Legislature(2017 - 2018)BUTROVICH 205
03/03/2017 08:00 AM Senate EDUCATION
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Broadband Access in Alaska's School Districts | |
| SB66 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | SB 66 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
March 3, 2017
8:00 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Shelley Hughes, Chair
Senator John Coghill
Senator Tom Begich
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Cathy Giessel
Senator Gary Stevens
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION: BROADBAND ACCESS IN ALASKA'S SCHOOL DISTRICTS
- HEARD
SENATE BILL NO. 66
"An Act re-designating the Alaska State Council on the Arts as a
public corporation and governmental instrumentality of the
state; defining the powers and duties of the Alaska State
Council on the Arts; providing exemptions from certain statutes
for the Alaska State Council on the Arts; making conforming
amendments; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 66
SHORT TITLE: ST. COUNCIL ON THE ARTS: PUBLIC CORP.
SPONSOR(s): EDUCATION
02/22/17 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/22/17 (S) EDC, FIN
03/03/17 (S) EDC AT 8:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
WITNESS REGISTER
DR. BOB WHICKER, Executive Director
Consortium for Digital Learning
Association of Alaska School Boards (AASB)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented information about broadband access
in Alaska's school districts.
JOSHUA BANKS, Staff
Senator Shelly Hughes
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the sectional analysis of SB 66 on
behalf of the sponsor.
BENJAMIN BROWN, Chair
Alaska State Council on the Arts (ASCA)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented information on SB 66.
ALICE BIOFF, Member
Alaska State Council on the Arts (ASCA)
Nome, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 66.
ANDREA NOBLE-PELANT, Executive Director
Alaska State Council on the Arts
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 66.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:00:26 AM
CHAIR SHELLEY HUGHES called the Senate Education Standing
Committee meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Begich, Coghill, and Chair Hughes.
^Presentation: Broadband Access in Alaska's School Districts
Presentation: Broadband Access in Alaska's School Districts
8:01:03 AM
CHAIR HUGHES announced that the first order of business would be
presentation on Broadband Access in Alaska's School Districts by
Dr. Wicker.
DR. BOB WHICKER, Executive Director, Consortium for Digital
Learning, Association of Alaska School Boards (AASB), presented
information about broadband access in Alaska's school districts.
He read from the following:
I've watched testimony from many of the entities that
have come before you. I will try to bridge the message
they have been delivering and bring an added
perspective from our experience at the Consortium for
Digital Learning. From previous testimony, you've seen
that schools are making progress toward using digital
learning and providing meaningful relevant
career/college readiness skills but face challenges in
bringing this type of learning to all students. It is
prudent to keep the overall goal in mind. Access to
the appropriate technology for desired teaching and
learning outcomes is what is transformational about
this discussion. The ubiquitous access to digital
learning and appropriate teaching tools that promote
the types of educational experiences we desire is the
thing that makes the difference. The power of the
technology tools we use provides the nimbleness,
effectiveness, and increased opportunities and
potential for academic achievement that are not
available without it. Improved broadband and higher
technology adoption in our schools adds tools to
achieve these things.
8:04:14 AM
In previous testimony I outlined how the Consortium
for Digital Learning has been an active advocate for
the advancement of digital learning for all students
in K12 since 2005. Through the support of the Alaska
Legislature, we've assisted over 140 schools in
implementing 1 to 1 laptop and tablet programs and
districts have continued or expanded those programs.
We have continued to advance digital learning in
Alaska by creating examples of collaboration between
districts, working with vendors to develop unique
solutions to our challenges, and conducting
demonstration projects and programs resulting in
higher learning and systemic changes. These projects
were great learning environments that laid the
groundwork for where digital learning has progressed
today in our State.
8:05:29 AM
It is important to note that our successful
implementations of digital learning advance by
controlling variables that can be controlled and
working around those that aren't. Let me repeat that
again… "Successful implementations control variables
that can be controlled and work around those that
can't." Sometimes this means learning to use the
broadband you have to amplify and accelerate learning
with the technology that is available. Improving and
sustaining our broadband services will no doubt,
greatly improve opportunities for our students, and is
worth pursuing. Yet, while broadband is a crucial
aspect to digital learning, improved broadband alone
does not guarantee an improved educational outcome
without addressing other aspects of digital learning.
Commitment, innovation, and wise use of resources and
district strengths have much to do with successful
implementations.
8:06:24 AM
The topics I will address today include 1) the types
of learning broadband and the use of technology
avails, 2) the level of broadband and technology for a
blended learning educational model in our state, 3)
other challenges and possible solutions, and 4) a
foundation of a plan for moving forward.
8:06:55 AM
The first graphic titled "Use of Bandwidth in
Instruction" highlights four examples of what types of
learning that are broadband enables. These examples
are promising innovations to Alaska's educational
model that modernize our instruction for increased
efficiencies and expansion of offerings, to say the
least.
At the top of the graphic is the published broadband
recommendation for schools for 2018 from the State
Education Technology Directors Association and
President Obama's ConnectEd Initiative. The figure of
1Gbps per 1000 students equals 1 mbps per student or
1000 kbps. That figure is presently beyond the great
majority of Alaskan school districts and schools and
far beyond those in rural Alaska.
8:08:44 AM
DR. WHICKER noted the upper left corner of the graphic gives an
example of online learning.
8:08:56 AM
CHAIR HUGHES said that the document is available online under
BASIS.
8:09:22 AM
DR. WHICKER continued:
Our definition of this is the delivery of core courses
or content online. You have heard from the Digital
Teaching Initiative districts and Ketchikan Digital
Academy is one highlighted here. Their main vendors
are Canvas and Edgenuity, whose learning management
software platforms are widely used across the state.
Ketchikan serves 14 partner schools across districts.
While offering courses through their Digital Teaching
Initiative grant, they have built a model around a
$250 per course cost to participants.
8:10:06 AM
Vendor bandwidth recommendations are 384 - 512 kbps
per concurrent user. Other online course providers in
other schools specify up to 1.5 mg per student for
their services. For areas with low bandwidth, a media
appliance (server) helps provide content that does not
need to be live.
8:10:30 AM
Important lessons learned here:
1. An on-site adult to supervise learning is crucial,
success of coursework is greatly dependent on that
person.
2. A central provider enables success and ease of use
by consolidating efforts, streamlining administration
and providing needed expertise to the end-user site.
The upper right of your handout highlights virtual
telepresence and teleconference. The definition we use
for this is "the delivery of instructional content,
professional development and special services from
inside or outside the district through video". Kodiak
Island School District is highlighted as an example.
Classes are taught from Kodiak to their villages
through video conference including welding, music,
fine art courses, and even coaching of sports teams.
They also use of video conferencing robots for teacher
professional development by instructors in the lower
48. Broadband connections serve village schools over
satellite and there is a fiber terrestrial connection
in Kodiak proper.
You have heard from other enterprising districts
delivering content inside and outside the district
from video conferencing studios. Outside technical and
special services, as well as professional development,
are also being delivered through mobile robots using
telepresence.
8:12:28 AM
Bandwidth recommendations from vendors for this type
of video conferencing in static implementations is up
to a dedicated 2 mg up and down. Districts are
successful using less bandwidth employing expensive
equipment and skilled technical expertise.
For Double Robots - 2 mg per robot is the
recommendation, also running on less in our school
environments.
8:12:56 AM
CHAIR HUGHES asked for more information about mobile robots.
8:13:07 AM
DR. WHICKER explained that they have been working with a company
called Double Robot on Segway-type robots. The robots use iPads
and engage with students to deliver instruction and remediation
programs.
CHAIR HUGHES asked if a teacher offsite could roll up to a
student's desk.
8:14:44 AM
DR. WHICKER said yes. The ability to be mobile removes some of
the issues of access to students by moving around the classroom
to help students and to coach and mentor teachers.
CHAIR HUGHES said it opens a whole new aspect. She asked if
Kodiak is using teacher-controlled robots to work with students.
DR. WHICKER said yes, but they are used mostly for staff
development. They do have a robot basketball coach. Robots
provide an example of what could be possible.
8:17:03 AM
He continued:
The lower left of your handout highlights High Access
Learning Environments. In this environment, teachers
and students use technology to amplify learning by
researching, creating content and digital products,
and communicating through email, video, and audio. A
dedicated digital device per student is recommended
for maximum impact and are used at various times
during the day as appropriate. Teachers moving through
levels of technology adoption are central to this
blended learning approach. Over 140 schools have some
sort of 1 to 1 program serving some students and a few
school districts that have all students with a per-
user device to student ratio.
8:18:08 AM
Bandwidth recommendations: 500 kbps per concurrent
user to allow for basic productivity and WAN/cloud
access. Many schools with 1 to 1 have less bandwidth
per student and use shaping and network filtering to
still meet instructional goals. The use of extensive
streaming video requires more bandwidth.
8:19:10 AM
Lessons learned here are:
• Professional development is critical, borne out in
our doctoral studies. There is a high correlation
between how much teachers use the technology to the
amount of district PD is offered over time.
• The high access learning environment is a
fundamental change needing leadership commitment,
sustainable funding commitment, many layers of project
support, focused curricular goals, and community
support.
8:19:34 AM
The lower right of your handout is an example of
Collaborative Learning - Our example is the World
Bridge Project between Copper River School District,
Kodiak Island Borough School District, Trillium
Learning, and NASA. Kodiak has sent two teams of high
school students in this project to the Europa
Challenge in Italy, a very high-level competition
between businesses and universities, and they have won
both times.
The project between the Copper River School District
and Kodiak had teams work across districts to design,
build, and launch pre-earthquake sensors into high
altitude as an experiment in gathering sensitive data
for the project. Copper River students designed the
rocket and Kodiak used computer imaging, 3D printing
and sensor modification to design the payload. The
launch was more than successful. Students and teachers
used teleconferencing, video conferencing, and an
online platform called Basecamp, used for creativity
and the sharing and tracking learning activities and
products.
8:21:25 AM
CHAIR HUGHES referred to the handout on use of bandwidth in
instruction and asked if the bandwidth requirement for robots in
the Kodiak School District is 2 Mbps per video unit. She
requested more information on whether it was a per-class, per-
video unit.
DR. WHICKER replied 2 Mbps is what is recommended by the vendor
per robot, however, Kodiak is using less bandwidth per robot.
The 2 Mbps per video unit is what is recommended for a static
VTC classroom. Some classrooms use less depending on the quality
of the picture they want. Some vendors recommend 4 Mbps per
class, but the consortium recommends 2 Mbps.
CHAIR HUGHES provided an example of a 30-student classroom where
each student is watching something on their own laptop. She
asked if 60 Mbps would be needed.
DR. WHICKER clarified that the 2 Mbps requirement refers to a
classroom with one camera with a couple of screens. In high
access learning environments, the recommendation is for 500 Kbps
per user of Wifi access per classroom. He did not recommend it
as a strategy.
8:24:34 AM
DR. WHICKER continued:
In our experience, if we're going to establish a
distance delivery or blended learning model utilizing
online learning, then we need to establish the kinds
of learning activities we desire for our children, and
then get to that bandwidth requirement. With that in
mind, the graphic titled "School Broadband Use
Scenarios in Alaska" show what levels of broadband are
needed at the school level when there are numbers of
students using different learning modalities. In this
graphic, the broadband speeds needed for various types
of learning and administrative activities are
indicated in the top charts. The amount of bandwidth
needed is dependent on what is going on in the school
and how many students are involved in the activity at
the same time.
The amount of bandwidth needed for different learning
activities are based on vendor recommendations and our
experience. The scenario of a 200-student school
follows with three examples of the numbers of students
involved in a particular activity and the bandwidth
required for them (low, average, and high usage).
Let's take a look at Scenario 1 for our 200-student
school. This scenario has 140 of the 200 students
engaged in learning activities not requiring any
bandwidth. It also has 40 students engaged in general
digital learning doing different tasks, and 10
students engaged in online learning classes on their
personal device and 10 more in a VTC classroom. The
second example on page 2 is of a school of 40
students.
8:29:04 AM
DR. WHICKER opined that the middle ground, the average usage, is
a good example of a digital school. High usage would require
dramatic restructure of a school. Scenario 3 shows only 20 kids
offline and is not typical of usage.
8:29:52 AM
CHAIR HUGHES thought of small rural schools where great teachers
might need to be beamed in.
8:30:24 AM
DR. WHICKER moved to the second scenario on page 2. He described
the bandwidth use of a small-size 40-student school. Twenty
students were offline, ten were doing general internet use, six
were taking online courses, and four were in a VTC class. He
suggested that the recommendation for that scenario is close to
10 Mbps. If there is an increased use of videoconferencing, it
is considered a high use scenario, but it is still under 20 Mbps
and right at 500 Kbps per second, per student recommendation.
CHAIR HUGHES pointed out that half of Alaska districts are still
below 100 Kbps per student.
DR. WHICKER said the handouts refer to 2014 bandwidth before the
grants were approved or implemented. He opined that most all
schools are around 10 Mbps now - 150 Kbps to 200 Kbps.
8:33:59 AM
CHAIR HUGHES requested a list of all school district bandwidth
to date.
DR. WHICKER said 2014 is the best data they have. It was
collected for a grant and needs to be redone.
8:35:04 AM
CHAIR HUGHES asked how much the grant cost.
DR. WHICKER said it was from the Broadband Pass Grant and it was
about $100,000 by Connect Alaska. It was very ambitious. People
from AASB personally visited 38 districts to verify the ability
and use of broadband.
CHAIR HUGHES requested he find out how much a new grant would
cost.
DR. WHICKER agreed to do so. He thought it wouldn't cost as
much.
8:36:58 AM
DR. WHICKER continued:
I'd like to move to what is as important as the
availability of broadband. Effective distance
education should include a comprehensive approach to
overcoming barriers, both technical and human. They
include:
Having the necessary equipment. Much can be done with
the level of equipment we have now in our schools.
Almost all our rural schools have equipment, however,
there are widespread issues with having older
equipment not being refreshed and systems being
outdated throughout our state. The majority of our
students do not have access to a personal device
provided by the school. That said, many rural
districts and larger districts are working hard to
include distance delivery of education and greater
digital learning as a main model of course and class
delivery.
8:37:57 AM
Reliance on E-Rate - E-rate reimbursements are crucial
to Alaska education and provide the basis for Internet
Service Providers to consider schools as anchor
tenants. When hiccups occur with E- rate (especially
in rural Alaska), it can knock the wind out of
districts. Even with E-rate subsidies, districts tend
to buy the level of bandwidth they can afford, not
necessarily all they need.
Data - We currently do not have good publicly
available statewide data on broadband speeds and
costs. Updating this data annually and doing further
research on school usage of broadband would be prudent
in efforts to improve education through broadband and
use of technology. We've done this in 2014 and it
needs to be done again.
Human issues - We've learned through our experience
that implementation without adequate support systems
present many challenges. A number of issues, mostly
human ones, ALL must be addressed to improve the
opportunity for success.
8:39:23 AM
Those issues include teacher using distance delivery
and video conferencing must know how to engage
students who learn with different styles of learning.
What works for one student may not work for all. We
know that a straight lecture from a talking head is
not an engaging methodology for many students.
Connection, relationship, and work on engaging content
and activities are possible. In my work life, I have
come to know people through phone, video, and email
communication and we have formed lasting friendships.
When working with children in a distance delivery
model, having a caring adult physically present with
rapport to both the child and distance teacher builds
a strong educational model.
8:40:12 AM
The lack of ongoing professional development and
adequate pre-service programs is significant when
teacher's roles are changing. Many teachers get
rudimentary professional development regarding the use
of applications but seldom get more. Sometimes, cheat-
sheets or instructional tutorials which could
alleviate issues are absent or lacking. As demands for
professional development time of mandated trainings
and information grow, important learnings of the
changes needed in classroom management using
technology, workflows made possible, learning
structure, and assessment strategies are often
neglected. A commitment and prioritization of a
blended professional development model is what is
needed.
8:41:14 AM
The disconnect between technology departments and what
is actually happening in the classroom can be an
issue. It is a balancing act between network and
equipment management by the technology departments and
how and when technology gets used by the classroom
teacher. If viewed as a main instructional strategy,
technology just has to work. We've seen how technical
difficulties bring a system to its knees or greatly
diminish learning opportunities. The fortunate thing
is that it WILL just work, if properly configured and
maintained. Even when the technology department gets
things working, many times they focus on just that
rather than being focused on how it works in the
classroom.
A lock-down mentality of permissions, passwords, and
teacher's not having a level of administrative access
to equipment are major barriers to effective and
efficient use of technology. It is not uncommon to go
into a school and see equipment not being used because
overcoming these issues takes too much effort from
teachers and they resort to ways that are easier.
Response times to technology challenges (most fixable
software or network issues) have to be timely and
efficient in order for teachers to use the technology.
8:42:50 AM
Many districts recognize this issue and are including
the technology department in curricular and planning
discussions. A new model of distributed roles within
public and private partners is also taking hold.
8:43:12 AM
Lastly, barriers exist when addressing issues with
changing an instructional model and collaborating
across schools and districts. We are lucky to have our
Digital Teaching Initiative districts that are
familiar in addressing many of these things. These
include:
1. Logistical changes - having common schedules
(daily, vacations, calendars)
2. Ways of accepting and granting credit
3. Administrative and technical staffing levels that
are needed, changing job descriptions
4. Policy alignment with practice
8:44:39 AM
So what can we do? Schools are working to provide the
best education possible for their children. We
appreciate your support of these ideas to develop a
sustained model of education that moves our students
forward into the world they will live in. With
assistance and the right tools, schools can accelerate
the rate of modernization of instructional models. We
have much of what we need to make this happen. A
statewide system of support could provide opportunity
for voluntary participation, and local control and
input that best addresses the children of a community
and the community aspirations for its children.
8:45:41 AM
While there are several ways to move forward, I would
like to paint a vision of one such way. The
development of an Innovative School Network of leading
school districts would help move us forward as a
state. The foundational pieces for this statewide
approach are in place and the basis for this network
is already established through the Digital Teaching
Initiative districts and others, most which have
testified before you. The Digital Teaching Initiative
experience has led to development of common
recommendations and strategies. Their efforts have a
level of scalability that could impact the vast
majority of our students in the very near future.
Combining their knowledge with the knowledge gained by
the Consortium for Digital Learning and other
innovative districts and organizations as that
directly supports the transition through consolidated
purchasing, professional development, technical
services, liaison to stakeholders and providers, and
common consistent approaches to solving issues could
form a basis of educational transformation.
8:47:02 AM
Through this network, systems to promote, develop,
incentivize, and administer the use of technology in
high quality, inspirational and effective ways can be
developed. That includes:
A well trained, well prepared teacher and "Learning
Coaches".
High access to technology.
Central source of administrative, technical,
curricular, and implementation supports centered on
the learner.
A high quality distance and blended learning program
that is collaborative, administered, delivered, and
received at distance.
Central organized system of learning management and
VTC capabilities to access vetted high quality
content, organize resources and assess outcome.
High quality professional development delivered in a
tiered blended learning model.
8:48:12 AM
We know that there are potential significant cost
savings over time with changes of the delivery of
professional development, curriculum and instructional
materials, and hardware purchasing. Our basis for this
determination has come from our experience of
initiating high access learning environments that
maximize the use of broadband and that have been
sustainable over time.
8:49:01 AM
DR. WHICKER concluded:
For the past 12 years, the Association of Alaska
School Boards has made significant commitment by
hiring staff and garnering funds to expressly to move
our member districts forward with digital learning,
modernization, and innovation. We are very excited
about the ideas that are being generated by the series
of hearings you have conducted and stand ready to
assist and work with the Legislature and DEED in any
way we can.
8:49:41 AM
SENATOR BEGICH voiced appreciation for the presentation. He
noted his past involvement in the Moore and Kasayulie lawsuits.
The Moore lawsuit identified that there were certain types of
educational deliveries that needed to be done to meet the
state's constitutional educational obligation. It makes sense to
apply technology in an appropriate way so that we are not
reducing a student's ability to learn, but we are providing
access to educational elements. He said he is excited about a
new survey on broadband needs and the various approaches of
bandwidth use.
In terms of the general things, he suggested to be sure that we
elevate schools to the minimum bandwidth and upgrade the level
of teaching, but also provide the means to replenish technology
in both rural and urban areas with an on-going effort to
maintain equity.
8:52:45 AM
DR. WHICKER agreed. He said there must be a way to replenish
technology. Schools are getting better at having a "refresh
schedule." In the past it was looked at as purchasing equipment,
but a sustainable model looks at refreshing equipment every
year. Repairs cost almost as much as buying a new device;
refresh mode flattens out the cost.
SENATOR BEGICH thought that made sense. He spoke of a need for a
regular spending mechanism. He stressed the importance of
training and the concept of collaboration in training. He
thought cultural learning should be considered and not
sacrificed to technology.
8:56:40 AM
DR. WHICKER agreed. He provided an example of a small district,
Copper River, which has revamped the calendar to allow cultural
curriculum. Distance delivery should consist of high quality
instruction and be standards based, place based, localized and
project based. That has to do with the state's foundational
approach.
SENATOR BEGICH asked whether robot technology saves money if it
is a teacher who is running the robot. He said it would concern
him if it was not a teacher.
DR. WHICKER replied that the main delivery model is through a
classroom teacher. Other support comes from outside for
professional development, but the teacher is still in the
classroom.
SENATOR BEGICH summarized that technology adds quality that is
difficult to provide to a rural village. Robots can make use of
a mode of teaching alongside a teacher. He thought robots cost
about $2,500 at the least. He spoke of a need for technical
support.
DR. WHICKER agreed that there needs to be a system of support.
SENATOR BEGICH asked where the potential cost savings are with
robots. He opined they enhanced the educational experience, but
might not save money.
9:00:44 AM
DR. WHICKER agreed. He said the cost savings he has seen is in
the delivery of professional development. Kodiak has saved money
by bringing a team together using a robot. He recommended
talking to Superintendent McDonald about further uses of robots.
9:02:30 AM
SENATOR COGHILL voiced appreciation for Dr. Whicker's work. He
asked what students are doing that could be done in outlying
areas.
9:03:13 AM
DR. WHICKER spoke of highly individualized programs. Real-life
applications of personalized learning and mentoring programs
could be used more in outlying areas.
9:04:53 AM
SENATOR COGHILL noted students can get take classes outside the
school setting to earn credits more quickly. He suggested this
might work in rural areas.
9:05:45 AM
CHAIR HUGHES wanted clarification if there are places where
there might be more broadband available in a community, but the
district is not purchasing it due to expense.
DR. WHICKER said yes.
CHAIR HUGHES asked for follow up information on that. She asked
whether districts need to think about shared bell schedules and
calendars to make the innovative network work.
9:07:22 AM
DR. WHICKER agreed that there needs to be a system that allows
broadband to happen, but he could not say what it would be for
everyone. It depends on the area. He did not believe there needs
to be a standard bell or calendar.
9:08:14 AM
CHAIR HUGHES envisioned a small K-12 school using a robot to do
a 2-way virtual class with an instructional aide to help the
younger students.
9:09:19 AM
DR. WHICKER said that is an effective model. Whether a robot is
used is questionable.
9:10:10 AM
CHAIR HUGHES thanked the Mr. Whicker.
9:10:26 AM
CHAIR HUGHES announced the consideration of SB 66.
SB 66-ST. COUNCIL ON THE ARTS: PUBLIC CORP.
9:10:59 AM
CHAIR HUGHES related that SB 66 is a committee bill that would
quasi-privatize the Alaska State Council on the Arts (ASCA) by
restructuring it as a public corporation to allow ASCA to
increase its ability to leverage funds from non-governmental
contributors and better adapt to the shifting economic climate
in Alaska. This effort responds to the widespread interest in
governmental entities to at least partially privatize their
operations and increase their operating efficiency.
9:11:30 AM
JOSHUA BANKS, Staff, Senator Shelly Hughes, Alaska State
Legislature, presented the sectional analysis of SB 66 on behalf
of the sponsor. He read:
Section 1 (Pages 1-4): Amends AS 39.25.110 concerning
exempt state employees to add all employees of the
Alaska State Council on the Arts (ASCA), thus making
employees of ASCA exempt from the State Personnel Act.
Section 2 (Pages 5-7): Adds artists' submissions made
in response to an inquiry or solicitation initiated by
the Alaska State Council on the Arts, to the list of
records that are exempt from public inspection under
AS 40.25.120.
Section 3 (Page 7): Repeals and re-enacts AS 44.27.040
regarding the creation of ASCA, to establish the
Council as a separate and independent public
corporation of the state of Alaska within the
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED).
Section 4 (Page 7): Amends AS 44.27.041 to charge ASCA
to be governed by an 11-member board of trustees, adds
literary arts as a field represented within the board,
and a member's expertise, rather than interest, as a
factor for consideration for board membership.
Section 5 (Page 7): Amends AS 44.27.042 to replace the
term "members" with the term "trustees" and "council"
with "board of trustees".
Section 6 (Page 8): Amends AS 44.27.043 to replace the
term "member" with "trustee".
Section 7 (Page 8): Replaces the term "members" with
the term "trustees" in AS 44.27.044 and replaces
language that entitles trustees to be reimbursed for
travel expenses at the same rate of members of state
boards under AS 39.20.180.
Section 8 (Page 8): Amends AS 44.27.045 to use gender-
neutral terms for board members.
Section 9 (Page 8-9): Amends AS 44.27.050 to require
the council to encourage literary arts as well as
other disciplines, invest in arts throughout the
state, and conduct research into artistic and cultural
activities throughout the state.
9:14:22 AM
Section 10 (Page 9): Amends AS 44.27.052(a) to replace
"educational objectives with "strategic" objectives as
it relates to the council's ability to enter into
contracts and accept gifts, contributions, and
bequests.
Section 11 (Page 9-10): Amends AS 44.27.054 to replace
language with the proper terms "chair" and "trustees"
previously established and makes a conforming
amendment to Section 1.
Section 12 (Page 10): Adds a new section to AS 44.27
detailing the administration of affairs of the board
of trustees. The board of trustees shall manage the
assets of the council, establish and amend bylaws
governing the business of the corporation, and employ
an executive director to supervise the administration
of ASCA. This section also exempts ASCA from the State
Procurement Code (AS 36.30), instructs the board of
trustees to establish procedures for procurement, and
requires consistency with the Alaska Veterans
preference established in AS 36.30.32(f). The
operating budget of ASCA is subject to the provisions
established in the Executive Budget Act (AS 37.07).
9:15:39 AM
Section 13 (Page 10): Amends AS 44.27.058 to require
that ASCA comply with the 20 U.S.C 951 - 960 (National
Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965)
as it relates to the receipt and disbursement of funds
from the National Endowment for the Arts.
Section 14 (Page 10-11): Amends AS 44.27.060 to add
new subsections (e) and (f) regarding confidentiality
of artist submissions and adds a provision for public
disclosure to submissions when the artist is awarded a
commission for said submission. However, under
subsection (g), subsections (e) and (f) do not apply
if the submission was created as a work for hire under
17 U.S.C. 101 or if the artist's copyright has been
transferred under 17 U.S.C. 204.
Section 15 (Page 11): Amends AS 44.27 to add
definitions for "board of trustees" and "council".
9:16:53 AM
Section 16 (Page 11-12): Creates transition language
for ASCA to allow council members to remain on the
board of trustees until their term is over, allows
current employees to remain with ASCA, allows
regulations, contracts, rights, liabilities, and
obligations created under current law to remain in
effect, and allows ASCA to retain all records,
equipment, appropriations, and other property.
Section 17 (Page 12): Creates an effective date for
this legislation as July 1, 2017.
9:17:31 AM
CHAIR HUGHES noted that Section 12 allows for the hiring of an
executive director; it is not adding a new position.
MR. BANKS said that was correct. ASCA currently has an executive
director.
9:18:03 AM
SENATOR COGHILL asked if there is a timeline for members to
become trustees.
MR. BANKS deferred the question to Mr. Brown or Ms. Nobel-
Pelant.
SENATOR COGHILL said he is reluctant to put U.S. Code
requirements into state statute because it unknown whether the
state is in compliance. He suggested those requirements be
spelled out in Section 13. He also inquired whether trustees
have new responsibilities.
MR. BANKS offered to work on those issues.
9:19:13 AM
BENJAMIN BROWN, Chair, State Council on the Arts (ASCA),
presented information on SB 66. He said the reason behind the
request to restructure ASCA was due to the state fiscal crisis
and issues that have arisen even before the budget situation.
Due to ASCA receiving more private foundation money, they have
been hamstrung by the State Procurement Code. They decided to
put together a package of the best ways to make ASCA more
effective. He thanked the committee for taking up their request.
He noted the House Education Committee has a companion bill. He
concluded that ASCA is trying to be part of the solution, not
part of the problem.
He addressed Senator Coghill's question. He said the National
Arts and Humanities Act mandates that state art agencies be
under the auspices of state government. Their funding must be
matched dollar for dollar. It also mandates that 40 percent of
funding pass through state arts agencies. He emphasized that SB
66 references federal requirements for purposes of clarity. It
does not add any more requirements of the legislature.
He offered to answer questions.
9:23:19 AM
CHAIR HUGHES noted the bill will be held over and questions
could be considered at the next meeting.
9:23:44 AM
ALICE BIOFF, Member, State Council on the Arts (ASCA), testified
in support of SB 66. She shared her personal background and work
with Kawerak, the regional non-profit consortium of tribes for
the Bering Straits region as a business planning specialist. She
spoke of her work with artists within the region. Kawerak
provides direct technical assistance to artist entrepreneurs.
She has seen firsthand how important ASCA is to artists in
supporting their work. The restructuring of ASCA strengthens
this support and will provide better funding opportunities and
better tools and services. SB 66 streamlines the process ASCA
will use to present opportunities to artists all over Alaska.
9:26:38 AM
ANDREA NOBLE-PELANT, Executive Director, Alaska State Council on
the Arts, testified in support of SB 66. She shared her personal
background. She said the timing of SB 66 is opportune, as
Alaska's creative industry is currently growing due to targeted
public and private investments in the past ten years. She
described the efforts of ASCA and the grants, programs, and
private programs it provides to Alaskan artists. SB 66 will
allow new and existing programs to reach more Alaskans with
increased impact and efficiency.
She related that ASCA works with constituents to oversee
projects and initiatives that build capacity for arts
organizations and provide practical and professional development
and opportunities for artists. She named several programs ASCA
works with, such as those with PTSD, incarcerated persons, and
more. They have long-standing partnerships with the Rasmuson
Foundation, the Alaska Arts and Culture Foundation, and the
Atwood Foundation. She listed new partners, which were inspired
by ASCA's work. Other partners include the Alaska Humanities
Forum, and the Western States Arts Federation. Funding from
partners goes back to Alaska residents and communities as
grants, programs, and services. She concluded that SB 66
provides flexibility for ASCA to manage projects in a timely
manner and to work across sectors, and it strengthens ASCA's
ability to secure future funding.
CHAIR HUGHES thanked the presenters.
MR. BROWN addressed Senator Coghill's question about expertise
of council members. He stated that everyone currently on the
council has expertise in one of the enumerated art areas and
qualifies to continue.
9:31:28 AM
CHAIR HUGHES held SB 66 in committee.
9:31:55 AM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Hughes adjourned the Senate Education Standing Committee
at 9:31 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 66 - Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SEDC 3/3/2017 8:00:00 AM |
SB 66 |
| SB 66 - Legislation Ver. D.PDF |
SEDC 3/3/2017 8:00:00 AM |
SB 66 |
| SB 66 - Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SEDC 3/3/2017 8:00:00 AM |
SB 66 |
| SB 66 - Fiscal Note - DOA-DOP-02-24-17.pdf |
SEDC 3/3/2017 8:00:00 AM |
SB 66 |
| SB 66 - Fiscal Note - EED-ASCA-2-24-17.pdf |
SEDC 3/3/2017 8:00:00 AM |
SB 66 |
| SB 66 - Supporting Document - WESTAF Letter of Support.pdf |
SEDC 3/3/2017 8:00:00 AM |
SB 66 |
| SB 66 - Supporting Document - Benjamin Brown Editorial.pdf |
SEDC 3/3/2017 8:00:00 AM |
SB 66 |
| SB 66 - Supporting Document - Alaska Public Media Article.pdf |
SEDC 3/3/2017 8:00:00 AM |
SB 66 |
| Legislative Testimony March 3v.4.pdf |
SEDC 3/3/2017 8:00:00 AM |
|
| TestimonyGraphic-V2 .pdf |
SEDC 3/3/2017 8:00:00 AM |
|
| BandwidthScenariosInSchools.pdf |
SEDC 3/3/2017 8:00:00 AM |