03/04/2008 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB269 | |
| HB353 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 353 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HCR 20 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 406 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| = | HB 269 | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS STANDING COMMITTEE
March 4, 2008
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 BILL NO. 269
"An Act requiring the state to procure United States and Alaska
flags manufactured in the United States; and requiring state
buildings and schools to display only United States and Alaska
flags manufactured in the United States."
- RESCINDED ACTION OF 2/28/08; MOVED NEW CSHB 269(STA) OUT
OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 353
"An Act relating to the blocking of certain Internet sites at
public libraries and to library assistance grants."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 20
Encouraging the installation of fire sprinkler systems in
residences.
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
HOUSE BILL NO. 406
"An Act relating to a requirement for competitive bidding on
contracts for the preparation of election ballots."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 269
SHORT TITLE: REQUIRE AK/US FLAGS BE MADE IN USA
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) LYNN
01/04/08 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/4/08
01/15/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/15/08 (H) STA
01/17/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
01/17/08 (H) <Bill Hearing Postponed to 01/19/08>
01/19/08 (H) STA AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 106
01/19/08 (H) <Bill Hearing Rescheduled to 01/24/08>
01/24/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
01/24/08 (H) Heard & Held
01/24/08 (H) MINUTE(STA)
02/14/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/14/08 (H) <Bill Hearing Postponed to 02/28/08>
02/28/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/28/08 (H) Moved CSHB 269(STA) Out of Committee
02/28/08 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/04/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 353
SHORT TITLE: PUBLIC LIBRARY INTERNET FILTERS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) KELLER
02/06/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/06/08 (H) STA, FIN
02/28/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/28/08 (H) Heard & Held
02/28/08 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/04/08 (H) STA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE WES KELLER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, offered a review of his
original introduction to HB 353 [given to the House State
Affairs Standing Committee on 2/28/08].
JIM POUND, Staff
Representative Wes Keller
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
353 on behalf of Representative Keller, prime sponsor.
CHARLES CLARK, Microcomputer Network Specialist
Information Services
Legislative Affairs Agency
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: During the hearing on HB 353, answered
questions regarding the technical aspects of filtering library
Internet access.
STEPHEN J. ROLLINS, Dean
Consortium Library
University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on HB 353.
KARL BECKER
Cordova, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of himself during the
hearing on HB 353.
KATHLEEN HEUS
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of herself during the
hearing on HB 353.
MARY JO JOINER, President
Alaska Library Association
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on HB 353.
KIMBERLY ROTH
Tok, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of herself and with the
permission of the Tok Community Library Board of Directors
during the hearing on HB 353.
KATHY MORGAN, Volunteer
Tok Community Library
Tok, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 353.
DEBBIE JOSLIN
Eagle Forum Alaska
Delta Junction, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of Eagle Forum Alaska
in support of HB 353.
JIM MINNERY
Alaska Family Council
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of the Alaska Family
Council in support of HB 353.
THEODORA WEBBER
Togiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on HB 353.
JENNY GRIMWOOD
Cordova
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of herself during the
hearing on HB 353.
CLAIRE RICHARDSON
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of herself in
opposition to HB 353.
RAI BENNERT
Friends of the Juneau Public Libraries
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of Friends of the
Juneau Public Libraries during the hearing on HB 353.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR BOB LYNN called the House State Affairs Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:06:32 AM. Representatives Roses, Coghill,
Johansen, Johnson, Doll, and Lynn were present at the call to
order. Representative Gruenberg arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
The committee took an at-ease from 8:07:20 AM to 8:07:32 AM.
HB 269-REQUIRE AK/US FLAGS BE MADE IN USA
8:07:33 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the first order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 269, "An Act requiring the state to procure United
States and Alaska flags manufactured in the United States; and
requiring state buildings and schools to display only United
States and Alaska flags manufactured in the United States."
CHAIR LYNN explained that the committee had moved HB 269 out of
committee on 2/28/08, with the mistaken understanding that there
was no penalty attached to not following the mandate of the
bill, when in fact there was. He said there is a committee
substitute available.
8:08:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL moved to rescind the committee's action in
reporting from the House State Affairs Standing Committee the
proposed committee substitute CSHB 269(STA). There being no
objection, the committee rescinded its action.
8:09:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 269, Version 25-LS1013\L, Bailey, 3/3/08,
as a work draft. There being no objection, Version L was before
the committee.
8:09:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES clarified that the only change made in
Version L is the removal of a penalty, which makes the bill
comply with the committee's wishes.
CHAIR LYNN confirmed that's correct.
8:10:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES moved to report CSHB 269, Version 25-
LS1013\L, Bailey, 3/3/08, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being
no objection, the new CSHB 269(STA) was reported out of the
House State Affairs Standing Committee.
HB 353-PUBLIC LIBRARY INTERNET FILTERS
[Contains brief mention of SB 119.]
8:10:42 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the next order of business was HOUSE
BILL NO. 353, "An Act relating to the blocking of certain
Internet sites at public libraries and to library assistance
grants."
8:11:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WES KELLER, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, offered a review of his original introduction to HB 353
[given to the House State Affairs Standing Committee on
2/28/08]. He said HB 353 proposes law to protect children from
having access to indecent material, as defined in AS
11.61.128(1)(A)-(F), on the Internet. He said distribution of
indecent materials to children is a Class C felony. He reviewed
that 40 percent of the 89 public libraries in Alaska have no
filters for their Internet access. He said the proposed
legislation does not "get into detailed micro-management," but
follows the guidelines of the requirements set in the
[Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA)]. He said filters,
once hooked up to computers, can continually be update with
improvements, and those overseeing the filters can easily
unblock them when necessary.
8:14:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER, in response to a question from
Representative Doll, said the cost of the filters is fairly
inexpensive, but he does not have a thorough study of the range
of costs.
8:15:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER, in response to a question from Chair
Lynn, guessed that the filter might be hooked up to the main
server. In response to Representative Doll, he said he had not
line up any experts to speak about the cost of a filter system.
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL explained her concern is that she received
information showing that the cost of basic installation would be
$10,000, and the cost of software would be $6,000 every year
thereafter to maintain a license. She remarked that that would
not include any added staff to the library. She said she would
like those figures confirmed or denied by an expert giving
testimony.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER reminded Representative Doll that there is
a list of costs in the committee packet.
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL indicated her understanding that there is a
difference between [that which is on the list] and a
professional level [filter system] that would be used in
libraries. She reiterated that she would like further details
regarding the cost.
8:17:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked what the cost to the University of
Alaska would be. He also questioned what kind of training
librarians would need and how decisions regarding filtering
would be made. He asked about the practicality of filtering as
it relates to a university student trying to use the Internet to
research a paper.
8:20:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER responded that the bill is crafted so that
it "does not address those things." For example, the language
of the bill would allow a librarian to turn off a filter; the
decision would be his/hers. He reminded Representative Johansen
that the level of filtering required in the bill is relatively
low. He turned to a handout in the committee packet, showing
[AS 11.61.128], which lists "the most indecent material." He
said he expects many of the libraries would filter more than
what is required by law, because "that's the way most of the
filters work." The bill does not specify who would be
authorized to make decisions about filtering, but he said he
assumes it would be the [Internet protocol] (IP) administrator.
He reminded Representative Johansen that CIPA already requires
filters for any library that receives certain federal discounts.
8:21:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he finds the lack of specificity
related to who would draw the line problematic.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said a library patron can request that the
librarian turn off the filter.
8:22:44 AM
CHAIR LYNN said he supports the concept of bill for the purpose
of protecting children, but echoed Representative Johnson's
concerns regarding where the line would be drawn. He asked the
bill sponsor if he has thought of limiting the filtering
requirement to include every library but that of the university
system.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER explained that the criteria are based on
whether or not the Internet access is open to the public, and
the university's Internet system is open to the public.
CHAIR LYNN clarified his point is he is trying to separate the
children from the adults.
8:26:33 AM
JIM POUND, Staff, Representative Wes Keller, Alaska State
Legislature, in response to Chair Lynn, said over the years
libraries have kept certain material off their shelves. The
U.S. Supreme Court has said that Internet access in public
libraries is neither a traditional nor designated public forum.
Regarding the fiscal note, Mr. Pound said those libraries
currently receiving federal funds that do not use Internet
filters, will no longer receive that federal money. He added,
"And we all know where they're going to come to ask for money
next year if they do not have these filters on their library
computers."
8:27:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN asked:
Is this a case where we've been told by the federal
government that if you don't pass these regulations,
federal funding will be withheld from the state?
MR. POUND answered no.
8:28:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON questioned if a patron's own computer
would be filtered if he/she brought it into a library to take
advantage of the wireless Internet service that may be provided
there.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said that question could be better
answered by a computer expert.
8:29:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN expressed concern about restricting
access to information at a university library. He asked the
sponsor if he has considered excluding the University of Alaska
libraries from the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said he had contemplated doing so, but
decided not to. He commented that the university would still
have to meet the requirements of CIPA. He mentioned that the
legislature's computers are filtered.
8:31:22 AM
CHARLES CLARK, Microcomputer Network Specialist, Information
Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, explained that there are
web filtering devices that can be installed at a certain level
of the network to filter web sites. He offered his
understanding that such filters "may not go off of key words."
Another type of sight filter, he noted, would "live on a
server." He related that that type of filter tends to be more
expensive, but "could probably be more elaborate about what goes
through the system."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON noted that many libraries have open
access Internet, where patrons can bring their own computers
along and access the library's server. He asked, "Where would
the filter be, and where would the 'on/off' switch be for that
individual computer, if you brought that in?"
MR. CLARK responded that the filter would have to "live on a
server." It could be a filter that blocks by key word. For
example, if someone typed in "anatomical parts" on a search
engine, that filter would block certain key words from coming
through. He mentioned a device that is like a router, but with
the ability to block web sites only. He said, "That would live
at a higher level, towards where the server would be on a
network."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON asked, "And if an individual went to the
library and said, 'I have my own computer and I need the filter
turned off,' how would you do that?"
MR. CLARK replied that that would probably be difficult. The
librarian would have to log into the server and indentify the
computer that was connected in order to disable the filtering.
In response to follow-up questions from Representative Johnson,
he said he could most likely figure out how to do it, and a
librarian could be taught to do it. How easy it would be for
the librarian would depend on his/her [computer] experience and
the frequency of requests. Regarding price, he said the filters
that live on individual computers run between $40-$400,
depending on quality. He said he does not know the cost of the
filters that live on servers, but ventured that that would
require a "site license," and the charge would be based upon how
many connections to the Internet there were.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON cautioned that the first step may be
taken to block individual computers, but by not taking the
second, more expensive step, the filter system still may not
meet the requirements of CIPA, and, thus, the federal money
would still be lost. He said he would not like the legislature
to go through the process only to have a wireless access keep
the public libraries from receiving that federal money.
8:36:43 AM
MR. CLARK, in response to a question from Chair Lynn, offered
his understanding that the filter used on the legislature's
computers is called, "WebSense," and it has the ability to block
web sites and to block by key word. Many of the filters, he
continued, have updates available daily or weekly.
8:38:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL, regarding costs, said WebSense, Snort, and
Squid are three names of filters available, and although they
are each fairly inexpensive, each one requires a technical
person to run it and a server on which to run it. She referred
to her previously cited costs for installation, software, and
licensing, and asked Mr. Clark to comment on those costs.
MR. CLARK said he assisted one library that chose to use a per
seat license because it did not have the infrastructure of
having a server. He noted that maintaining a server can be
expensive. He said he has not been involved with costs, but
said whether a cost could be considered out of line would depend
on the size of what it covered.
8:39:36 AM
MR. CLARK, in response to a question from Representative
Johansen, explained that most updates to filter systems are done
automatically. In response to a follow-up question from
Representative Johansen, he said he has worked with several of
the inexpensive filters, the majority of which are "rather
secure"; however, security depends on how secure the users are.
For example, he said, "If you create a password and you hand
that password out to other people, then the user is the issue,
not ... the software itself." He talked about a library system
that was secure to the point where "the box was locked down so
you couldn't view other people's profiles," versus a library
system that "did not limit everybody's system very much." He
mentioned simply putting a general block on egregious web sites,
and said there are many levels of blocking with programming.
8:42:08 AM
MR. CLARK, in response to a question from Representative
Coghill, offered his understanding that there are "no filters on
key words that would be going through" chat rooms on line.
8:43:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG noted that the bill has not been
referred to the House Judiciary Standing Committee. He said he
has questions regarding the relationship of HB 353 to CIPA. He
highlighted the reference to criminal code, on page 2, [line 2],
AS 11.61.128(1)(A)-(F). He highlighted the term "knowingly" as
the mental state specified in AS 11.61.128(1), and he noted that
the term is defined in AS 11.81.900. He said he anticipates
having many questions regarding fairly complex legal issues. He
indicated a concern that librarians may find themselves
committing a Class C felony if they do not follow the language
of subsection (b), on page 2, lines 1-3 of the bill, which read
as follows:
(b) If an adult has a research or other lawful
purpose to access Internet sites that depict the items
described in AS 11.61.128(1)(A)-(F), a public library
may disable the technology measure for the adult.
CHAIR LYNN, in response to Representative Gruenberg, reflected
the sponsor's indication that SB 119 is not a companion bill to
HB 353.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he wants to ensure that the
legislature is not creating bills "at cross purposes."
8:45:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked the sponsor if he has any
suggestions as to what expenditures the libraries should cut in
order to pay for the cost of the program proposed through HB
353.
8:46:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER responded that he thinks libraries have
the responsibility to "maintain what they have," and "this is
just a maintenance item" for which they have the money in their
budgets. He stated that he presumes the cost for filtering
would not be high. Furthermore, he said the bill leaves "the
level of expenditure up to the library."
8:47:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG remarked that the cost of a filter may
be small for a library in Anchorage; however, for the libraries
in some of the smallest communities, the relative cost could be
considerable. He asked if the sponsor would "support additional
appropriations to the libraries for this purpose."
MR. POUND said he thinks the sponsor could approve a one-time-
only expenditure for the purchase of software.
8:49:10 AM
CHAIR LYNN asked what the line is between Internet filters and
"the whole broad issue of censorship," which he said is quite
controversial.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said he struggles with the issue of
censorship; however, the bill simply targets censorship related
to children. He stated that he feels strongly that it is
inappropriate to have public libraries that have open access to
indecent material, as described in the aforementioned statute.
CHAIR LYNN said he basically agrees, but indicated that one
exception is the university library, where a majority of
students are over 18.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER reiterated that the since the university
libraries are open to public, children have access to them.
8:51:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL asked the bill sponsor if, as is true for
other legislation, HB 353 is being proposed because of a
perceived problem. She noted that the library already requires
its computer users to indicate their agreement to the terms of
use.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER reiterated that a requirement of CIPA is
that libraries have a policy regarding the filtering of Internet
access, and he said, "We did not go there in this bill."
Regarding "the level of the problem," he said he can only
provide anecdotes and hesitates to "get into that level of
discussion." He reiterated that research of libraries' own
records show there are 89 libraries that receive federal and
state funding, with 40 percent of those operating without any
filtering system whatsoever. In response to a follow-up
question from Representative Doll, he said the particulars of
how the filters are administered would be a policy call of each
library; the bill would simply require that there be a filter
used.
REPRESENTATIVE DOLL asked if the sponsor thinks this issue
should be decided by the state rather than municipalities.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER answered yes.
8:54:26 AM
CHAIR LYNN remarked that [pornography on the Internet]
desensitizes everyone, but especially children, to "very
objectionable material."
8:54:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES predicted that if the bill were to pass,
universities will not risk losing funding, but neither will they
use the filters. Instead, they will restrict the public's
access to the library. He talked about high school students in
advanced placement classes who need access to university
libraries in order to do their research. He said the issue is
not the cost of the filter or its maintenance, but the criminal
language in the bill [text provided previously]. He said a
librarian could be deemed to be not as diligent or careful as
he/she could or should have been, either inadvertently or
deliberately, and someone may want to "make a case over it,"
which would result in librarians having to defend themselves in
court. For example, he explained that a librarian may just
decide he/she does not have the time to be administering the
filter.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said although he is not an attorney, he
has looked carefully at the complex definition of "knowingly"
and does not think the example Representative Roses gave rises
to the level of "knowingly distributing indecent material."
8:58:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, in response to Representative Rose's
remarks, said that as a practical matter, he does not think the
libraries would be criminally prosecuted very often; however, he
said they will be concerned about legally being disallowed to
get a grant from the state, which would close the library down.
He said that is a civil standard that is of concern. He
indicated that the language related to the civil standard is
found on page 1, lines 11-14, which read:
Sec. 14.56.500. Internet blocking filters
required. (a) Except as provided by (b) of this
section, a public library that provides members of the
public with access to the Internet shall install and
maintain in good working order Internet software
filters that block Internet sites that depict the
items described in AS 11.61.128(1)(A)-(F).
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said library staffs will have to take a
lot of time to enforce the law, train employees, and probably
keep extensive records in order to show the Department of
Education and other funding sources that they have complied with
the law. He asked the bill sponsor if he has considered what
libraries will have to do to comply with the law, and at what
cost?
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said he has considered this issue. He
related that Alaska's 89 public libraries receive approximately
5 percent of their revenue from the state, 5 percent from the
federal government, and the rest from local sources.
9:01:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER, in response to questions from
Representative Johansen, offered his recollection that the
[Children's] Internet Protection Act was passed in 2000, and was
contested and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003. He
reiterated that 40 percent of Alaska's 89 public libraries do
not currently use Internet filters or may be in the process of
implementing them. He added that that number nationally is 35
percent. He said those libraries that have not yet implemented
filters are not necessarily ignoring the requirements of CIPA,
but may be involved in an implementation process that "takes
time and awareness."
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN expressed his skepticism that the
learning curve would take [as much time as has passed since the
Act was signed into law or upheld by the Supreme Court].
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN observed that CIPA does not require the
blocking or filtering of text, only images. He said a book is
often much more detailed, interesting, and imaginative than a
simple picture.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER clarified that HB 353 does not specify
whether the filtering would be of images versus text.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN said he understands that; however, the
sponsor has discussed the proposed legislation "based a lot on
CIPA requirements," which do not require the filtering of text.
He clarified that he had just been pointing out that text can be
"more graphic than your bright line of what's okay and what's
not." He noted that [on page 2, line 5, of the bill], an adult
is specified as "an individual who is 18 years of age or older",
while [on page 2 of 5, in a handout in the committee packet,
entitled, "Meeting CIPA Requirements With Technology"], "Adults
are defined as persons 17 years of age or older." He questioned
whether that was an oversight.
9:04:39 AM
MR. POUND noted that the information in the committee packet was
derived from the Internet, and he offered his understanding that
the federal government "uses 17 rather than 18."
9:05:07 AM
STEPHEN J. ROLLINS, Dean, Consortium Library, University of
Alaska Anchorage (UAA), referred to a letter in the committee
packet he wrote to Representatives Lynn and Keller. He warned
that HB 353 would take the state "down a slippery slope." He
opined that the bill's definition of "public library", which
includes all libraries in the state that serve the public in any
capacity, is too broad. He said the previously stated number of
89 libraries is not accurate, because it does not include
university, "special," or school libraries in the state. He
said he knows of no state that requires filtering for college,
university, or research libraries, and there is no federal
legislation requiring filtering for those libraries. He stated,
"CIPA is not applied at the university and is not a
requirement."
MR. ROLLINS explained that one of the reasons universities have
been exempted from federal regulations is that filters do not
work in college, university, and research libraries. He
explained that filters too often inadvertently block relevant
websites. Furthermore, turning filters on and off for adults is
not manageable, because "nearly every one of our users is an
adult, and at UAA we see about 10,000 per week." Mr. Rollins
said UAA monitors the use of its Internet computers without
filters, relying on visual monitoring to spot computer gaming,
pornography, and other recreational uses. He related that just
last week, UAA removed a local resident from its library for
using one of the computers to access a pornographic website. He
added, "And if they repeat that behavior, they will be
trespassed from the university library."
MR. ROLLINS said the bill's unfunded mandate would cost the
university thousands of dollars each year to license and
maintain software for filters - an estimated $6,000 annually.
The bill, he said, threatens to remove all state library funding
from UAA if it does not filter its Internet. He reported that
last year, UAA's library received approximately $120,000 and it
expects to receive about $150,000 next year. The funding is for
the statewide library electronic doorway (SLED) and for the
statewide data basis program, which the UAA library helps to
manage and coordinate. He said the proposed legislation also
threatens public access to the university library, because,
since filtering is not an option, the university libraries would
have to stop serving the public. He stated, "This result cannot
be the intention of HB 353."
9:08:39 AM
MR. ROLLINS stated, "I also want to point out that ... HB 353
gives two different definitions of a public library: One, a
public library is one that provides members of the public with
access to the Internet. The Second definition is: A public
library is 'a library that is open to members of the public.'
These are two very different definitions, with the second even
broader than the first." He stated that HB 353, in its current
form, should not be passed, and universities should be exempt
from filtering requirements. He reiterated that the current
system the university uses to monitor computer Internet use
provides proper balance between appropriate and inappropriate
use of its equipment. He emphasized that the bill is too broad
and "takes the state in to an area" that he said he believes
"should stay with the local communities."
MR. ROLLINS, in response to Chair Lynn, said he thinks the bill
needs to be significantly rewritten and narrowed in its
definitions of a "public library". In response to
Representative Coghill, he said the library clusters its
computers around its reference desk, visible to the public, and
the library staff ensures that the computers available are being
used for the maximum number of uses for educational and resource
purposes. A patron who is on a computer game too long, and
certainly anyone who is visiting a pornography site, will be
asked to leave.
9:11:56 AM
MR. ROLLINS, in response to questions from Representative
Gruenberg, said he does not have a figure as to how many patrons
visit libraries nationwide. He offered further information
regarding the previously mentioned grant monies from the state,
which he clarified are for a program that serves "every resident
of Alaska." He noted that UAA has five libraries, and he
estimated that the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) has
five libraries and the University of Alaska Southeast (UAS)
might have two.
9:14:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES expressed appreciation for Mr. Rollins'
comments regarding the monitoring that is currently being done.
He asked Mr. Rollins if the university has wireless capability
in its libraries and, if so, what kind of monitoring is
possible.
MR. ROLLINS answered yes, but said there is no monitoring of the
wireless connections. In response to a follow-up question from
Representative Roses, he said he assumes that filters would have
to be applied at the network server level, which would then
filter the wireless connection.
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES asked, "And so, that would cause some
difficulty in terms of being able to then turn the filters on
and off?"
MR. ROLLINS responded, "We wouldn't know that the person had the
need to turn it on and off."
9:15:26 AM
KARL BECKER testified on behalf of himself during the hearing on
HB 353. He noted that he works part time at the public library
in Cordova as an Internet Technology (IT) technician, and he
said he understands the legitimate concern regarding the manner
in which young people are exposed to the world. However, he
emphasized his belief that controlling access on the Internet is
primarily the responsibility of parents. He said he is far more
concerned about what young people may see on television, in
stores, and in supermarket checkout [lines], then what they may
inadvertently be exposed to in a public library.
MR. BECKER said he would like library patrons to be able to
access the Internet as freely as any state legislator. Internet
use, he posited, should be determined at the community level
through the setting of policy by local library boards, which is
how it is done in Cordova. The Cordova Public Library
prominently displays its Internet use policy at each computer.
Furthermore, the computers are located in a high-traffic area,
which allows monitoring of their use and discourages
inappropriate Internet use in the library. Mr. Becker said the
downside of that is the lack of privacy for patrons who are
using the Internet appropriately. He said in four years he has
received only one complaint from a patron regarding another
patron's use of the Internet, and only three times has he had to
"discourage particular uses of patrons, and the response has
been immediate."
9:18:00 AM
MR. BECKER questioned who would decide which sites would be
inaccessible: the government, the manufacturer of [filtering]
software, [information technology] IT personnel, or librarians?
He reiterated that he believes these types of decisions should
be made on the local level - by those who represent the values
of the community. He expressed another concern that the bill
does not specify which software would be used, information he
said is important for the public to know. Another issue, he
said, would be "social networking sites." He mentioned "chat"
sites, and named Facebook, Flickr, and YouTube, LLC. He said
those sites can be legitimately used, but can allow unwanted
content to get through, which he said "creates a false sense of
security that filters will block all information that young
people - in some people's opinion - should not be exposed to."
Filters will also block information that should be legitimately
available to adults, such as legitimate medical or artistic
information.
MR. BECKER said he thinks a defect in the bill is that if an
adult were to ask that the filter be turned off, presumably that
adult patron could then view publicly any materials he/she
chose. He concluded, "I appreciate the depth and the extent of
questioning that this bill is receiving, since I believe that it
has not been a very carefully considered bill."
9:20:58 AM
CHAIR LYNN said he agrees that parents should be responsible for
setting limits for their children; however, parents don't always
accompany their children to the library.
9:21:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON offered his understanding that the bill
deals only with federal grants, but noted that written
information from the University of Alaska mentions state grants.
He asked for confirmation that passing the bill would mean that
state grants would also be blocked; that libraries would "also
be dropped from getting state grants."
CHAIR LYNN noted that Representative Roses nodded his head in
the affirmative.
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON continued:
And the second point I would like to make for the
record: I believe the legislative computers are
blocked and filtered.
CHAIR LYNN confirmed that they are. Echoing Mr. Becker's
previous remark, he questioned how only the objectionable parts
of YouTube could be blocked by a filter.
9:22:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG, in response to Representative Johnson,
said:
Section 1 deals with state grants, and that's in Title
14, which is [the] Title on education. The department
there, I believe, refers to the Department of
Education. And I think Mr. Rollins spoke as to
whether the university blocks things. His letter of
February 22 mentions that also.
9:25:17 AM
KATHLEEN HEUS, testified on behalf of herself during the hearing
on HB 353. She noted that she has been involved with libraries
for many years, both as staff and volunteer. She stated her
belief that as much information as possible should be made
available to library patrons. She said it is the parents'
responsibility to teach their children what is and is not
acceptable, and restricting information on the Internet often
results in viable information also being filtered. She pointed
out that patrons may be reluctant to ask a librarian to turn a
filter on and off, even for the purpose of accessing pertinent
health information. Regarding filters for computers, she
remarked that any lock that is made can be unlocked. Ms. Heus
noted that a recent study showed the following rates of
effectiveness of filters: text, 85 percent; images, 38 percent;
and video images, 33 percent. In response to Chair Lynn, she
said she would submit those statistics to the committee in
writing [subsequently included in the committee packet].
9:27:51 AM
MARY JO JOINER, President, Alaska Library Association, testified
during the hearing on HB 353. She said the bill is problematic,
not only for those who work in Alaska's libraries, but also for
all of the Alaskans who use those libraries. She stated that
the language is too broad, and, while there would be no direct
cost to state government, local communities would incur costs to
purchase, install, and maintain a system that would require
"staff intervention on patron requests." Furthermore, she said
the proposed legislation may restrict direct public access to
university libraries and indirect access to interlibrary loan
materials and databases.
MS. JOINER quoted an excerpt from Representative Keller's
personal web site, [weskeller.com], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
He will support laws that promote the following:
Less Government: Reduce government regulation, size,
and spending without jeopardizing truly needy and
vulnerable Alaskans or hindering programs that are
best done by government as described in the
Constitution. Prioritize Local over Federal or State
control.
MS. JOINER said AkLA concurs; regulations applying to library
policies are a local concern. She cited another portion of the
aforementioned web site, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Stronger Families: Enhance traditional family values
and parental rights and responsibility to rear
children with minimal governmental interference.
MS. JOINER said the American Library Association's Office of
Intellectual Freedom states, "Parents, and only parents, have
the right and responsibility to restrict their own children's
access, and only their own children's access to library
resources, including the Internet."
MS. JOINER said it would seem that AkLA shares the same goals
for government [as Representative Keller]. She noted that on
his web page, Representative Keller also expresses his desire to
make government "open and accessible." Ms. Joiner concluded
that the proposed legislation "does none of these," and she is
confused. She stated her belief that HB 353 would not serve
Alaskans well.
9:30:02 AM
CHAIR LYNN noted that he had recently heard a bill in the House
Judiciary Standing Committee regarding parents' responsibility
for their children and potential government interference, and he
said there are some inconsistencies between that bill and HB
353.
9:30:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked Ms. Joiner to poll AkLA's member
libraries to show how much it would cost to "install and
maintain in good working order Internet software filters that
comply with this bill."
MS. JOINER said she would be happy to provide that information
[subsequently included in the committee packet].
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG clarified that he would like
information pertaining to all the costs involved.
9:31:39 AM
KIMBERLY ROTH, testified as follows:
I am the librarian for the Tok Community Library,
which is the public library in Tok. I'm a member of
the Tok Community Library ... Board of Directors, and
I am giving this testimony with the permission of the
board of directors. ... The Tok Community Library is
an all-volunteer, non-profit organization,
incorporated in 1955, under the Territory of Alaska.
This organization is in the fifty-third year of
supplying continuous, all-volunteer library service to
the community of Tok and the surrounding area. HB
353, though well-intentioned, will have detrimental
effects on small libraries in rural communities. If
this bill is passed, the Tok Community Library will
have no choice but to discontinue public Internet
access. This library operates on the public library
assistance grant - in FY 08, it was $6,350 - [and]
monies raised from local fundraisers and used book
sales. The major source of income for the Tok
Community Library is the public library assistance
grant. It cannot even afford the purchase price of
such a filtering system which would actually cost
thousands, let alone the cost of annual updates,
training, or tech support. It could not afford the
liability to any of the volunteers in the capacity in
which they serve should a problem of such a filtering
system arise.
The browsers of this library patron computer defaults
to SLED - the state library electronic doorway - for
reference and research use. The monetary value of
this on line material, in print form, is literally in
the thousands, and much is not even available in print
form. Not having this on line resource would require
the library budget to be used to buy reference
material in print form. There would be less money for
other areas of the collection and a decrease in
quality of the collection as a whole. With a decrease
in the quality of collection and reduced access to
reference material, this public library service will
be diminished. No filter on a single public library
access computer in the Tok Library is posted. It is
well known in the community and it's a non-issue.
This is Tok. If it was an issue it would be
addressed. There has never been a single complaint to
the board of directors regarding the lack of filter on
the computer. If each community were allowed to
address this issue locally, it would allow for the
most appropriate course of action by those who live in
the community and use the service.
9:35:07 AM
KATHY MORGAN, Volunteer, Tok Community Library, told the
committee that her testimony would be abbreviated, because many
of her remarks had already been covered by previous testifiers.
She said [passage of HB 353] would force the Tok Community
Library to terminate its public access to Internet, because it
would not be able to afford the financial and technical burden
of filtering and the training and hours involved for
installation and maintenance of related software. She said the
library has no paid employees. It receives 90 percent of its
funding from a state library assistance grant; therefore, if it
were made to add filters in order to avoid losing the grant, it
would have to stop providing Internet to its patrons. Doing so,
she said, would have a snowball effect; the library would have
to spend a great deal more on reference materials and it would
be much more difficult for patrons to locate needed books
through interlibrary loans without access to SLED.
MS. MORGAN referenced [subsection (b), on page 2, lines 1-3, of
HB 353], which read as follows:
(b) If an adult has a research or other lawful
purpose to access Internet sites that depict the items
described in AS 11.61.128(1)(A)-(F), a public library
may disable the technology measure for the adult.
MS. MORGAN informed the committee that she started college three
years before she was "of legal age," and the proposed law would
have seriously hampered her in doing college research. She
emphasized her strong objection to HB 353.
9:37:25 AM
DEBBIE JOSLIN, Eagle Forum Alaska, testified on behalf of Eagle
Forum Alaska in support of HB 353. She stated that she takes
the responsibility of parenting seriously and is not asking that
the library take over her duties as a parent; however, children
don't always do what they are told - not even children who know
better. She said she has heard a lot of testimony regarding the
cost of using filters, but she said a family has a right to a
family-friendly public resource - the public library. She said
children can be doing legitimate research and accidently stumble
upon an inappropriate web site. She said she would not have a
problem with adults needing to ask for a filter to be turned off
to do research.
9:40:15 AM
JIM MINNERY, Alaska Family Council, Testified on behalf of the
Alaska Family Council in support of HB 353. He said the council
supports the bill for many reasons. First, there is no reason
that state law regarding this issue should be any different than
federal law. He said roughly 60 percent of the public libraries
- not including the university library system - are currently
utilizing the Internet filters that are required by CIPA; they
were not put out of business by that federal law. The other 40
percent, he said, "have chosen, for whatever reason, not to
adhere to the requirements of CIPA, so they have lost the right
to have access to the federal rates of Internet access, which is
called, 'E-rate.'" Mr. Minnery encouraged the committee to
contact the libraries currently using filters to find out what
the cost of such a system is. He stated, "In our view,
government has a compelling interest in preventing the
dissemination of obscenity and pornography harmful to minors."
MR. MINNERY said the second reason the council supports the bill
is that it believes libraries should be "sanctuaries of
learning," and that "children's access to information and the
desire to learn should not be put at risk by allowing them
access and exposure to harmful material." The third reason, he
said, is that the council firmly believes that parents should
have the primary role in educating their children regarding what
they think is appropriate. He related that the Alaska Family
Council is in the process of developing a series of statewide
seminars to teach parents how to become aware of dangers such as
pedophiles and pornography and help their children "navigate the
technical world." Mr. Minnery said pedophiles and pornography
distributors routinely use marketing strategies to attract
children. He mentioned "Third Way" - a web site that has found
that 20-30 percent of Internet pornography consumption today is
by children 12-17 years of age. Despite the availability of
foolproof age verification systems, children have easy access to
pornography on line. Mr. Minnery reported that the average age
at which children are first exposed to pornography on the
Internet is 11.
9:44:08 AM
MR. MINNERY said that ultimately, any controversy regarding this
issue boils down to weighing the cost to libraries and "having
to do a little extra work." He reported that sexually explicit
and obscene images are proven to be addictive. Mr. Minnery said
he thinks that filtering software has been proven to be much
easier to "put into place" than "a lot of the folks have
recognized today." He said concerns are outdated; they focus on
"out-dated scenarios." He explained, "... When legitimate
material is blocked, an immediate action can occur by the
administrator to unblock that." Mr. Minnery concluded that for
the aforementioned reasons, the Alaska Family Council strongly
encourages the House State Affairs Standing Committee to pass HB
353 in order to protect Alaska's children from what the council
believes is "a very real danger."
MR. MINNERY said he does not know why the library in Tok would
be any different in its ability to follow the requirements of
CIPA than the 60 percent of public libraries that have.
9:46:21 AM
MS. ROTH, in response to Mr. Minnery, reiterated that the Tok
Community Library, as a small library, is not fiscally able to
afford filters. Furthermore, she reemphasized that no one who
uses the library in Tok is concerned about the issue; they
oversee the Internet use of their children.
9:47:30 AM
THEODORA WEBBER told the committee that Togiak has two public
libraries, one at its school and the other a community library.
She indicated that the former has filters currently in use,
while the other will be equipped with a filter system. She said
she does not know the ramifications of the proposed legislation
regarding Togiak's choice of software. She reported, "It cost
us $30,000 to purchase the library the software, the
administration computer, our laptops, and our Internet access.
She said Togiak has a volunteer IT technician to whom the
community makes requests to block certain web sites.
MS. WEBBER offered details of Togiak's software program:
Library patrons register for an identification number; those
under the age of 18 have an automatic block put on their ID
card; those 18 or over have no block put on their cards. She
indicated that the cost of keeping that information updated is
$600 annually and requires the attention of the IT volunteer
once a month.
MS. WEBER stated that she thinks the use of filter software [in
public libraries] is a good idea, but she thinks it should be
left to the community - not the state - to decide what to
filter. In response to a remark from Chair Lynn, she clarified
her understanding is that the bill would not dictate to
libraries which filter to use, but would mandate the use of a
filter for all patrons, no matter their age.
9:50:16 AM
MS. WEBBER, in response to a question from Representative Roses,
reviewed how the ID card is used in Togiak. In response to
Representative Johansen, she explained that the patron's ID
number is entered on the computer keyboard and the name comes up
with the number. If someone is attempting to use another
person's ID card, both patrons are no longer allowed to use the
system. This process, she noted, is monitored by the IT
technician at the school library and by the volunteer librarians
at the community library. In response to a follow-up question
from Representative Johansen, she proffered, "In our community,
we're small enough that everybody knows everybody."
9:52:20 AM
JENNY GRIMWOOD testified that she is a mother of five children
who lives in Cordova. She noted that the elementary students in
Cordova use the public library, as well as many transient people
in the summer. She said there currently are no filters on
Cordova's library Internet system, but she commented on the ease
in which the computer screens can be viewed by others. She
stated that it is difficult as a parent to keep up with the
advances of technology, and she emphasized the importance of
doing everything possible to make libraries safe for children.
9:53:22 AM
CLAIRE RICHARDSON, noted that she had submitted written
testimony [included in the committee packet], and she read a
condensed version of that testimony as follows:
I am a homemaker, a graduate student in pastoral
studies, and I'm the mother of a 9-year-old daughter.
... Internet safety is a very important topic for my
husband and for me, and our local library is our most
important community resource here in Juneau for our
family. Therefore, I read the bill with a lot
interest.
... I applaud Representative Keller's interest in the
safety of my third grader, but the more I thought
about the bill's punitive stance - denying state funds
to any library that doesn't use filters - gave me
pause to reflect on two points: One, how does my
local library handle the situation currently?; and
two, as a parent, am I comfortable with that level of
safety?
Juneau Public Libraries do not use Internet filters,
and yet, I've always felt my child was very safe.
Why? Well, for one thing, the layout of the library
allows children to be in their own, very separate
area. They have two computers for their use with no
Internet access at all. The librarians are seated
next to the "grownup" computers, and in all my years
visiting the downtown library, I have never seen
children using those Internet computers.
By design and consensus, the current system at my
library seems to be working. Frankly, I think my
child has greater access to questionable Internet
sites at their friend's home or in our home. Filters
are used in the schools, but let's face it, the best
filter is a human being: me, the parent, a teacher,
and - if need be - a librarian.
However, just because I am satisfied with Juneau's
course of action, I would never [emphasis on "never"]
impose our choice on other Alaska communities. I
understand that Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Ketchikan
have already chosen to use filters. And that's the
magic of libraries - they are community driven -
people making decisions within their own community.
I am not in favor of any state law that would punish
cities and towns for making thoughtful choices that
best meet the needs of their communities. I would
suggest that HB 353 wants to fix something that is not
broken, as it appears that each community is doing a
fine job choosing what is best for its local library.
CHAIR LYNN pointed out that there is difference between private
computer use and [the necessary standards related to] public
computer use.
MS. RICHARDSON said she agrees, and complimented the Juneau
library for separating the children's computers from those used
by adults.
9:57:01 AM
RAI BENNERT, Friends of the Juneau Public Libraries, testifying
on behalf of Friends of the Juneau Public Libraries, said
Juneau's libraries have safeguards already in place to prevent
viewing of "adult content." He said the bill appears to be
correcting a problem that may not exist. He noted that he had
submitted a letter to the committee [in the committee packet],
which details some of the concern that Friends of the Juneau
Public Libraries has with the bill, and he asked for "a
continuation revue by the committee on those points."
9:58:13 AM
CHAIR LYNN closed public testimony.
[HB 353 was heard and held.]
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
State Affairs Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at
9:58:51 AM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|