04/10/2007 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HJR7 | |
| HJR15 | |
| HB193 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HJR 7 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HJR 15 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 193 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
April 10, 2007
8:06 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Bob Lynn, Chair
Representative Bob Roses, Vice Chair
Representative John Coghill
Representative Kyle Johansen
Representative Craig Johnson
Representative Andrea Doll
Representative Max Gruenberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 7
Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska
to avoid the use of personal pronouns and similar references
that denote masculine or feminine gender in that document.
- MOVED CSHJR 7(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 15
Supporting the passage of a Filipino Veterans Equity Act and a
Filipino Veterans Family Reunification Act.
- MOVED CSHJR 15(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 193
"An Act relating to the composition of the Alaska Police
Standards Council; and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 193(STA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HJR 7
SHORT TITLE: CONST AM: GENDER-NEUTRAL REFERENCES
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) GATTO
01/30/07 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/30/07 (H) STA, JUD, FIN
04/03/07 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
04/03/07 (H) Heard & Held
04/03/07 (H) MINUTE(STA)
04/10/07 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HJR 15
SHORT TITLE: WW II FILIPINO VETS:BENEFITS/IMMIGRATION
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) LEDOUX
03/29/07 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/29/07 (H) MLV, STA
04/03/07 (H) MLV REFERRAL WAIVED
04/10/07 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 193
SHORT TITLE: POLICE STANDARDS COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) ROSES
03/12/07 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/12/07 (H) STA, FIN
04/03/07 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
04/03/07 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
04/10/07 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
SANDRA WILSON, Intern
to Representative Carl Gatto
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to concerns expressed by
committee members during a prior hearing on HJR 7, on behalf of
Representative Gatto, prime sponsor.
REPRESENTATIVE CARL GATTO
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Offered brief comment as prime sponsor of
HJR 7.
NORMAN COHEN, Staff
to Representative Max Gruenberg
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Offered clarification during the hearing on
HJR 7.
REPRESENTATIVE GABRIELLE LEDOUX
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HJR 15 as prime sponsor.
CHRISTINE MARASIGAN, Staff
to Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Offered clarification regarding HJR 15 on
behalf of Representative LeDoux, prime sponsor.
CRYSTAL NOVOTNEY, Staff
to Representative Bob Roses
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided comment during the hearing on HB
193 on behalf of Representative Roses, prime sponsor.
JOHN CYR, Executive Director
Public Safety Employees Association (PSEA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on HB 193.
TERRY VRABEC, Executive Director
Alaska Police Standards Council (APSC)
Department of Public Safety
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 193.
ACTION NARRATIVE
VICE CHAIR BOB ROSES called the House State Affairs Standing
Committee meeting to order at 8:06:17 AM. Representatives
Coghill, Johansen, Johnson, Gruenberg, Doll, and Roses were
present at the call to order. Representative Lynn arrived as
the meeting was in progress.
HJR 7-CONST AM: GENDER-NEUTRAL REFERENCES
8:07:08 AM
VICE CHAIR ROSES announced that the first order of business was
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 7, Proposing amendments to the
Constitution of the State of Alaska to avoid the use of personal
pronouns and similar references that denote masculine or
feminine gender in that document.
8:07:41 AM
SANDRA WILSON, Intern to Representative Carl Gatto, Alaska State
Legislature, responded to concerns expressed by committee
members during a prior hearing on HJR 7, on behalf of
Representative Gatto, prime sponsor. She explained that the
resolution simply proposes to substitute all masculine pronouns
with titles. For example, she said, "his" might be "governor."
The meaning, she added, would not be changed.
8:08:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he had requested a legal opinion on
HJR 7, as well as conducting a thorough search of the
legislation himself, to discern whether or not the resolution
would have any unintended consequence. He directed attention to
a sentence from [a memorandum in the committee packet, from Jack
Chenoweth, Assistant Revisor, Legislative Legal and Research
Services, dated April 4, 2007], which read as follows:
The material in the resolution is arguably wholly
technical and not intended to make a substantive
change in a matter of constitutional law.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said although the changes are so vast, he
could not think of any concern he still has regarding the policy
call of HJR 7.
8:10:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CARL GATTO, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor of HJR 7, said he conducted the same search as
Representative Coghill, after which he was assured that HJR 7
would do what it is intended to do.
8:11:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL mentioned court cases, and he said there
is a point at which a huge quantitative change could be
considered a revision, which would require a constitutional
convention.
8:12:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG revisited the issue he brought up
during the prior hearing on HJR 7, regarding the occurrence of
the term "secretary of state" within HJR 7. [He had suggested
the need to change that term, and had been told that that should
not be done as part of HJR 7.] He related that subsequent to
that hearing, [his staff had] spoken with Mr. Chenoweth, whose
recommendation echoed that which Representative Gruenberg had
been given at the prior hearing.
8:12:50 AM
NORMAN COHEN, Staff to Representative Max Gruenberg, on behalf
of Representative Gruenberg, explained that Mr. Chenoweth's
concern was that "it could then get into the area of revision
...."
8:13:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG recommended that the House Judiciary
Standing Committee consider the issue of gender and the
reference to secretary of state.
VICE CHAIR ROSES, after ascertaining that there was no one else
to testify, closed public testimony.
8:14:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL directed attention to an article in the
committee packet, entitled, "States Balance He's And She's," and
quoted one sentence, which read as follows: "State
constitutions are living historical documents that need to
reflect the day and time in which they are protecting their
citizens." For that reason, she said, she strongly supports HJR
7.
8:15:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG directed attention to page 3, line 18
of the resolution, where "[HIS]" would be deleted. He said it
would be awkward without a replacement such as "the election" or
"the governor".
8:15:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO concurred.
8:16:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt Amendment 1 as follows:
On page 3, line 18:
Before "election"
Insert "the governor's"
8:16:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL objected. He pointed out that the
beginning of the sentence in question already makes mention of
"the governor"; therefore, he questioned the need to use it
again.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would agree to just saying "the
election".
VICE CHAIR ROSES announced that the committee is amending
Amendment 1, so that the language would now read: "following
the election".
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL removed his objection to Amendment 1, as
amended. There being no further objection, Amendment 1, as
amended, was adopted.
8:18:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he would vote to move HJR 7 out of
committee; however, he said he struggles with "changing the
whole constitution this way." He explained that he can see the
benefit of the resolution, but he said any move toward political
correctness always make him a little nervous. He pointed out
all the offices currently held by females, and he said he
understands why the masculine gender is not always appropriate;
however, he related that in most of the literature he has read,
both historical and contemporary, the word "he" refers to gender
neutral. He indicated that he supports equality, but would not
support wiping out all references to the male gender.
8:23:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL said she thinks HJR 7 is a significant step
that has nothing to do with putting one gender down or bringing
another up. She emphasized the necessity of recognizing
equality by making language gender neutral.
8:24:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated his support of HJR 7.
8:24:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to report HJR 7, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHJR 7(STA) was
reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.
[VICE CHAIR ROSES handed the gavel back over to Chair Lynn.]
8:25:21 AM
CHAIR LYNN concurred with the action of the committee.
The committee took an at-ease from 8:25:40 AM to 8:30:02 AM.
HJR 15-WW II FILIPINO VETS:BENEFITS/IMMIGRATION
8:30:08 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the next order of business was HOUSE
JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 15, Supporting the passage of a Filipino
Veterans Equity Act and a Filipino Veterans Family Reunification
Act.
8:30:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL moved to adopt the committee substitute (CS)
for HJR 15, Version 25-LS0718\M, Bannister, 4/9/07, as a work
draft.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG objected.
8:30:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GABRIELLE LEDOUX, Alaska State Legislature,
presented HJR 15 as prime sponsor. She paraphrased from her
sponsor statement, which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
This resolution from the Alaska State Legislature
respectfully urges the United States Congress to pass
the Filipino Veterans Equity Act and the Filipino
Veterans Family Reunification Act.
From 1898 until 1946, the Philippine Islands were
considered a territory of the United States. During
Word War II the military forces of the Philippines
were drafted into service under the command of
American officers in the United States armed forces in
the Far East to fight against the Japanese invasion.
Filipino and American soldiers fought side by side in
such battles as Corregidor. Many died during the 65-
mile Bataan Death March, and those who survived were
imprisoned under inhumane conditions.
Filipino World War II veterans were promised military
benefits, but after the War the United States Congress
passed the Supplemental Surplus Appropriation
Rescission Act of 1946. The act considered the
services of Filipino World War II veterans not to be
active service. This status change had the effect of
denying Filipino World War II veterans the rights,
privileges and benefits that American World War II
veterans received.
There have been several attempts to reverse this
injustice. In 1990, Filipino World War II Veterans
were allowed to immigrate to the U.S. Many of them did
and petitioned for their immediate families. In 2000,
they were provided with military burial benefits and
in 2003 they were provided long overdue medical and
nursing home care from the U.S. Dept. of Veterans
Affairs.
The Filipino Veterans Equity Act and the Filipino
Veterans Family Reunification Act would correct a
terrible injustice by: 1) providing veterans the full
benefits they were denied; and 2) providing immediate
relief for those veterans and their families who have
waited for more than a decade with approved
immigration petitions.
REPRESENTATIVE LeDOUX reviewed the changes that were made in
Version M. The resolution, she said, used to state that
Filipino soldiers fought with American soldiers, which could be
construed to mean they fought against them. Therefore, the
language [on page 1, line 7,] was changed to read, "Filipino
soldiers fought shoulder-to-shoulder with American soldiers".
Furthermore, on page 3 of the resolution, the list of those
receiving copies was augmented.
8:33:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES noted that all seven members of the House
State Affairs Standing Committee had signed on as [co-sponsors]
of HJR 15.
8:33:55 AM
CHRISTINE MARASIGAN, Staff to Representative Gabrielle LeDoux,
Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative LeDoux,
prime sponsor of HJR 15, confirmed for Representative Gruenberg
that "both bills" will be heard by the House and Senate Military
and Veterans' Affairs Committees.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1,
to send copies of the resolution to all sponsors and co-sponsors
in each house.
8:34:56 AM
MS. MARASIGAN stated her understanding that today, at
approximately 5:30 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, there will be
World War II veterans from across the United States placing a
wreath at the National World War II memorial in honor of their
fallen comrades. The following day, they will be lobbying to
get more co-sponsors on "this particular piece of legislation."
She asked Representative Gruenberg if his conceptual amendment
is asking that the resolution be sent to current co-sponsors.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked the sponsor what her wishes in
the matter are.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX said she would like the resolution sent to
everyone who is a cosponsor as of the passage date.
8:35:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG [amended his original motion] by
suggesting "to add it to all sponsors and co-sponsors of ... all
four bills in Congress, as of the date the governor signs ...."
8:36:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL objected to Conceptual Amendment 1, as
amended, for clarification purposes.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG explained:
There are four pending bills, and my motion is to send
... copies of this resolution to all sponsors and co-
sponsors of all four pending bills. ... That would be
as of the date the governor reads this resolution and
she decides if it is a joint resolution.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL removed his objection.
8:37:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG removed his objection to adopting
Version M as a work draft so that his amendment might be
considered.
[There being no further objection, Version M was before the
committee, and Conceptual Amendment 1, as amended, was treated
as adopted.]
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG named someone whom the resolution would
affect. He noted that there is a bill that would allow the
Filipino veterans to receive United States veterans' benefits.
He recommended that the sponsor consider extending state
veterans' benefits.
8:38:37 AM
CHAIR LYNN said that might be good legislation to look at in the
future. He noted that he grew up during World War II, and he
stated that the Philippine people have been staunch allies of
the United States of America for a long time, and HJR 15 is the
least the legislature can do for them.
8:39:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to report CSHJR 15, Version 25-
LS0718\M, Bannister, 4/9/07, as amended, out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, CSHJR 15(STA) was reported out of the
House State Affairs Standing Committee.
HB 193-POLICE STANDARDS COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP
8:39:56 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the last order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 193, "An Act relating to the composition of the Alaska
Police Standards Council; and providing for an effective date."
8:40:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES presented HB 193 as prime sponsor. He said
the group he is most familiar with that governs itself is the
Professional Teacher Practices Commission (PTPC). He said in
the commission, peers evaluate what they do and don't do;
however, at no point in time have a majority of those serving
that commission been teachers. He related that HB 193 follows
that same use of peers. Regarding the Alaska Police Standards
Council (APSC), he said the bill recommends a reduction in the
number of chief administrative officers from four to three.
Furthermore, it proposes adding three police officers to the
board, reducing the number of public members down to three, and
eliminating "one of the other commissions" in order to have a
more balanced approach to the profession. Currently,
Representative Roses noted, the standard is that the council is
comprised of commissioners, chiefs, and four private citizens.
He said more often than not those private citizens have been
retired police chiefs. Referring again to the PTPC meetings, he
noted that the people who were the hardest on policing their own
ranks were the teachers themselves. He stated, "And I have no
doubt in my mind that the police officers, as well, are going to
hold their colleagues up to a high standard, and that would be
the anticipation and the expectation." He said that was his
intent in bringing forward HB 193.
8:44:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL directed attention to page 1, paragraph
1, which lists "correctional administrative officer", and
paragraph 3, which names "the commissioner of corrections". He
asked, "It's intended, then, that you have two correctional
officers on this particular council?"
8:44:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES replied, "The way I read it is it's
currently the way it happens, yes."
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL indicated that he is wary of taking
members of the community off boards. He asked, "How many police
organizations are in bargaining units and how many are not?"
8:45:34 AM
CRYSTAL NOVOTNEY, Staff to Representative Bob Roses, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Roses, prime
sponsor of HB 193, said she does not have that information.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said that would be good information to
acquire.
8:46:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES suggested that John Cyr may have an answer
to that query. Notwithstanding that, he told Representative
Coghill that he is correct that the language in the bill
specifies that the nominations would be made "through that
mechanism." However, he pointed out that the language "doesn't
hold the governor's responsibility to only accepting those
nominations."
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he wants to know what the balance
is. If it is 50/50, he said, the committee may want to add
language to allow other communities to make nominations.
8:47:33 AM
JOHN CYR, Executive Director, Public Safety Employees
Association (PSEA), told the committee that PSEA represents a
large number of police officers around state. In response to
Representative Coghill's question, he listed the following
entities represented either by PSEA or other unions: the police
officers of Anchorage, Fairbanks, Juneau, Sitka, Ketchikan,
Soldotna, and Unalaska, the Alaska State Troopers, and airport
police and firefighters. He said there are some smaller groups
with their own associations, such as Wasilla. He stated that he
would have no objection to "anyone submitting names to the
governor."
8:48:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked Mr. Cyr, "Do you know of any forces
that are not in an association that's a bargaining unit?"
8:49:09 AM
MR. CYR answered yes. He named the following as being
"nonrepresented": Haines, Skagway, North Pole, Palmer, North
Slope Borough, Bethel, and Kotzebue.
8:49:59 AM
CHAIR LYNN stated his understanding that the governor could
choose a beat officer that is or is not represented.
MS. NOVOTNEY answered that is correct.
8:50:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he does not have a problem with
recommendations being made, but he has concerns regarding the
smaller communities and the change proposed in the bill [to]
"three" [from] "[FOUR]".
8:51:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said his office has, in connection with
other legislation, looked at the general difference between
"peace officer" and "police officer." He noted that Article 2
of AS 18.65 includes all the statutes relating to the Alaska
Police Standards Council. He said the council not only covers
police, but also covers probation, parole, and correctional
officers. He directed attention to page 2, line 9 of the bill,
which shows the term, "public safety employees". He said he is
not aware if that term appears anywhere in the aforementioned
statute and has a definition. He asked Ms. Novotney if that
term is defined anywhere in law.
8:53:20 AM
MS. NOVOTNEY said she doesn't know but can search for the
answer.
8:53:47 AM
MR. CYR responded that he does not know.
8:53:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he would like that term defined,
otherwise there could be some question as to what organizations
are covered. He asked if Village Public Safety Officers (VPSOs)
are covered under the Alaska Police Standards Council.
MR. CYR offered his understanding that they are. He continued:
I know that the commissioner has had long discussions
with the ... APSC about changing the scope of their
job, the way they do business, advanced training -
those kinds of things - and frankly, that is one of
the concerns that has generated this as we move into
the twenty-first century with policing. I mean, our
membership is very interested in how all those pieces
fit together, ... the intersection between the sworn
officer ... who carries a gun and is totally
empowered, and the other variations of officers that
we have across the state. And so, those are the
concerns that we bring to the table when we ask for
representation.
8:55:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said "police officer" is defined in AS
18.65.290(7), which read as follows:
(7) "police officer" means
(A) a full-time employee of the state or a
municipal police department with the authority to
arrest and issue citations; detain a person taken into
custody until that person can be arraigned before a
judge or magistrate; conduct investigations of
violations of and enforce criminal laws, regulations,
and traffic laws; search with or without a warrant
persons, dwellings, and other forms of property for
evidence of a crime; and take other action consistent
with exercise of these enumerated powers when
necessary to maintain the public peace;
(B) an officer or employee of the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities who is stationed
at an international airport and has been designated to
have the general police powers authorized under AS
02.15.230(a);
(C) a University of Alaska public safety officer
with general police powers authorized under AS
14.40.043;
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he wonders whether the definition
should be expanded to include VPSOs. He said, "We don't very
often have a bill that deals with the Alaska police standards
council, and it sounds like there are some things ... that the
legislature might want to bring up to date."
8:56:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said most VPSOs are under contract with
local Native organizations. He concurred with Representative
Gruenberg that the issue should be addressed, but questioned
whether now is the best time to do so, since the new
commissioner has already said he would be looking at these
issues.
8:57:28 AM
CHAIR LYNN directed attention to a sentence on page 2,
[beginning on line 7], which read as follows:
(b) When making appointments of police
officer members of the council under (a) of this
section, the governor may consider police officers who
have been nominated by labor organizations that
represent public safety employees.
CHAIR LYNN asked Mr. Cyr if he would object to the addition of
language to clarify that the governor may consider both police
officers who have been nominated by labor organizations and
those who are not affiliated with labor organizations.
8:58:17 AM
MR. CYR yielded to the sponsor of the bill to make that choice,
but he said he would have no objection. He stated, "We would
like to see police officers represented on this committee, and
whether they ... come from our organization or APD or the City
of North Pole, ... I think they all have something in common and
something to offer at this level. And that was our intent to
begin with."
8:58:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he would like to know more about the
various types of training.
8:59:43 AM
MR. CYR responded as follows:
The difference between ... a labor organization like
IBEW [International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers]
or the Teamsters is: to get an IBEW card and to be
trained, you need to go through their training
organization and become a member before you get a job.
With a public sector union, it actually is the
opposite. Our members go to the ... academy in Sitka,
they work through that basic program, [and] then they
... move into the [field training evaluation program
(FTAP)] program where they're given to a field
training officer in the field .... They spend a year,
basically on [on-the-job training (OJT)] and then get
a basic police certificate. They become our members
when they get their job.
So, the point you make is, I think, exactly why we are
concerned. A lot has been made about the training -
how it works, is the system broken, what is happening
- and I have, in all my testimony, said ... this is
not about the system being broken; this is about
trying to make it better.
Having said that, if we look at the ... graduation
rates at the academies that have gone for the last
four or five years, those rates have been dismally
low. Folks have been leaving the academy, not because
they have failed, but because they - for whatever
reason - no longer wish to attend. The training
programs in the field: our members are those field
training officers, and they talk to me daily about the
folks that they're getting and what their concerns
[are], and who we have in the public. Those training
standards, that schooling - all of that - is handled
by the [Alaska] Police Standards Council.
The input that we have now runs through the chain of
command. If you are a State Trooper in Soldotna, and
you have concerns about the training, you go to your
sergeant, who goes to the lieutenant, who goes to the
captain, who goes to the major, who -- I mean, you
understand that. And yeah, that is input and that
does help ..., but what we really are interested in is
being able to sit at the table and look at those
programs, and try to make them better, so that they
are more responsive and that we move into the twenty-
first century together. I think this ... is critical
for Alaska. We have, as you all know, a host of
problems out there that get worse every day - from
"meth" [methamphetamine] labs to gang violence. And I
guess I think that those guys who are on the ground -
whether we represent them or not - the working police
officer who interacts every day should have a place -
a forum, if you will - to sit as equals and talk about
the programs that affect their lives and the community
at the end.
9:02:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said this is the type of discussion that
the committee needs to have. He stated his appreciation of
bargaining units, but admitted that he has not been one of the
greatest fans of public bargaining, even though he understands
the value of it. He expressed concern that there would be
people nominated to the standards council, but not based on
training capacity. He said he thinks bringing valuable police
officers to the council is appropriate, because they work "at
the ground level" and know what is going on at that level.
9:04:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES said members of the Alaska Retirement
Management (ARM) Board are nominated by labor organizations such
as the National Education Association (NEA)-Alaska and APEA, and
"it says they 'shall' pick from those nominations." The same is
true regarding PTPC: names are forwarded by NEA-Alaska or AFT
to the governor, who "shall" choose from that list of nominees.
He said there was a recent court case regarding that issue.
Representative Roses said he made certain the language in HB 193
read "may" rather than "shall". He specified, "And on every one
of those boards, they do not hold a majority position on the
board; they never are going to be able, as an entity, to control
the vote. And so, ... the intent was representational." He
stated, "It is not the intent of this bill to have somebody
who's currently serving be removed. ... When their term expires
then the person would step in." He said he does not think
anyone has done a poor job; he just wants to improve upon
representation.
9:07:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if the bill would go so far as to
allow a biologist working for the Department of Natural
Resources, who witnesses someone dumping toxic waste, to issue a
citation.
9:08:38 AM
MS. NOVOTNEY directed attention to language in the bill which
outlines the composition of council. [Paragraph 4] lists "three
police officers, each of whom has been certified for five years
or more by the council under this chapter". She said the DNR
biologist in Representative Johnson's example would not "fall
into that category."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON pointed out that that biologist could go
through all the training, so that in five years he/she could be
certified, without actually ever having frontline experience in
police law enforcement. He continued:
Or a [Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G)] person who
has full police authority can carry a firearm. Is
that someone we want to look at as being on the police
standards council, when most of their job is ... very
narrowly targeted to game ...? And I think they would
qualify under "police officer."
9:09:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES responded that the critical part of
Representative Johnson's remark was whether that person had gone
through all the training, in which case he/she would qualify.
He said the distinction between those working in DNR and the
officers being discussed is that "they are certified currently
under the chapter of the council, and that they have five years
of experience." He added, "Also, nothing stops them from being
one of the public at large members."
9:10:58 AM
MR. CYR noted that in order to obtain a basic police
certificate, a person must: graduate from academy, complete the
field training officer program, and spend a year on the street
doing police work. He said, "We're talking about professional
police officers here."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked if the "brown shirts" in ADF&G have
been through the academy.
MR. CYR answered that those employees are actually Alaska State
Troopers and, as such, are fully certified police officers.
9:12:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG handed out copies of AS 18.65.290(7)
[text provided previously]. He directed attention to the bill,
page 2, line 8, and said he thinks the language should include
correctional officers.
9:13:53 AM
MS. NOVOTNEY indicated that she is willing to check on that.
9:14:18 AM
TERRY VRABEC, Executive Director, Alaska Police Standards
Council, Department of Public Safety, clarified that VPSOs,
although they receive extensive training, are not certified
police officers. He directed attention to a 2-page letter,
dated April 5, 2007, which he had sent to Representative Bill
Thomas [included in the committee packet]. The letter expresses
the reaction to a recent council meeting, at which Mr. Cyr
spoke. He paraphrased two paragraphs on the second page, which
read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
A poll of each Council member showed deep concern over
changing the current composition of the Council.
Council membership is extremely concerned that PSEA is
attempting to push Council into a "labor-management"
role by their use of the term equity. APSC has never
been a labor-management influenced group, and for good
reason. The Council is an executive level decision-
making body that deals with complex decertification
matters of police, correction and probation officers.
It is these decisions that require seasoned executives
of law enforcement, correction/probation, and of our
public, all of whom are appointed by the Governor to
provide a necessary balance of professional knowledge,
training with public transparency and trust.
The attempt to remove chief administrative officers
and public members from the Council and replace them
with organized labor-nominated, line officers severely
impinges on the professional standards and
certification role of the Council -- the number one
priority here is to maintain the public trust.
Organized labor's number one priority is to its
membership.
MR. VRABEC confirmed what was mentioned earlier, that the
council deals with not only police officers, but also
correction, probation, and parole officers, even though the
probation and parole offices "fall under the corrections unit."
He said he has spoken with people in the commissioner's office
in the Department of Corrections, and that office expressed
concern that it could be losing a position on the council.
Furthermore, the office expressed that if line officers were to
be considered for police officer positions, it would like to
consider line officers for corrections officers.
MR. VRABEC said after speaking with Mr. Cyr, the council felt
that some issues were training related and would not change by
putting police officers on the council. He explained that even
though the council demands a certain amount of hours for police
academy and field training, it does not regulate the independent
departments' training. He suggested that some of the labor
employees' concerns are department issues that "we're not going
to be able to address, on account that it's just not in our
purview." He said the commissioner of DPS discussed the
possibility of having an ad hoc committee to submit concerns to
the council, but Mr. Vrabec reiterated that the council will not
be able to regulate what some of the departments do for
training.
MR. VRABEC, in conclusion, stated that the council does not
support HB 193 at this time.
9:18:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES said he understands there is more involved
in this issue than just training. He emphasized the seriousness
of taking someone who has worked towards a profession and no
longer allowing them to do so. He said he does not question the
integrity of the council. He stated his concern is equal
representation. He said medical review boards, for example, are
not made up solely of hospital administrators, but also include
physicians. Every board that makes the decision whether or not
to remove someone from a profession is made of peers. He said
the five police chiefs who came to his office said they think
"this became an opportunity for the union to have a second bite
of the apple when it came to discipline." Representative Roses
said he told the police chiefs he agreed and that he sees the
situation as "the administrators having a second bite of
discipline, as well." All five police chiefs, he said, voiced
concern that "a bill was brought forward when the PSEA had not
taken the time to come to the council and at least request that
this council membership be revised." He said HB 193 was ready
to be heard a month ago, but he had specifically requested that
it be held until after the council held its April 2 meeting,
because he hoped that [PSEA and the council] would come to some
agreement without the legislature's intervention. That did not
happen, he said.
9:21:39 AM
MR. VRABEC responded that the discussion was taken seriously,
but in the end, no agreement related to HB 193 was reached. In
response to a question from Representative Roses, he said the
current make-up of the board includes: four police chiefs, the
commissioner of the Department of Corrections, the commissioner
of the Department of Public Safety, a designee of the Department
of Corrections, and four public members. He mentioned the
backgrounds and experience of the public members.
9:24:08 AM
MR. VRABEC, in response to a question from Representative
Coghill, said even if public members of the council are former
law enforcement workers, they have a different perspective and
will "come from views of their respective city or organization
...." He said the council does not get to pick its members; the
governor selects them. In response to a follow-up question from
Representative Coghill, he said the public members on the board
would have been part of a bargaining unit in the former
positions in law enforcement, but they are not now. In response
to questions from Representative Gruenberg, he said his own
position is a full-time one.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked Mr. Vrabec if he finds the fact
that there are no representatives of employees on [the board] at
all unbalanced.
MR. VRABEC answered no. He explained that the council feels
strongly that it should not be mixing labor issues when it is
attempting to remain neutral on council issues. He stated:
Quite often, if a chief of police had an officer that
was coming in front of council for issues, they would
either recuse themselves, or there would be a vote to
have them taken out of the discussion or the vote for
decertification. Our feeling is if we had labor
organized individuals on the council, and a vote came
up with one of their own prospective members, that
they would also need to recuse themselves, and that
... would mean several more people who would not be
able to vote on a situation.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that the council has certain
powers. For example, it establishes standards for employment
and determines whether or not a person should lose his/her
license to be police officer. He stated:
It's one thing to have only representatives of the
management side on that, but - and I don't care
whether they're members of a bargaining unit or not -
... to have a member who is a police officer or
correctional officer - don't you think that would
provide more balance?
MR. VRABEC answered that the chief administrative officers who
serve on the council are police officers and, thus, fall under
the same rules and regulations of all police officers in the
state.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said that is his point. He asked, "Why
limit it to only them?"
MR. VRABEC said the council and the association of police of
chiefs feel that their expertise and years of experience benefit
the council "versus the individuals as a line officer position."
9:29:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked how many police units, outside of
the small towns previously named by Mr. Cyr, are not within a
bargaining unit.
MR. VRABEC estimated that there are 15-20 smaller agencies in
the state that are not affiliated with a labor unit, and they
comprised of 1-15 employees.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said although he is in favor of the
bill's permissive nature, he would like to drop the reference to
"public safety employees" on page 2, line 9. He also reiterated
that he would like the number of public members of large to be
four, while the number of police officers would be dropped to
two. He said, "I think you need the folks who are kind of the
ground pounders to be able to speak at the table."
9:33:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN noted that the chief of police in
Ketchikan is not a police officer, and he asked how common an
occurrence that is. He said theoretically there could be zero
members on the [council] with street experience. He asked Mr.
Vrabec to comment.
9:34:34 AM
MR. VRABEC offered his understanding that Ketchikan's set up is
unique.
9:34:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON cautioned that the bill may create
"another urban/rural divide" by excluding smaller communities
from representation. He said he thinks there are unique aspects
of those smaller communities that make them deserving of
representation on the [council]. He said he also has a problem
with reducing the number of public members. He stated, "I do
believe that we do need a line officer or a beat officer -
something that's [yet undefined]. I do believe that there needs
to be that representation on the board ...." He said the
language of the bill directs; it does not mandate.
9:36:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES said he appreciates Representative
Johnson's concern regarding urban/rural divide. He directed
attention to page 2, line 4, of bill, [which shows the proposed
drop from four to three members of the public at large], and he
noted that a similar bill in the Senate dropped that number to
two public members, while changing the number of police officers
to four. He pointed out that under HB 193, at least two of the
three members of the public at large would be appointed from
communities of 2,500 population or less. He said he would not
be opposed to Representative Coghill's recommendation to have
four members of the public at large and two police officers.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON reiterated his concerns.
9:38:51 AM
CHAIR LYNN, after ascertaining that there was no one to testify,
closed public testimony.
9:39:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to adopt Amendment 1 as follows:
On page 1, line 14:
Delete "three"
Insert "two"
On page 2, line 4:
Delete "three [FOUR]"
Insert "four"
There being no objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
9:39:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 2,
which would specify [in Section 1, paragraph 4, of the bill]
that of the two police officers, one would be from a community
of less than 2,500 people.
9:40:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES objected.
9:40:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL indicated that although he appreciates
Representative Johnson's sentiment, he thinks having two
[members of the council from the public category] is sufficient.
9:40:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON said he thinks having public members from
a smaller community is different than having a frontline officer
from a smaller community. He explained that the public member
may not be aware of the situations that the officer member has
to face. He concluded, "When we have the police officers -
which [are] the expertise we're trying to place on the board -
from those varying communities, we're getting a wide variety of
discretion throughout the state as opposed to possibly one from
Anchorage, one from Fairbanks."
9:41:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES responded:
Right now the governor could actually pick two that
are from small communities. If we specify it has to
be one from each, we've limited the governor's
choices.
... I would assume that the 10 names that would come
in nominations for these two positions would be fairly
well balanced between urban and rural; otherwise
they're cutting off their own nose to spite their
face.
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES maintained his objection.
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES, in response to Representative Johnson,
stated that across Alaska, all teachers and other education
support personnel - with the exception of one school district -
are represented by PTPC, and there has never been an issue of
union versus management. He said he does not see that as being
an issue with the Police Standards Practice Council either. He
said, "It is in everyone's best interest that the
professionalism of the job be upheld and the standards be
upheld, and the expectation is ... that there isn't a police
officer out there that doesn't want to make sure that all the
other police officers are held to a high standard, as well.
Their life depends on it."
9:44:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON clarified Conceptual Amendment 2, then
withdrew Conceptual Amendment 2, because he said he does not
sense there is a lot of support for it.
9:44:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 3
as follows:
On page 2, line 8:
Between "police" and "officers"
Insert "and correctional"
There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 3 was adopted.
9:46:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL, in response to Representative Gruenberg,
moved Amendment 4 as follows:
On page 2, line 9:
Between "organizations" and "."
Delete "that represent public safety employees"
9:46:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES responded, "The only problem with ... the
way it states right now is that NEA-Alaska could nominate police
officers if you leave it to any labor organization; so, I think
that we have to be specific in that the labor organizations are
related to either police or correctional officers."
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL emphasized the specificity of the
qualification level shown on page 1, line 4. He said another
organization that does not represent police or correctional
officers could not put forth those names [with authority].
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES responded, "I have no problem, and I
believe the way it would state would be a 'labor organization
that represents police and correctional officers covered by the
council'."
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL said he would "expect that language to
find its way in"; however, at this point, he said, "to leave it
in this would be confusing for us to pass it out."
9:48:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG stated his intent to offer a conceptual
amendment to insert a modifier of the phrase "labor
organizations". He asked the sponsor for input.
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES said the APSC has authority over a certain
group of individuals.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG suggested he wanted clarification that
the labor organizations are those that represent people governed
by the council. He asked Representative Coghill if he would be
willing to withdraw his motion to adopt Amendment 4.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL withdrew his motion to adopt Amendment 4,
although he said he thinks Representative Gruenberg's suggested
language is "messy."
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG [moved to adopt] Conceptual Amendment
5, as follows:
One page 2, line 9:
Between "labor organizations that represent" and "."
Delete "public safety employees"
Insert "employees governed by the council"
9:50:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL objected to request that the sponsor
carry that intent into the next committee. He said, "Otherwise,
if it comes to the floor in such a way that I can't agree, I
might make an amendment to strike Section 2."
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES responded, "No problem."
9:50:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL removed his objection to Conceptual
Amendment 5. There being no further objection, it was so
ordered.
9:50:49 AM
CHAIR LYNN said he thinks HB 193 [as amended] is a good bill.
He commented that he knows from experience that the police "on
the beat" have a different perspective than that of the police
chiefs.
9:51:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES moved to report HB 193, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 193(STA) was
reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at
9:52:01 AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|