Legislature(2017 - 2018)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/13/2018 01:30 PM Senate FINANCE
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 | |
| HB323 | |
| HB318 | |
| HB110 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 110 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 318 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 323 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 13, 2018
4:23 p.m.
4:23:55 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair MacKinnon called the Senate Finance Committee
meeting to order at 4:23 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Lyman Hoffman, Co-Chair
Senator Anna MacKinnon, Co-Chair
Senator Click Bishop, Vice-Chair
Senator Peter Micciche
Senator Donny Olson
Senator Gary Stevens
Senator Natasha von Imhof
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Colleen Sullivan-Leonard, Sponsor; Kris
Curtis, Legislative Auditor, Alaska Division of Legislative
Audit; Janey McCullough, Director, Division of
Corporations, Business and Professional Licensing,
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development;
Ted Madsen, Staff, Representative Ivy Spohnholz.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Richard Holt, Chair, AK Board of Pharmacy, Anchorage; Leif
Holm, Board of Pharmacy, North Pole; Danielle Lafon, Chair,
Board of Social Worker Examiners, Fairbanks; Crystal
Koeneman, Staff, Representative Sam Kito; David Edwards-
Smith, Chair, Board of Massage Therapists, Soldotna.
SUMMARY
CSHB 110(L&C)
MASSAGE THERAPY LICENSING; EXEMPTIONS
CSHB 110(L&C) was REPORTED out of committee with
a "do pass" recommendation and with one
previously published fiscal note: FN2 (CED).
CSHB 318(FIN)
MEMBERSHIP OF & EXTEND BD .SOC WORK EXAM
CSHB 318(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with
a "do pass" recommendation and with one new
fiscal impact note from Department of Commerce,
Community and Economic Development.
HB 323 EXTEND: BOARD OF PHARMACY
HB 323 was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with one previously
published fiscal impact note: FN 1(CED).
HOUSE BILL NO. 323
"An Act extending the termination date of the Board of
Pharmacy; and providing for an effective date."
4:25:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE COLLEEN SULLIVAN-LEONARD, SPONSOR, discussed
the bill. She explained that the bill extended the
termination date of the Board of Pharmacy. The bill would
extend the board for four years; from June 30, 2018 through
June 30, 2022. Adoption of the bill would continue existing
activities by the board, and administration by the Division
of Corporations, Business and Professional Licensing
(DCBPL). Failure to adopt the legislation would result in a
one-year wind-down of the board, with the division assuming
all license responsibility in FY 20. The composition of the
board was seven members including five licensed pharmacists
and three members from the public.
Representative Sullivan-Leonard continued to discuss the
bill; informing that the board regulated admission in to
the practice of pharmacy, established and enforced
compliance with professional standards, and adopted
regulations. The board established and maintained a
controlled substance database. The board also oversaw
licensing for pharmacists, pharmacy interns, technicians,
licensing for drug rooms (inside institutional facilities);
and also registered pharmacies located outside the state if
a pharmacy shipped drugs to consumers inside the State of
Alaska.
4:27:47 PM
AT EASE
4:28:15 PM
RECONVENED
KRIS CURTIS, LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR, ALASKA DIVISION OF
LEGISLATIVE AUDIT, reminded that the purpose of a sunset
audit was to determine whether a board or commission was
serving the public interest and should be extended. She
referenced the document "A Sunset Review of Department of
Commerce, Community and Economic Development, Board of
Pharmacy (board)" (copy on file).
Ms. Curtis read from the report conclusions listed on the
first page:
The audit concluded the board operated in the public
interest by effectively licensing pharmacists,
pharmacy interns, pharmacy technicians, in-state
pharmacies, drug rooms, and wholesale distributors.
Board meetings were conducted in accordance with
applicable laws and the board was active in amending
regulations to improve the industry.
Ms. Curtis read from page 9 of the report, which showed
licensing and registration activity. She detailed that
there were 3,747 active licenses as of March 2017; which
was a 33 percent increase compared to the prior 2009 sunset
audit.
Ms. Curtis directed attention to the schedule of revenues
and expenditures on page 10 of the report and noted that
the board had a surplus of approximately $275,000 as of the
end of FY 17. She noted that there was a schedule of
licensing fees at the bottom of page 11 and added that
DCBPL management planned to do a fee analysis at the end of
2017 to examine adjustment of fees.
Ms. Curtis relayed that the Division of Legislative Audit
was recommending a four-year extension for the board in
recognition that recent statutory changes expanded the
board's responsibilities in relation to the controlled
substance prescription database. She read from the
background information on page 3 of the report:
Senate Bill 196, passed in 2008, requires the Board of
Pharmacy (board) to establish and maintain a
controlled substance prescription database as provided
in AS 17.30.200. The law was passed with the intent to
improve patient care and foster the goal of reducing
misuse, abuse, and diversion of controlled substances.
The statute requires each dispenser submit to the
board, by electronic means, information regarding each
prescription dispensed for a controlled substance. The
database electronically collects information from in-
state and out of-state pharmacies as well as other
dispensers of controlled substance prescriptions. The
database allows pharmacists and practitioners to
review prescription history prior to prescribing or
dispensing a controlled substance. The database is
also to be used to:
• monitor prescribing practices and patterns of
prescribing or dispensing;
• identify practitioners who prescribe controlled
substances in an unprofessional or unlawful manner;
• identify individuals who may be abusing controlled
substances; and
• identify individuals who present forgeries or
otherwise false or altered prescriptions to a
pharmacy.
Ms. Curtis relayed that there were quite a few structural
problems when the legislation went into effect in 2008, and
the problems were slow to be addressed. The report grouped
the challenges into two areas, including the completeness
of information, which was listed on page 4. The law did not
provide a way to identify the people that were required to
submit information to the database, so the board could not
verify completeness. Regulations established at the time of
the creation of the database called for monthly reporting;
which was not timely enough to be useful.
Ms. Curtis continued to discuss the requirement for the
board to monitor the prescription drug database. The second
area of challenge was the use of the information gathered.
The law did not require practitioners and pharmacists to
consult the database prior to prescribing or dispensing,
rather it was totally voluntary. The board was advised by
the Department of Law that information in the database
could not be forwarded to practitioners or pharmacists
because it was illegal to send an unsolicited report.
Consequently, the board did not use the information, and it
was not used to identify patterns of abuse or prescribing
practices.
4:31:58 PM
Ms. Curtis continued discussing the new requirements
regarding the drug database. She described that there had
been recent significant changes in the law to address the
problem areas. Changes included that prescribers and
dispensers must register with the database, and the board
of pharmacy could notify other occupational boards that
licensees had registered. The change provided a way to
identify incompleteness and noncompliance. In 2018,
beginning in July, dispensers would be required to submit
information to the database daily. Dispensers and
practitioners would be required to check the database prior
to dispensing or prescribing or administering medication
with controlled substances (with some exclusions). The
board was also able to provide unsolicited reports.
Ms. Curtis noted that on page 12 of the report there was a
conclusion that with the statutory changes the board was
empowered to help combat the abuse of controlled substance.
Given that the changes were very recent, the audit was
unable to evaluate the degree to which the board would use
the new authority to serve the public's interest. The
conclusion furthered that DCBPL management did not believe
the board should proactively analyze data to meet public
health objectives. Further, Department of Commerce,
Community, and Economic Development (DCCED) management
indicated that additional resources were needed if the
legislature intended for the board to analyze data and
become proactive in helping enforce prescription drug laws.
Ms. Curtis continued discussing the recommendations of the
audit. She noted that the report included two
recommendations that began on page 14:
Recommendation 1: DCBPL's chief investigator should
work with the director to improve the timeliness of
investigations.
The audit identified and reviewed 13 of 20 cases
opened for over 180 days between July 2014 and March
2017. Six of the 13 (46 percent) cases were found to
have unjustified periods of inactivity ranging from 51
to 184 days.
Ms. Curtis explained that the periods of inactivity were
largely due to competing priorities, specifically oversight
of the controlled substance prescription database.
Ms. Curtis read recommendation 2 from page 14 of the
report:
DCBPL's director should improve procedures to ensure
required licensure documentation is appropriately
obtained and retained.
Three of 25 facility applications tested as part of
the audit did not include the required regulatory
documentation.
Ms. Curtis reported that in one case, a self-inspection
report was not provided, in one case a background check
report was not obtained, and in one case DCBPL staff did
not follow up when an application disclosed that a citation
was issued on a pharmacist out-of-state license. The board
was not held responsible for the errors, as it did
appropriately approve the license pending receipt of key
documentation. The oversight was due to lack of follow-
through by DCBPL staff in obtaining the documentation.
Further, the division tested 25 individual licenses tested
found that one pharmacy intern's license application file
did not include evidence of the applicant meeting the
educational requirement.
4:35:03 PM
Ms. Curtis informed that responses to the audit began on
page 45. The governor's office agreed that the board served
the public's interest and should be extended and did not
comment regarding the controlled prescription drug
database. The department's response was on page 47. It
agreed with both recommendations of the audit. Regarding
recommendation 1, DCCED stated that it had implemented new
procedures to address the finding. Regarding recommendation
2, the department agreed that additional checks and
balances were needed to make sure that administrative
record was complete. The department stated that additional
resources were needed to ensure that standards were being
met. The board chair's response was on page 49, and the
chair agreed with both recommendations.
4:35:53 PM
Vice-Chair Bishop asked about Exhibit 1 on page 1; and
asked if the board was fully staffed.
Ms. Curtis deferred the question to the board chair. She
stated that the audit was dated August 2016.
Co-Chair MacKinnon planned on bringing up the department
staff to address questions. She addressed the excess
receipt authority in the amount of $275,000. She wondered
why there a request had not been made to hire the necessary
personnel.
Representative Sullivan-Leonard was pleased to see that the
board extension was recommended for four years rather than
six or eight. She thought it was important to follow the
board closely with regard to new statutory requirements; as
well as ensure that the board had the necessary resources
to accomplish its goals.
4:37:30 PM
RICHARD HOLT, CHAIR, AK BOARD OF PHARMACY, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), stated that the board worked diligently in
the protection of Alaskan patients and serving communities.
The board had worked hard in adapting to ever-changing
pharmacy practice and licensing, in addition to the
controlled substance prescription database. He supported
the extension of the board, in order for the board to
continue serving the needs of patients and populations that
were reliant upon the board as subject matter experts in
the field of pharmacy.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if Mr. Holt had heard the comments
from Ms. Curtis regarding the department's assertion that
the board needed more personnel to complete its duties.
Mr. Holt informed that the board had a new employee that
split duties between board functions and monitoring of the
prescription drug database. He referenced SB 37, which had
proposed to give the board authority to hire an executive
administrator using licensing receipts services fees for
out of state entities.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked how the board was trying to gain
authority.
Mr. Holt explained that SB 37 was heard in the House
Finance Committee the previous day and would provide the
board with authority to hire an executive administrator.
4:40:18 PM
Senator Stevens asked about the board's $275,000 of surplus
funds.
Mr. Holt did not recall the exact amount of surplus from
year to year. He thought the amount of surplus was
cumulative.
Co-Chair MacKinnon informed that according to the
Legislative Finance Division (LFD) the carry-forward for FY
12 to FY 13 was $29,896; for FY 14 to FY 15 the carry-
forward was $201,479; and in FY 16 to FY 17 the carry-
forward surplus was $275,216.
4:41:25 PM
Vice-Chair Bishop asked Mr. Holt if the board was at full
strength.
Mr. Holt answered in the affirmative.
4:41:56 PM
LEIF HOLM, BOARD OF PHARMACY, NORTH POLE (via
teleconference), agreed with the remarks of the previous
testifier.
Co-Chair MacKinnon OPENED public testimony.
Co-Chair MacKinnon CLOSED public testimony.
4:42:43 PM
Vice-Chair Bishop discussed FN 1 from Department of
Commerce, Community and Economic Development. The fiscal
note had a cost of $27,900 annually if the bill passed.
There would be $26,400 of expenses would be incurred for
travel for members to attend four board meetings.
Advertising the board meetings would cost $400, and $1000
in expenses would be incurred for training and conference
fees. There would be $100 stipends for board members
attending.
Co-Chair MacKinnon noted that the fiscal note did not
reflect the full cost to the state or the board members.
The board's total revenue was $1,014,241 and its total
expenditures was $940,504.
Vice-Chair Bishop stated that the funds were Designated
General Funds (DGF) of receipt supported services.
Co-Chair MacKinnon noted that the members of the profession
were providing the state with resources to continue the
administration of the pharmacy profession.
4:44:34 PM
JANEY MCCULLOUGH, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS,
BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSING, DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, stated that
the board had a level of pharmacy expertise that was needed
in the division. She recommended extension of the board.
Senator Micciche asked about a gap of $75,000 between funds
received and the cost to run the program.
Ms. McCullough asked if Senator Micciche was talking about
revenues and expenditures listed in the report. She
informed that the excess funds were carried forward for the
program to be used in years of non-renewal of licenses.
Senator Micciche asked if Co-Chair MacKinnon could repeat
the figures associated with the cost of operating the
board.
Co-Chair MacKinnon specified that in FY 16 and FY 17, the
board's total expenditures were $940,504. The information
came from an LFD review.
4:46:24 PM
Senator Micciche asked who covered the costs.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if those who were licensed under
the board paid a fee and supported the DGF.
Ms. McCullough stated that the licensing fees paid by all
licensees supported the program and paid all the expenses.
There was no other revenue received to support the expense
of the board.
Senator Micciche considered the actual cost of the programs
was being discussed. He thought it was helpful for the
public to understand that all the costs were covered by
licensees.
Ms. McCullough answered in the affirmative.
4:47:51 PM
AT EASE
4:49:16 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair MacKinnon stated that there were 72 hours
remaining in session. The committee had discussed the bill
and the associated funding. She wanted to make sure that
the bill would pass both bodies before the legislature
adjourned.
Vice-Chair Bishop MOVED to report HB 323 out of Committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
HB 323 was REPORTED out of committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with one previously published fiscal
impact note: FN 1(CED).
4:51:01 PM
AT EASE
4:52:52 PM
RECONVENED
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 318(FIN)
"An Act extending the termination date of the Board of
Social Work Examiners; relating to the composition of
the Board of Social Work Examiners; and providing for
an effective date."
4:52:52 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon read the title of the bill. She noted
that the sponsor, Representative Ivy Spohnholz, was on the
House floor.
TED MADSEN, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE IVY SPOHNHOLZ, discussed
the bill. He noted that the bill was an eight-year sunset
extension for the Board of Social Work Examiners. He noted
that Section 2 of the bill contained a "tweak" to the
board's composition. The subject was discussed on page 10
of the report by the Division of Legislative Audit. Under
current law, the board could not be entirely composed of
government agency employees, or non-profit social workers.
He explained that the requirement had made it onerous to
fill the seats of the board. The proposed change would
allow for the four licensed social workers on the board to
be non-profit employees. He noted that it was difficult to
find a for-profit social worker to fill the position on the
board. The agency responses indicated that the change had
been supported.
4:55:03 PM
Ms. Curtis discussed the document "A Sunset Review of the
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development,
Board of Social Work Examiners (board)," (copy on file).
She read from the report conclusions on the first page:
The audit concluded that the board operated in the
public's interest by effectively licensing and
regulating social workers. Board meetings were
conducted in compliance with law, investigations were
generally processed timely, and the board issued or
changed regulations to improve the profession.
Ms. Curtis informed that the division was recommending an
eight-year extension of the board. She directed attention
to page 6, which showed a schedule of licensing activity.
As of March 2017, there were 783 total active licenses,
which was a 41 percent increase when compared to the 2009
sunset audit. Page 7 of the report was a schedule of
revenues and expenditures. At the end of FY 17 there was a
surplus of $95,000. The fees were listed on page 8 of the
audit.
Ms. Curtis directed attention to page 9, where the report
began listing two recommendations for improvements:
Recommendation No. 1:
DCBPL's director should improve procedures to ensure
board-required documentation is obtained prior to
licensure.
Ms. Curtis detailed that of the 25 licenses tested, there
was one error. The board had appropriately approved the
license, but it was conditional upon receiving key
documentation. Subsequently DCBPL staff had issued the
license without obtaining the documentation.
Ms. Curtis continued discussing the recommendations:
Recommendation No. 2:
The Office of the Governor, Boards and Commissions
director should work with the board to identify
potential applicants for the board's vacant clinical
social worker position.
Ms. Curtis detailed that the position became vacant in
March 2017, and was still vacant in October of the same
year. She referenced earlier testimony regarding the
statutory requirements for board members and the difficulty
in finding applicants.
Ms. Curtis noted that the response to the audit began on
page 19. The Office of the Governor responded to
recommendation 2 and agreed that the stringent requirements
should be changed and encouraged the board to seek a
legislative fix. The response from DCCED was on page 21,
and agreed with both recommendations. With regard to the
recommendation for improving licensure documentation, the
department agreed that additional checks and balances were
needed to ensure the administrative record was complete.
The department also stated it needed additional supervisory
resources to ensure the standards were met.
Ms. Curtis continued discussing the audit and noted that
the board's response was on page 23 of the audit. The board
agreed with both recommendations.
4:57:58 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if Ms. Curtis had done historical
research in order to determine why the legislature had
adopted such stringent guidelines.
Ms. Curtis answered in the negative.
Mr. Madsen indicated he had contacted Legislative Research
Services regarding the original enactment of the board. The
board member guidelines had been a part of the original
legislation crafted to create the board in 1988. The intent
was to find a private, for-profit social worker to serve on
the board; however, the vast majority of individuals
working in social work were not working for a for-profit
entity.
4:59:25 PM
AT EASE
5:00:22 PM
RECONVENED
Mr. Madsen read an excerpt of an email from Legislative
Research Services (copy not on file):
We reviewed the bill files and House committee minutes
for HB 526, and note that a major concern in 1988 was
the issue of social workers in private practice and a
lack of regulation or any means to discipline those
individuals when or if a client complained of
unprofessional behavior.
During the committee process, the bill was amended to
include regulation of a clinical social worker in
private practice and language was added to ensure that
at least one licensed member of the board was in
private practice.
DANIELLE LAFON, CHAIR, BOARD OF SOCIAL WORKER EXAMINERS,
FAIRBANKS (via teleconference), spoke in support of HB 318.
She stated that the board supported HB 318, and thought the
board was necessary to continue providing public protection
by overseeing social work licensure in Alaska.
5:01:45 PM
Senator Stevens asked if there were social workers that
were not government employees.
Ms. Lafon stated that there were social workers in the
state that were not governmental employees, however it was
hard to quantify the number as the board did not track
employment location.
Senator Stevens asked if Ms. Lafon could estimate a number
of non-governmental employee social workers in the state.
Ms. Lafon answered in the negative.
Senator Stevens asked is Ms. Lafon saw an advantage in
having a non-governmental social worker on the board.
Ms. Lafon was not sure why the regulation was written as
such. She noted that the board had a vacancy for a year due
to the challenging regulation and lack of applicants. The
board had discussed the matter extensively and did not see
a conflict with changing the requirement as proposed.
5:03:14 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon referenced a recommendation that
additional supervision was needed. She asked if the board
had made the request of the administration.
Ms. Lafon was not sure what Co-Chair MacKinnon referenced.
Ms. Curtis clarified that the agency's response to the
audit was to state that it was important to ensure checks
and balances were in place in order to ensure its
administrative record was complete. The department believed
additional supervisory resources were needed to ensure
departmental standards were met.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if the administration had come to
the board to ask for additional receipt authority or
support for using board funds from licenses.
Ms. Lafon discussed the audit findings. She stated that the
board sent its division employees to training sessions
through the Association of Social Work Boards. The board
members also received training. The board had received
notification from the division that it was educating its
staff to license social workers appropriately.
5:05:50 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if the administration had
requested additional DGF to support from the board for
additional supervision of the board's licensees.
Ms. Lafon answered in the negative.
Co-Chair MacKinnon stated that the committee would direct
the department to have communication with the board on the
matter.
Ms. Curtis stated that the comment from the department
could be seen in multiple sunset audits. Legislative Audit
had found multiple instances (for multiple boards) in which
DCPBL staff did not follow up to obtain documentation or
other details. There was standard language inserted
regarding the need for additional resources.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if the department was making such
statements when there was excess DGF available from the
board. She wondered if the problem was a training issue or
a personnel issue.
Ms. Curtis stated that the department had made the
statement multiple times, and she thought all the boards in
question were in a state of surplus.
5:07:43 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon referenced a repeated theme in the
audits related to a recommendation for additional staff.
She wondered if there was a connection between surplus
revenue and the request.
Ms. McCullough stated that the division had identified the
need to have more occupational licensers to be able to
issue more licenses.
5:09:15 PM
AT EASE
5:09:28 PM
RECONVENED
Ms. McCullough stated that the division had determined
(through audit findings) that occupational licensing
examiners needed more oversight on the quality of work. She
detailed that supervisors typically had 7 to 8 employees
under direct supervision, which could include 6 or 7 boards
under a supervisor's purview. The division was finding that
more training, oversight and mentoring would solve the
resource problem.
Ms. McCullough continued that the division would need
spending authority to provide more of the resources needed.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if the division would ask all
boards for additional funds for extra supervisory capacity.
Ms. McCullough stated that the division would spread out
the work of an additional supervisor, and all programs
would benefit from additional supervision over daily
occupational licensing work.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked how the funds would be collected,
and if it would adequately be shared with all licensures,
or only with those boards that had a surplus.
Ms. McCullough reiterated that all programs would benefit
from additional staff.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if all programs would pay for
additional staff.
Ms. McCullough answered in the affirmative and clarified
that additional supervisory staff would be supported by all
licensing fees.
5:12:56 PM
Vice-Chair Bishop commented that he hoped that the DCCED
commissioner was listening, so he could assist with the
issues being discussed.
Co-Chair MacKinnon noted that the commissioner had been
present earlier in the meeting.
5:13:35 PM
Vice-Chair Bishop discussed a new fiscal impact note from
the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development, OMB Component 2360. He detailed that the cost
would be $21,400 annually. He read from the Analysis on
page 2 of the fiscal note:
If the bill passes the following expenses will be
incurred:
Travel: $19.9(board members to attend four board
meetings per year)
Services: $0.4 (advertising of public notice of board
meetings) $1.0 (training and conference fees) $0.1
(stipends for board members attending board meeting in
community of residence
Professional licensing programs within the Division of
Corporations, Business and Professional Licensing are
funded by Receipt Supported Services, fund source 1156
Rcpt Svcs (DGF). Licensing fees for each occupation
are set per AS 08.01.065 so the total amount of
revenue collected approximately equals the
occupation's actual regulatory costs.
Co-Chair MacKinnon noted that from FY 16 to FY 17, the
board's total revenue $333,783; and had expenditures
totaling $215,924. The information had been provided by
LFD. The carry-forward in the FY 12 to FY 13 time period
was $36,860. From FY 14 to FY 15 there had been a deficit
carry-forward of $21,989. The surplus carry-forward from FY
16 to FY 17 was $95,870.
5:15:16 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon OPENED public testimony.
Co-Chair MacKinnon CLOSED public testimony.
Vice-Chair Bishop MOVED to report CSHB 318(FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note.
CSHB 318(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with one new fiscal impact note
from Department of Commerce, Community and Economic
Development.
5:16:23 PM
AT EASE
5:19:01 PM
RECONVENED
CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 110(L&C)
"An Act relating to the Board of Massage Therapists;
relating to the practice of massage therapy; relating
to massage therapy establishments; relating to the
Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic
Development; and providing for an effective date."
5:19:01 PM
CRYSTAL KOENEMAN, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE SAM KITO (via
teleconference), discussed the bill. The bill was brought
forward by the Board of Massage Therapy, which was newly
established in 2015. She referenced the recent board
extension, at which time some licensure issues came
forward. The bill would address the issues to more
effectively license members of the profession, give the
board better oversight, and protect Alaskans.
Ms. Koeneman continued discussing the bill. She relayed
that the bill would require the Board of Massage Therapy to
adopt regulations covering massage therapy establishments;
which would give authorities the tools needed to shut down
operations of human trafficking and prostitution that tried
to use massage therapy as a front. In 2015 the board
learned from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that
there were 35 businesses in Anchorage that were used as a
front for human trafficking. Regulating massage
establishments gave the board an additional tool in order
to hold owners of the establishments accountable.
Ms. Koeneman relayed that the bill would increase the
minimum course of study from 500 hours to 625 hours, which
was in line with national standards. In 2012, national
massage therapy associations met and had developed new
standards for the industry. One recommendation was to
increase the required course hours, but the information had
not been available at the time the original legislation
passed. All three massage schools in Alaska would exceed
the minimum course hours requirement. The bill also reduced
the minimum required safety education which covered blood-
borne pathogen coursework, in order to address redundancy.
Ms. Koeneman detailed that there was a change to the bill
in the other body that would remove a restriction that
prevented members having served on prior boards. The bill
also modified the bi-annual fingerprint requirement to
every six years, which would decrease burden on licensees
but would still gave the board adequate oversight to
continue background checks.
5:24:10 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon OPENED public testimony.
5:24:44 PM
DAVID EDWARDS-SMITH, CHAIR, BOARD OF MASSAGE THERAPISTS,
SOLDOTNA (via teleconference), spoke in support of the
bill.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if Mr. Edwards-Smith could speak
to the fingerprinting issue.
Mr. Edwards-Smith stated that HB 110 would reduce the
burden of a renewing licensee having to redo fingerprinting
every period. He felt fingerprinting was very important for
background checks, but thought reducing it to every three
cycles would be adequate.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked Mr. Edwards-Smith if the board had
any problem with chain-of-custody with fingerprints.
Mr. Edwards-Smith referenced a letter from Sara Chambers,
Deputy Director, DCBPL (copy on file) that indicated the
division was looking to make improvements including a board
recommendation to accept a certain type of finger printers.
He discussed the concept of chain-of-custody and
recommendations.
5:28:20 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon referenced a letter from the Americans
For Prosperity group (copy on file) that supported reducing
the number of required course hours. She asked if he could
speak to the board's discussion on the matter.
Mr. Edwards-Smith stated that the 625 required course hours
proposed in the bill was a product of seven national
massage therapy organizations that had been active for many
years. The groups had done a study to look at the tests and
educational requirements for massage therapy. The
comprehensive study and other boards had determined 625
hours was a national standard.
5:31:08 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if the board anticipated that
other states would follow suit after the study was
disseminated. She questioned if other states believed 500
hours was adequate.
Mr. Edwards-Smith indicated that through conversation with
other states, the board understood that every single state
that was licensing massage therapy would like to change to
625 hours.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if the board had discussed the
issue and was supportive of the proposed 625 required
hours.
Mr. Edwards-Smith answered in the affirmative.
5:33:36 PM
Senator Micciche thought it seemed as though half of states
had 500 hours of required training. He preferred the
minimum adequate hours of training. He asked what could be
gained through the additional training.
Mr. Edwards-Smith asserted that additional education would
provide for a stronger therapist with backgrounds related
to pathology, anatomy and physiology, and technique. He
discussed proposed changes to curriculum, to better deal
with pathologies that had changed since the adoption of the
500-hour requirement.
Senator Micciche wished he had a list of all the states
required hours of education and training.
5:35:36 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon CLOSED public testimony.
Vice-Chair Bishop asked if fingerprints changed.
Ms. Koeneman answered in the negative, and informed that
fingerprints were not kept on file, and so the fingerprints
would need to be reprocessed to be run through a national
background check program.
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked if Ms. Koeneman had any other
points to make on the fingerprinting change.
Ms. Koeneman offered that the current fingerprinting
process for boards under DCCED was the same that was in
place for a concealed carry permit. She noted that the FBI
had not flagged other boards over the fingerprinting
process but had flagged that of the Board of Massage
Therapy. She thought that appearances might suggest that
the process was less secure, but in reality the process was
secure.
Co-Chair MacKinnon referenced the aforementioned April 9,
2018 letter authored by Sara Chambers of DCCED, regarding
audit findings.
5:38:59 PM
Ms. Koeneman pointed out that there were 495 programs
throughout the country that offered massage therapy
coursework and certification. Of the 495, there were only
73 that fell below the 625 hours. Well over 400 programs
across the nation had over 625 hours required to cover all
the needed material for massage therapy certification.
5:39:45 PM
Vice-Chair Bishop discussed FN 2 from the Department of
Commerce, Community and Economic Development. For FY 19 the
cost was $10,800. In the out years, there would be a cost
of $4,600. He read from the fiscal note analysis on page 2:
HB 110 provides authority for the Board of Massage
Therapy to establish a license for massage therapy
establishments and to develop regulations for
licensing requirements. Regulating massage therapy
establishments intended to facilitate protection of
the pubic from businesses that engage in prostitution,
sex trafficking, and the employment of unlicensed
persons performing massage-therapy type activities.
If the bill passes the following expenses will be
incurred:
Travel: $4.6 (two trips per year to conduct onside
investigative inspections in out years)
Services: $10.8 (costs to amend regulations including
legal, printing and postage in the first year
The potential number of establishments affected by
this bill is unknown at this time. Future costs for
legal and hearing service expenses in out years are
unknown.
Professional licensing programs within the Division of
Corporations, Business and Professional Licensing are
funded by Receipt Supported Services, fund source 1156
Rcpt Svcs (DGF). Licensing fees for each occupation
are set per AS 08.01.065 so the total amount of
revenue collected approximately equals the
occupation's actual regulatory costs.
5:41:35 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon thought she may have not spoken
accurately regarding revenue and expenses. Many of the
boards and licensees were providing DGF, and there had been
great concern that the budget should be cut, and she was
trying to make a distinction. The state brought in revenues
from licensees to support the work of the boards. She noted
that the Board of Massage Therapy's expenses for 2017 had
been $224,300.
5:43:13 PM
AT EASE
5:45:58 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair MacKinnon asked about total cost and total
expenses, and asked about a discussion of the board's
surplus.
Ms. McCullough explained that in FY 15, the program was new
and had not yet collected licensing fees. The board had
gone into a deficit position of $69,926 at the end of FY
15. When revenue was collected in FY 16, $586,230 was
brought in and there was a total expenditure of $254,892,
for an annual surplus of $331,338.
Ms. McCullough discussed expenditures and surpluses since
the inception of the board and collection of licensing
fees. At the end of FY 17, the board had a surplus balance
of $335,053. The department had completed a fee analysis,
and lowered fees so the board did not have to carry such a
high surplus.
5:48:26 PM
Co-Chair MacKinnon thought there had been a rate decrease.
Ms. McCullough reiterated that because of the large
surplus, the division tried to keep revenues and
expenditures as close as possible, as required by AS
08.01.065.
Co-Chair MacKinnon thanked Ms. McCullough for her work.
Vice-Chair Bishop MOVED to report CSHB 110(L&C) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note.
Senator Micciche OBJECTED for discussion.
Senator Micciche discussed his objection. He stated that he
didn't normally support an increase to training
requirements. He thought there were many people in the
state that were looking for work and that additional
training added additional expense. He surmised that most of
the people in the industry supported the increase. He spoke
about DGF and clarified that the funds were generally from
Alaskans paying for a service.
Senator Micciche WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSHB 110(L&C) was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with one previously published
fiscal note: FN2 (CED).
5:51:39 PM
AT EASE
5:53:41 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair MacKinnon discussed the schedule for the following
day.
ADJOURNMENT
5:55:05 PM
The meeting was adjourned at 5:55 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 110 Massage Therapy Testimony.docx |
SFIN 4/13/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 110 |