave  it conceptual for                                                               
the  drafter,  but  [have  it   contain]  the  mental  intent  of                                                               
knowingly violates it  and [have it be] as tight  as you can make                                                               
it  so  that  the  person  [who]  innocently  releases  it  isn't                                                               
punished."                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 0781                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  asked  whether   there  were  any  objections  to                                                               
[Conceptual]  Amendment   2.     There  being   none,  Conceptual                                                               
Amendment 2 was adopted.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  turned attention  to page 2,  lines 12-                                                               
13, which says in  part, "and may not be used  as evidence in any                                                               
criminal  proceedings  or civil  proceedings."    He said  he  is                                                               
wondering  "if there  would be  any circumstance  where you,  for                                                               
some  reason,   would  have  to   use  a  blood  sample."     For                                                               
identification  purposes  after a  fire,  for  example, or  if  a                                                               
prisoner escapes.                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  WAGONER  opined  that in  extenuating  circumstances,  a                                                               
court order might be the route to take.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRUENBERG  asked   whether  the   aforementioned                                                               
language would prevent a court order from being obtained.                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   SAMUELS   pointed   out,   however,   that   the                                                               
aforementioned  language  refers to  use  in  civil and  criminal                                                               
proceedings and thus would not  apply in instances of identifying                                                               
someone.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GRUENBERG said  he just  wanted to  be sure  that                                                               
there isn't some circumstance wherein  those test results need to                                                               
be used.                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  asked  whether  the  DOC  has  any  objection  to                                                               
deleting the aforementioned language.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MS. PARKER  said the DOC does  not, but added:   "The problem is,                                                               
is that we  have been warned that it will  cause undue challenges                                                               
and litigation  if it's  used in  criminal or  civil proceedings;                                                               
that's been  the experience in  other jurisdictions, and  this is                                                               
really for the protection of the inmates ...."                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG  said he is considering  this issue from                                                               
the  prosecution's point  of view  and wants  to be  careful that                                                               
they are  not, in  some manner,  causing the DOC  some harm.   In                                                               
response  to comments,  he added,  "It might  be important  to be                                                               
able to  establish the  fact of  testing, to  prove that  you had                                                               
tested and  ... [that] the  results had come back  negative [and]                                                               
so there was no need to treat."                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                
SENATOR  WAGONER opined  that this  latter point  is moving  away                                                               
from the  purpose of the  bill.  "There's been  a lot of  work go                                                               
into  this  and  I  think   we're  on  pretty  firm  ground,"  he                                                               
concluded.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
Number 0432                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SAMUELS moved  to  report HCS  CSSB 309(STA),  as                                                               
amended,  out of  committee with  individual recommendations  and                                                               
the accompanying  zero fiscal  note.   There being  no objection,                                                               
HCS CSSB 309(JUD) was reported  from the House Judiciary Standing                                                               
Committee.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
HB 551 - DRUG FELONY DISQUALIFIES TEACHER                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
Number 0411                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE announced that the  next order of business would be                                                               
HOUSE BILL NO.  551, "An Act relating to the  issuance of teacher                                                               
certificates  to  and  revocation   of  teacher  certificates  of                                                               
persons convicted of felony drug  offenses and to the issuance of                                                               
limited  teacher certificates  to  persons  convicted of  certain                                                               
crimes involving a minor and felony drug offenses."                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE, speaking as Chair  of the House Judiciary Standing                                                               
Committee, sponsor of  HB 551, surmised that  the committee would                                                               
be amending  the bill such  that the new language  being inserted                                                               
[on  page   1]  would  only  reference   misconduct  involving  a                                                               
controlled substance in the first degree - AS 11.71.010.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA indicated  that he would also like  to try to                                                               
keep in some of those second,  third, and fourth degree crimes by                                                               
defining them;  for example, keeping  in and defining  the crimes                                                               
involving a school zone.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  suggested  that  such  a  change  could  be  done                                                               
conceptually.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 0318                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
RYAN  MAKINSTER, Staff  to Representative  Lesil McGuire,  Alaska                                                               
State Legislature,  presented HB 551 on  behalf of Representative                                                               
McGuire, Chair,  House Judiciary  Standing Committee,  sponsor of                                                               
HB 551.   He said that recent news articles  have highlighted the                                                               
fact that there have been a  few teachers who have been convicted                                                               
of drug convictions.   And although there is no  desire to have a                                                               
person's youthful  mistakes keep  him/her from pursuing  the goal                                                               
of  being a  teacher, or  to punish  great teachers  for youthful                                                               
mistakes,  HB  551  does  focus  on  the  issue  of  felony  drug                                                               
convictions.   He  acknowledged  that members  have  a desire  to                                                               
alter  the bill  such that  it will  focus specifically  on first                                                               
degree   crimes  involving   controlled  substances,   which,  he                                                               
surmised, involve activities at  a "criminal enterprise" level or                                                               
manufacturing  activities,  or  activities  with  the  intent  to                                                               
distribute.                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. MAKINSTER relayed  that HB 551 does not  pertain to "personal                                                               
use or private possession."   He posited that Representative Gara                                                               
has the right idea in wanting  to retain reference to some second                                                               
and third  degree crimes involving controlled  substances because                                                               
there is specific language in  those statutes that addresses drug                                                               
offenses  [occurring  on or  near]  school  zones and  [involving                                                               
minors].                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE referred to Amendment 1 and said she liked it;                                                                    
Amendment   1,   a   handwritten   amendment   with   handwritten                                                               
corrections, read [original punctuation provided]:                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     At page 1 line 10                                                                                                          
     delete                                                                                                                     
     "- 11.71.040"                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     At Page 1 line 11  after "subsection, [sic]" insert "or                                                                    
     under  AS 11.71.020  - .040  if the  conviction is  for                                                                    
     Distribution, or  for possession or  manufacturing with                                                                    
     the  intent  to  distribute,  or  in  violation  of  AS                                                                    
     11.71.030(a)(3)(A) or AS 11.71.030[sic](a)(4).                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Number 0201                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA offered to explain Amendment 1.  He said:                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     Ideally what  we want to  do is  get at people  who are                                                                    
     selling   drugs,  people   who  are   manufacturing  or                                                                    
     possessing  with  the intent  to  sell  drugs, and  the                                                                    
     school  zone things  also. ...  So, we  can clearly  do                                                                    
     [crimes in  the] first  degree, we  can clearly  do the                                                                    
     school zone  things because those  statutory provisions                                                                    
     are   very  identifiable,   [but]  where   my  proposed                                                                    
     amendment gets  a little  vague is  [where] I  also add                                                                    
     any of  the second through fourth  degree [crimes] that                                                                    
     involve possession or manufacturing  with the intent to                                                                    
     distribute.    [That's  because]  distribute  could  be                                                                    
     sharing with the person next  to you - distribute isn't                                                                    
     defined as sales.                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
     And  so  we  could  be   a  little  overbroad  and  say                                                                    
     manufacture or  possess with the intent  to distribute,                                                                    
     but  we  would,  arguably, possibly,  be  getting  into                                                                    
     people  who are  sharing  in  a room  with  a bunch  of                                                                    
     friends  when they're  19 years  old,  because that  is                                                                    
     distribute under the statute.   So then I thought about                                                                    
     saying  distribute with  the intent  to  sell, but  the                                                                    
     truth is, the way the  criminal process works, when you                                                                    
     get convicted of a crime  - let's say you get convicted                                                                    
     of [a] second  or third degree crime ...  - the records                                                                    
     will show  you were convicted under  that statute [but]                                                                    
     it's  going to  be very  hard  to figure  out what  the                                                                    
     conduct was that you were  convicted of.  We won't know                                                                    
     whether you were trying to sell or not sell.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
     And so there's  really no perfect answer,  to trying to                                                                    
     answer those questions, for those  people who do second                                                                    
     or  third or  fourth degree  crimes, whether  they were                                                                    
     trying to make money off of it  or not.  So we could be                                                                    
     under  broad  and just  be  safe  and do  first  degree                                                                    
     [crimes] and  then the school  zone violations  and the                                                                    
     school bus violations, or we  could try [to] figure out                                                                    
     a way to  do this ... thing about second  and third and                                                                    
     fourth  degree  manufacturer   and  distributions,  but                                                                    
     we'll   never   know   whether   those   were   sharing                                                                    
     distributions  or  sales  distributions.  ...  I  don't                                                                    
     really  know what  to do  about  those.   My sense  is,                                                                    
     leave them  out, we  flag it  for the  school district,                                                                    
     and the  school district  doesn't hire  them ...  - but                                                                    
     maybe they do. ... I don't have the perfect answer.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
TAPE 04-72, SIDE A                                                                                                            
Number 0001                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
MR. MAKINSTER,  in response to  a question, said that  a person's                                                               
teaching certificate  could be revoked if  he/she is [convicted],                                                               
whether for a current offense or  a past offense that has come to                                                               
light; being convicted could also  prevent someone from obtaining                                                               
a teaching certificate.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELS said he didn't  think that a person should                                                               
necessarily have  something he/she did when  younger held against                                                               
him/her; however,  if one is  already a teacher and  is convicted                                                               
of  selling a  controlled substance,  he/she should  lose his/her                                                               
job.                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA responded:                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
     I think  that's the hard part  [about] addressing [this                                                                    
     issue]; you  do want  to get all  the people  who sell,                                                                    
     but this  statute's not defined in  terms of [selling].                                                                    
     The first  degree [crime]  ... is  defined in  terms of                                                                    
     [selling] -  so hard  drugs, if  you sell  them, you're                                                                    
     disqualified - but  in the second and  third and fourth                                                                    
     degree,   the  crime   is   for   distribution.     And                                                                    
     distribution [wouldn't  have to] be sales,  it could be                                                                    
     passing [a  controlled substance] around a  room. ... I                                                                    
     think also  the second,  third, and fourth  degrees are                                                                    
     different  drugs, [and]  I  don't  know the  difference                                                                    
     between any of them [just by] looking at the statute.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
     I  can't tell  you ...  what  a [schedule  IA, IIA,  or                                                                    
     IIIA] drug  is. ...  This is one  of those  areas where                                                                    
     you either get overbroad and  bring in too many things,                                                                    
     or don't  bring in enough.   I don't know how  to bring                                                                    
     in exactly the  number, unless we said at  the end, for                                                                    
     purposes  of this  bill,  [that]  distribution is  only                                                                    
     distribution  for financial  gain. ...  I think  that's                                                                    
     what we  would want, but  I don't think we're  going to                                                                    
     be able  to know  [just] by  looking at  the conviction                                                                    
     whether that  was a distribution  for financial  gain -                                                                    
     we'll  get  a  record   [showing  that  a  person  was]                                                                    
     convicted of AS  11.71.020, and we won't  know what the                                                                    
     conviction was for.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SAMUELS  reiterated  his  belief  that  should  a                                                               
teacher  be convicted  of selling  or distributing  [a controlled                                                               
substance] to a minor, that  teacher should lose his/her teaching                                                               
certificate.                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Number 0312                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA offered  his  belief that  such behavior  is                                                               
covered under  the statute pertaining  to misconduct  involving a                                                               
controlled  substance in  the first  degree.   In  response to  a                                                               
question, he  noted that  the bill includes  the language,  "or a                                                               
law or  ordinance in another  jurisdiction with  elements similar                                                               
to an  offense described  in this subsection",  and that  this is                                                               
not a new provision.  "It's done  in the criminal law now; ... in                                                               
various circumstances,  something that you do  outside, depending                                                               
on  the elements,  can count  towards  a higher  sentence or  ...                                                               
extradition," he added.                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  OGG indicated  that he  is inclined  to have  the                                                               
bill pertain  to all felons  [who are  convicted of this  type of                                                               
crime], and  offered his  belief that someone  who just  shares a                                                               
small amount  of a  controlled substance,  as opposed  to selling                                                               
it, would be a misdemeanant, not a felon.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SAMUELS  asked  where  the line  would  be  drawn                                                               
regarding the amounts being distributed.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  noted that  the  bill  currently applies  to  all                                                               
felons  who  are  convicted  of  this type  of  crime,  but  that                                                               
testimony in  the House Special Committee  on Education indicated                                                               
that  there would  be  more  comfort with  the  bill  if it  only                                                               
applied  to first  and  second degree  convictions  or even  just                                                               
first degree convictions.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  OGG  noted that  the  chair  of the  Professional                                                               
Teaching Practices Commission (PTPC) is present to testify.                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE indicated  a preference for narrowing  the scope of                                                               
the  bill before  taking public  testimony.   She  noted that  AS                                                               
11.71.030(a)(2)   also  pertains   to  delivering   a  controlled                                                               
substance to  a minor, and  asked Representative Gara  whether he                                                               
intended to  include a reference  to that provision  in Amendment                                                               
1.                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA posited that they  probably ought to add that                                                               
reference.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE   noted  that   crimes  involving   marijuana  are                                                               
referenced in the statute pertaining  to misconduct in the fourth                                                               
degree  -  AS 11.71.040;  that  there  is  a court  opinion  that                                                               
affirms a  person's right, under the  Alaska State Constitution's                                                               
privacy clause, to  grow marijuana for personal use  and smoke it                                                               
in  the privacy  of  one's  own home;  and  that  with regard  to                                                               
misconduct involving marijuana, the  bill pertains only to felony                                                               
level crimes.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  recommended either  having the  bill pertain                                                               
to crimes of  misconduct involving a controlled  substance in the                                                               
first  degree and  those connected  with schools  and minors,  or                                                               
having  the bill,  as proposed  via Amendment  1, pertain  to all                                                               
crimes that are  "possession or distribution in  amounts that are                                                               
reflective of  the intent to  distribute" but know that  it might                                                               
be difficult to  determine such by just looking at  what level of                                                               
crime  a person  is convicted  of.   With the  latter option,  he                                                               
surmised  that they  would have  to rely  on school  districts to                                                               
screen teachers and prospective teachers appropriately.                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
Number 0759                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA made a motion  to amend Amendment 1 such that                                                               
it includes at the end:   ", or AS 11.71.030(a)(2)".  There being                                                               
no objection, Amendment 1 was amended.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
Number 0776                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA  made a  motion  to  adopt Amendment  1  [as                                                               
amended].                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  OGG   asked  why  AS   11.71.030(a)(3)(B),  which                                                               
pertains  to  possession  on  a school  bus,  isn't  included  in                                                               
Amendment 1 [as amended].                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said leaving it  out is a mistake; therefore,                                                               
Amendment  1   [as  amended]  should  include   reference  to  AS                                                               
11.71.030(a)(2) and AS 11.71.030(a)(3).                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  suggested  that   Amendment  1  [as  amended]  be                                                               
withdrawn and reoffered, as a new Amendment 1, to that effect.                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  OGG   noted  that   currently  there  is   no  AS                                                               
11.71.030(a)(4).                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  acknowledged that  error and  explained that                                                               
"AS 11.71.030(a)(4)" should instead read "AS 11.71.040(a)(4)".                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE   GRUENBERG   asked   whether  just   saying   "AS                                                               
11.71.040(a)(2)-(4) would be sufficient.                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said no.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  concurred, and pointed  out that the intent  is to                                                               
have   reference   to  AS   11.71.030(a)(2)   and   (3)  and   AS                                                               
11.71.040(a)(4); therefore, Amendment 1 should read:                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     At page 1 line 10                                                                                                          
     delete                                                                                                                     
     "- 11.71.040"                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
     At Page 1 line 11  after "subsection, [sic]" insert "or                                                                    
     under  AS 11.71.020  - .040  if the  conviction is  for                                                                    
     Distribution, or  for possession or  manufacturing with                                                                    
     the  intent  to  distribute,  or  in  violation  of  AS                                                                    
     11.71.030(a)(3),   or   AS   11.71.030(a)(2),   or   AS                                                                    
     11.71.040(a)(4).                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
Number 1050                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  asked  whether   there  were  any  objections  to                                                               
adopting the foregoing  as a new Amendment 1.   There being none,                                                               
Amendment 1 was adopted.                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
Number 1066                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
LARRY  WIGET,  Executive   Director,  Public  Affairs,  Anchorage                                                               
School District  (ASD), noted that  members should have  in their                                                               
possession  the Anchorage  School  District's position  statement                                                               
regarding HB 551.  He went on to say:                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
     Currently   the  law   prohibits  the   [Department  of                                                                    
     Education and Early Development  (DEED)] from issuing a                                                                    
     teaching  certificate   to  a   person  who   has  been                                                                    
     convicted of a crime -  or an attempt, solicitation, or                                                                    
     conspiracy to commit a crime  - involving a minor.  The                                                                    
     proposed revisions to  HB 551 would not  require that a                                                                    
     crime   had  any   connection  (indisc.   -  microphone                                                                    
     interference) that  there was a nexus  to the classroom                                                                    
     or teaching.  Drug  convictions have [been] singled out                                                                    
     from other felonies [into]  class by themselves without                                                                    
     any  ability to  look at  the totality  [of] individual                                                                    
     situations. ...                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                
     I  believe it  would be  the preference  of the  ASD to                                                                    
     follow  more  along  the guidelines  that  [are  being]                                                                    
     suggested  in  a  letter  that  I  just  received  this                                                                    
     afternoon ... from  the Professional Teaching Practices                                                                    
     Commission,  in  which  the commission  has  asked  its                                                                    
     executive  director to  draft a  regulation that  would                                                                    
     expressly   include  felony   level  crimes   involving                                                                    
     possession  of a  controlled substance  to the  list of                                                                    
     crimes of  moral turpitude.   This  regulation provides                                                                    
     guides  to   school  districts  in   making  employment                                                                    
     decisions regarding (indisc.)   The commission believes                                                                    
     that this  will address  the concern that  prompted the                                                                    
     proposed  amendment to  HB 551  - that's  basically our                                                                    
     position ....                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                
Number 1165                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
BONNIE   BARBER,   Executive  Director,   Professional   Teaching                                                               
Practices Commission  (PTPC), clarified  that the  PTPC currently                                                               
views  possession  of  a controlled  substance  for  the  purpose                                                               
distribution as  a crime of  moral turpitude, and noted  that the                                                               
PTPC has  revoked the teaching  certificate of  someone convicted                                                               
of such  a crime.  However,  although this is the  PTPC's current                                                               
practice, the  current regulation  does not  specifically include                                                               
such a  crime in  its list of  what constitutes  moral turpitude.                                                               
Because of  this lack,  she relayed,  the PTPC  has asked  her to                                                               
draft  an  amendment to  add  felony  possession to  the  current                                                               
regulation pertaining to moral turpitude.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE indicated  that  the committee  is  focusing on  a                                                               
statutory  fix  and  would  not  be  opposed  to  the  PTPC  also                                                               
addressing the issue via a change in regulations.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  GARA  concurred,  adding,  that  the  legislature                                                               
certainly has  every intention  of letting  the PTPC  decide that                                                               
there is additional conduct for which  it will not hire a teacher                                                               
or for which it will terminate a teacher.                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Number 1265                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
LAWRENCE  LEE  OLDAKER,  Chair, Professional  Teaching  Practices                                                               
Commission  (PTPC),  after  mentioning  that he  is  a  professor                                                               
emeritus at the University of  Alaska Southeast, noted that he is                                                               
providing members  with a formal  written statement by  the PTPC.                                                               
He went on to say that  the PTPC opposes the [change proposed via                                                               
HB 551]  because although  the PTPC  does not  countenance felony                                                               
behavior involving controlled substances,  the PTPC is capable of                                                               
handling such matters on an  individual basis without making such                                                               
behavior something  for which a  person would  automatically have                                                               
his/her teaching certificate revoked for life.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
MR.  OLDAKER,  too,  mentioned   that  the  PTPC  is  considering                                                               
altering  the   current  regulation   regarding  acts   of  moral                                                               
turpitude in  order to bring it  more in line with  what is being                                                               
proposed via  HB 551, and  indicated that although the  PTPC does                                                               
not condone  felony behavior involving controlled  substances, it                                                               
is willing  to take into  account that  a person can  change over                                                               
time  and, thus,  having a  felony conviction  for actions  taken                                                               
when  he/she  is young  might  not  necessarily be  a  sufficient                                                               
reason to revoke a teaching certificate for life.                                                                               
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE remarked  that the  comments  from testifiers  are                                                               
well taken,  and that  the committee is  endeavoring to  limit HB                                                               
551 so that it applies only to the most serious conduct.                                                                        
                                                                                                                                
MR.  OLDAKER  noted   that  since  1990  there   have  been  five                                                               
revocations related to felony  convictions involving a controlled                                                               
substance, and eight revocations related  to other behavior.  "So                                                               
we have taken ... effective steps," he opined.                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE  agreed, but  added  that  as  a matter  of  state                                                               
policy,  she feels  it  is appropriate  to  include the  proposed                                                               
change in statute  while still allowing the PTPC  the latitude to                                                               
address   issues  regarding   behavior  that   constitutes  moral                                                               
turpitude.  "We're  just trying to draw the line  at those really                                                               
serious offenses  and the  ones that it  sounds like  you already                                                               
take action on anyway," she concluded.                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR. OLDAKER, in response to  comments, clarified that the PTPC is                                                               
considering adding  felony possession  of a  controlled substance                                                               
to the list of conduct that is considered moral turpitude.                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA relayed that  some members of the legislature                                                               
are reluctant  to make possession, even  felony possession, cause                                                               
for precluding someone from teaching later on in life.                                                                          
                                                                                                                                
MR.  OLDAKER agreed  to keep  that in  mind.   At the  request of                                                               
Representative  Gruenberg, on  an  unrelated  topic, Mr.  Oldaker                                                               
mentioned  some changes  to the  PTPC's rules  of operation  that                                                               
he'd like to see instituted.                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                
Number 1737                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to report  HB 551, as amended, out                                                               
of   committee   with    individual   recommendations   and   the                                                               
accompanying  fiscal  note.    There  being  no  objection,  CSHB                                                               
551(JUD)  was   reported  from   the  House   Judiciary  Standing                                                               
Committee.                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
HB 545 - STATE LEASE AND CONTRACT EXTENSIONS                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                
Number 1750                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR McGUIRE  announced that the  final order of  business would                                                               
be HOUSE  BILL NO. 545, "An  Act relating to the  extension under                                                               
the State  Procurement Code of  terms for leases for  real estate                                                               
and  certain terms  for  certain state  contracts  for goods  and                                                               
services;  and providing  for an  effective date."   [Before  the                                                               
committee was CSHB 545(L&C).]                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 1765                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
VERN  JONES,  Chief  Procurement  Officer,  Division  of  General                                                               
Services,  Department  of  Administration (DOA),  said  that  the                                                               
state's procurement code currently  allows the state to negotiate                                                               
extensions of real  estate leases for up to 10  years in exchange                                                               
for rent reductions.   House Bill 545 would  increase the state's                                                               
ability   to  negotiate   lease   extensions   by  changing   the                                                               
requirement threshold from a 10-15  percent reduction in existing                                                               
lease  rates to  a 10  percent  reduction in  the current  market                                                               
rate.   Existing  statutory  restrictions  on these  negotiations                                                               
have hampered the state's ability  to negotiate lease extensions,                                                               
he  opined, and  relayed that  the  increase in  the real  estate                                                               
market in Alaska  combined with the way the  state structures its                                                               
leases  often makes  it  so  that a  10-15  percent reduction  in                                                               
existing lease rates is unattainable.                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR. JONES  posited that tying  the reduced rates to  a percentage                                                               
below the current  market is a more  reasonable approach, adding,                                                               
"we believe  [it] will  allow us  to negotiate  successfully more                                                               
often, and  the more frequently we're  able to do that,  the more                                                               
we can avoid  the lengthy, costly re-procurement  process, not to                                                               
mention the cost and disruption  of moving large numbers of state                                                               
offices  and state  employees as  well as  the disruption  to the                                                               
public."  Referring  to a chart, he said that  a substantial part                                                               
of  lease   costs  are  for   tenant  improvements   and  upfront                                                               
construction.   These costs are typically  financed and amortized                                                               
by lessors over  the initial term of a lease,  and oftentimes the                                                               
lessor  will  offer the  state  dramatically  lower priced  lease                                                               
rates for renewal periods.                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. JONES said  that in those cases, at the  end of initial lease                                                               
periods, there  is already a  reduced rate, and so  attempting to                                                               
negotiate an  additional 15 percent  reduction as is  required by                                                               
current law is  often unachievable.  He added that  the DOA feels                                                               
that this  bill would  remedy that  situation, would  change that                                                               
requirement  from  a  10-15  percent  reduction  of  the  already                                                               
reduced  rate to  a  10  percent reduction  of  market rate,  and                                                               
market rate,  as defined in  CSHB 545(L&C), would  be established                                                               
either by  an assessment of value  or a real estate  appraisal of                                                               
rental value.                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
MR. JONES,  in response  to a question,  said that  CSHB 545(L&C)                                                               
now contains  a definition of  market rate, stipulates  a minimum                                                               
cost savings of  10 percent, and only applies to  office space or                                                               
real estate leases.                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                
Number 1932                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
CHAIR  McGUIRE, after  ascertaining that  no one  else wished  to                                                               
testify, close public testimony on HB 545.                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA remarked:                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
     The bill  is fine.  It  just seems to me,  whenever you                                                                    
     get  in the  procurement  code, you  end  up having  to                                                                    
     write  down rules  of logic  instead of  letting people                                                                    
     just exercise  logic.  And  so the rule of  logic we've                                                                    
     come  up  with is,  if  the  state thinks  that  they'd                                                                    
     actually  just save  money by  not  moving, that's  not                                                                    
     good  enough unless  they would  save 10  percent.   Is                                                                    
     that  the  way  the  bill  reads?   I  mean,  [do]  you                                                                    
     actually have  to save 10  percent or else you  have to                                                                    
     move?                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                
MR. JONES  replied, "You would need  to achieve a rental  rate of                                                               
at  least 10  percent below  market value  if you  want to  avoid                                                               
moving."  If the bill passes,  the state could negotiate a rental                                                               
rate that  would be  a guaranteed 10  percent below  market value                                                               
and the  state could avoid costly  moving expenses.  If  the bill                                                               
doesn't pass,  the state would  have to pay moving  expenses plus                                                               
possibly have  to pay market rate  at a new location.   He opined                                                               
that passage of the bill is a  tool that will make the state more                                                               
efficient and allow it to reduce costs.                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE GARA  offered his  belief that  even if  the state                                                               
can't  achieve  the minimum  cost  savings  of 10  percent  below                                                               
market  value, it  could still  save something  by not  having to                                                               
move  and  go  through  the whole  request  for  proposals  (RFP)                                                               
process; therefore, perhaps the state  should not limit itself to                                                               
a 10 percent minimum.                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
MR.   JONES,   in  response,   relayed   that   he  agrees   with                                                               
Representative  Gara's point,  adding, "If  I could,  I'd use  my                                                               
discretion  in every  matter, but  in the  last committee  it was                                                               
decided  that ...  5 percent  really wasn't  enough to  avoid the                                                               
open competitive  process that would  otherwise be there,  so ...                                                               
it was increased to 10 percent."   He noted that moving costs are                                                               
typically around "$1 a foot"  and are not included in calculating                                                               
the minimum cost savings.                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                
Number 2059                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
REPRESENTATIVE  SAMUELS  moved to  report  CSHB  545(L&C) out  of                                                               
committee  with individual  recommendations and  the accompanying                                                               
zero fiscal  note.  There  being no objection, CSHB  545(L&C) was                                                               
reported from the House Judiciary Standing Committee.                                                                           
                                                                                                                                
ADJOURNMENT                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                
Number 2062                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                
There being no  further business before the  committee, the House                                                               
Judiciary Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.                                                                 

Document Name Date/Time Subjects