Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/17/1993 01:33 PM Senate HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE
March 17, 1993
1:33 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Steve Rieger, Chairman
Senator Bert Sharp, Vice-Chairman
Senator Loren Leman
Senator Mike Miller
Senator Jim Duncan
Senator Johnny Ellis
Senator Judy Salo
MEMBERS ABSENT
All Present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 88 am
"An Act establishing May 1 as Family Day and the month of
May as Preservation of the Family Month; and relating to the
prevention of child abuse and neglect in the family."
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 79(STA)
"An Act setting termination dates for various boards,
commissions, councils, agencies, committees, and programs of
state government; repealing obsolete statutes relating to
the State Fire Commission and the Board of Electrical
Examiners; repealing obsolete statutes relating to
termination of agency programs and activities; increasing to
10 years the normal maximum interval for review of boards,
commissions, and other entities that are subject to sunset
reviews; and providing for an effective date."
SENATE BILL NO. 61
"An Act implementing certain recommendations of Alaska 2000
to improve the state's education system; and providing for
an effective date."
PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION
HB 88 - No previous action to record.
SB 79 - See State Affairs minutes dated 2/10/93, and
2/17/93. See HESS minutes dated 3/12/93.
SB 61 - See HESS minutes dated 2/8/93, 2/10/93, 2/17/93,
2/24/93, 3/3/93 and 3/8/93.
WITNESS REGISTER
Massoud Shadzad, President
PROMPT Foundation, Inc.
For Preservation of Family, Prevention
of Domestic Violence and Child Abuse
P.O. Box 22234
Juneau, Alaska 99802
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 88 am.
Randy Welker, Legislative Auditor
Legislative Audit Division
P.O. Box 113300
Juneau, Alaska 99811-3300
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on CSSB 79(STA).
Vince Barry, Director
Education Program Support
Department of Education
801 West 10th Street, Suite 200
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1894
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 61.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 93-25, SIDE A
Number 001
CHAIRMAN RIEGER called the Senate Health, Education and
Social Services (HESS) Committee to order at 1:33 p.m.
The first order of business was HB 88 am (MAY 1 IS FAMILY
DAY/MAY IS FAMILY MONTH). Chairman Rieger indicated that
Patty Swenson from Con Bunde's office was present to answer
questions.
The only person to testify on the measure was MASSOUD
SHADZAD, President, PROMPT Foundation, Inc., For
Preservation of Family, Prevention of Domestic Violence and
Child Abuse. He gave his written testimony to the committee
members. Mr. Shadzad explained he has been doing research
over the last twenty-five years and has concluded the
institution of the family is disintegrating. He said we can
no longer ignore this important institution. We have
"Prevention of Child Abuse Month" which is April. Family is
a basic and the most important institution that needs to be
preserved. Mr. Shadzad explained that during the last few
years he has tried to get a resolution and proclamation from
the Department of State. Last year, seven states designated
the month of May as Preservation of Family Month. He said
his organization is trying to get the focus of agencies and
people in the communities to pay attention to this important
issue. The concept is a positive concept and doesn't cost
anything. He said he is trying to motivate self-supported
projects on an individual or agency basis. Mr. Shadzad
urged the committee to pass HB 88 am.
There being no further testimony, SENATOR MILLER moved to
pass HB 88 am, out of the Senate HESS Committee with
individual recommendations. Hearing no objection, the bill
was moved out of committee.
Number 081
The next order of business was CSSB 79(STA) BOARDS/
COMMISSIONS/COUNCILS/AUTHORITIES. CHAIRMAN RIEGER indicated
the bill had been heard before and was held for the purpose
of amendments. He said he would like to explain some of his
concerns before the bill moves forward. He said the HESS
Committee will be doing work on health care issues over the
next year. In looking at the extension dates for a number
of boards and commissions, it occurred to him that there
might be some needed changes. He referred to Clinical
Social Work Examiners, State Medical Board, Board of
Nursing, Chiropractor Examiners, Dispensing Opticians,
Examiners in Optometry, Pharmacy, Psychologists and
Psychological Associate Examiners, and said that we might be
going too far to extend their termination date to the year
2000. He said he believes the committee should recommend
extending them to 1996.
Chairman Rieger said there are three sections in existing
law which refers to how the legislature shall form and pass
a bill. The first section is on page 3, lines 12 - 15, "(c)
A board scheduled for termination under this chapter may be
continued or reestablished by the legislature for a period
not to exceed four years unless the board is continued or
reestablished for a longer period under AS 08.03.010." He
said he doesn't see a reason for the committee to prescribe
in law how a future legislature shall format their bills and
make their choices routinely. He recommended that the
section be repealed. Chairman Rieger also said the same
thing occurs in two other places, page 5, lines 17 - 20, and
on page 8, lines 9 - 14.
The next change Chairman Rieger recommended was that
Legislative Budget and Audit be given specific direction to
review computer and telecommunication systems. Currently,
the Finance Committee is faced with requests from various
state agencies for $20 million in computer hardware,
software, and software development. It has become such a
significant part of the state's operations that Legislative
Budget and Audit should be expanding their capabilities in
security and similar areas.
Chairman Rieger said his last recommendation is that the
sunset provision on page 5, line 22, be changed. The
requirement to have a hearing should be more applicable to
the extension or the reestablishment of a board rather than
the termination. Having a hearing before you terminate
seems contrary to the purpose of having sunset legislation
in the first place. He said he has put all of those
suggestions into one amendment which follows:
Page 1, line 5:
Delete "increasing to 10 years the"
Insert "relating to review of computer and
telecommunications systems used by state agencies;
eliminating certain restrictions on bills that
reorganize or continue boards and commissions;
relating to legislative review of boards and
commissions; repealing statutes that set a"
Page 2, line 13:
Delete "2003"
Insert "1996"
Page 2, line 16:
Delete "2000"
Insert "1996"
Page 2, line 19:
Delete "2003"
Insert "1996"
Page 2, line 28:
Delete "2002"
Insert "1996"
Page 2, line 29:
Delete "2002"
Insert "1996"
Page 3, line 2:
Delete "2003"
Insert "1996"
Page 3, line 3:
Delete "1998"
Insert "1996"
Page 3, line 7:
Delete "2001"
Insert "1996"
Page 3, line 12 - 15:
Delete all material.
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 4, line 1, after "(5)":
Insert "review computer and
telecommunications systems used by state agencies,
particularly with respect to their cost-
effectiveness and security;
(6)"
Page 4, line 4:
Delete "(6)"
Insert "(7) [(6)]"
Page 4, line 6:
Delete "(7)"
Insert "(8) [(7)]"
Page 4, line 10:
Delete "(8)"
Insert "(9) [(8)]"
Page 4, line 12:
Delete "(9)"
Insert "(10) [(9)]"
Page 5, lines 17 - 20:
Delete all material.
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 5, lines 22 - 23:
Delete "termination, dissolution, continuation,"
Insert "[TERMINATION, DISSOLUTION,] continuation"
Page 8, lines 9 - 14:
Delete all material and insert:
"[(e) THE COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE
MAY INTRODUCE A BILL PROVIDING FOR THE
REORGANIZATION OR CONTINUATION OF THE
BOARD, COMMISSION OR AGENCY PROGRAM. NO
MORE THAN ONE BOARD, COMMISSION, OR
AGENCY PROGRAM MAY BE CONTINUED OR
REESTABLISHED IN ANY LEGISLATIVE BILL,
AND THE BOARD, COMMISSION, OR AGENCY
PROGRAM MUST BE MENTIONED IN THE TITLE
OF THE BILL.]"
Page 8, line 18, after "08.01.010(12);":
Insert "AS 08.03.020(c);"
Page 8, line 22, after "AS":
Insert "44.66.010(c),"
Page 8, lines 23 - 26:
Delete all material.
Renumber the following bill section accordingly.
Chairman Rieger said he hasn't had a chance to get Mr.
Welker's response to the proposed amendment, but would
appreciate any comments.
RANDY WELKER, Legislative Auditor, Legislative Audit
Division, said he did get a chance to review the proposed
changes. He said Chairman Rieger has recommended moving the
sunset date on eight medical related occupational licensing
boards to 1996. The concern is it would require sunset
examinations all at once. With the other boards and the
redistribution of sunset termination dates in the bill, it
would require the division to conduct close to twelve sunset
reviews during 1995 leading up to the termination date. Mr.
Welker said there would be an impact on the division as far
as the audit resources. He referred to proposed language
relating to reviewing the computer and telecommunication
systems and said the place where Chairman Rieger is
suggesting the change is the function of Legislative Audit
and not the Budget and Audit Committee. Mr. Welker referred
to the recommendation to delete certain language and said
part of it pertains to the fact that no more than one board,
commission, or agency program may be continued or
reestablished in any legislative bill. He said he believes
the purpose behind that language was to provide independent
review and analysis on a board by board basis in the formal
sunset process and not allow any one board to go through and
survive the sunset process on the coattails of another. It
makes them all stand up to independent scrutiny in the
normal sense of process.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked Mr. Welker if he has a recommendation
regarding staggered sunset dates. Mr. Welker said the
sunset dates were initially staggered over the ten year
cycle. Currently, in the proposed redistribution of the
boards over the division's recommended ten year cycle, it
gives them the responsibility of conducting audits on about
four boards a year. He said he doesn't have a
recommendation to address Chairman Rieger's concern at the
present time.
Chairman Rieger referred to the function of reviewing
computer and telecommunications and said he actually thought
that the Legislative Audit Division was the right place.
Mr. Welker said that earlier, Chairman Rieger mentioned the
Budget and Audit Committee.
Number 219
SENATOR LEMAN said four of the boards/commissions normally
expire in 1995 and he doesn't see a particularly good reason
to extend them to 1996. Four would be pulled out of the
bill as they would become due in 1995 anyway and the other
four would be extended to 1996. Senator Leman said his
suggestion could become an amendment to the amendment. It
takes care of spreading the work load. Those boards would
be Clinical Social Work Examiners, State Medical Board,
Board of Nursing, and Psychologists and Psychological
Associate Examiners.
SENATOR MILLER moved the amendment. CHAIRMAN RIEGER
objected for the purpose of discussion.
SENATOR LEMAN moved the amendment to the amendment which
would delete Clinical Social Workers Examiners, State
Medical Board, Board of Nursing, and Psychologists and
Psychological Associate Examiners from the bill.
Chairman Rieger said his approach is to not extend the
medical related boards out to the year 2000 given the state
of the health care issues currently being discussed in the
legislature and nationally.
Number 272
SENATOR ELLIS said he would like to offer an amendment. On
page 5, line 12, change extend the termination date for the
Citizens Review Panel for Permanency Planning from "1994" to
"1996." He indicated his concern with the plight of foster
children and the need to take the review of their situation
out of the bureaucracy. MR. WELKER said he didn't have an
objection to the amendment.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER said the amendment has been moved and the
amendment to the amendment has been moved. He discussed the
amendment to the amendment. Page 2, line 13 refers to the
Board of Chiropractic Examiners and said that hasn't
changed. He discussed proposed changes:
Page 2, line 16, relating to the Board of Clinical
Social Work Examiners, the date would change from
"June 30, 2000," to "June 30, 1996."
Page 2, line 19, the language would remain as is.
Page 2, line 28, relating to the State Medical
Board, the date would change from "June 30, 2002"
to "June 30, 1995."
Page 2, line 29, relating to the Board of Nursing,
the date would changed from "June 30, 2002" to
"June 30, 1995."
Page 3, line 2, Board of Examiners in Optometry,
would remain as is.
Page 3, line 3, Board of Pharmacy, would remain as
is.
Page 3, line 7, relating to the Board of
Psychologist and Psychological Associate
Examiners, the date would change from "June 30,
2001" to "June 30, 1995."
Chairman Rieger asked if there was an objection to Senator
Leman's amendment to the amendment. Hearing none, the
motion carried. Chairman Rieger asked if there was an
objection to the amendment as amended. SENATOR DUNCAN
stated his objection for the record but did not request a
roll call vote. So the motion passed.
Number 345
SENATOR ELLIS moved that Amendment #2 be adopted. He
explained his amendment changes the date on page 5, line 12,
from "1994" to "1996." Hearing no objection, the motion
carried.
There being no further discussion on the bill, SENATOR
MILLER moved that SB 79, as amended by the Senate HESS
Committee, be passed out of committee with individual
recommendations. Hearing no objection, it was so ordered.
Number 364
The last order of business to come before the committee was
SB 61 (IMPLEMENT ALASKA 2000 RECOMMENDATIONS). CHAIRMAN
RIEGER said as he recalls at the last meeting Senator Ellis
had offered Amendment #10 which deleted references to a
permanent charter school board and an initial charter school
board. An amendment to the amendment was offered which
failed and then the amendment failed. Chairman Rieger said
some of the language in Senator Ellis' amendment is useful.
He moved the following amendment be adopted:
Page 7, lines 15-16:
Delete "in the contract. A board of directors for
the charter school shall oversee the operation of
that school."
Chairman Rieger said it would be his intention to consider
taking out the references of a separate board of directors
of a charter school. He said it would be separate from the
school board.
SENATOR ELLIS asked if there aren't two issues involved. He
said "in the contract" is a sperate issue from a separate
board of directors. He said it made sense when other parts
of the amendment were included. Chairman Rieger removed his
motion to adopt the amendment. He said he is trying to
address the point raised at the last meeting about the
confusion of having two boards.
SENATOR SALO referred to the reference to the separate board
for the charter school and said you would have to eliminate
most of section (b) as it spells out the composition of the
board. SENATOR DUNCAN said (b), (c), (d) spells out the
composition of the board. Senator Salo referred to (c) and
said it could be eliminated or the function could be changed
to another group such as the faculty of that charter school.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER said the next amendment was to delete lines
17 through 31. Senator Duncan said he thinks it should be
all one amendment.
Chairman Rieger moved to delete, for the purpose of
discussion, on page 7, lines 15 and 16 the last sentence, "A
board of directors for the charter school shall oversee the
operation of that school." He continued to propose the
following amendment:
Page 7, lines 17 - 31
Delete all material.
Insert "(b) The charter school shall"
Page 8, line 3
Delete "(e)"
Insert "(c)"
Page 8, lines 6 - 7
Delete "permanent charter school board"
Insert "charter school"
Page 8, lines 27 - 28
Delete "permanent charter school board"
Insert "charter school"
Page 9, line 8:
Delete "initial and permanent boards of a"
Chairman Rieger asked if the Department of Education had a
comment regarding the amendment. VINCE BARRY, Director,
Education Program Support, Department of Education, said the
idea of the board of directors is it gives parents and
teachers an opportunity to put the charter school together.
He said it is a very simplistic kind of activity where
teachers and parents can get together and make suggestions
as to how they can operate this type of a school in a school
setting. They would have their own board. He referred to
"(d)" and said after the approval of the local board, they
then have a permanent charter school. The intent of the
legislation is for the school to operate under the school
district's board. Chairman Rieger said he thinks the
amendment is a clarifying amendment to make sure that there
isn't confusion as to whether there is a separate school
board or not.
Chairman Rieger asked if there is an objection to the
proposed amendment. SENATOR LEMAN objected. He said he
believes that the amendment guts one of the key principles
of the establishment of charter schools which is to get
parents more involved in a curriculum that is more tailored
to a specific program that they want to establish. He
indicated there needs to be more input at the local level.
There is the overall authority of the school board and
having a board of directors for the charter school might be
a better way to go.
Chairman Rieger said there is going to have to be a
conforming language change on page 7, around lines 3 and 5.
He said he thinks the requirement for teacher and parent
involvement might be able to be inserted.
Number 521
SENATOR SHARP said there has to be a driving force and
parents and teachers have to be involved in the welfare of
the children.
Chairman Rieger said he would like to suggest some
additional language. On page 6, line 30, after "upon"
delete "the application of the initial board of directors of
a charter school and the" and replace with "an application
for a charter school," It would then read, "A charter
school may be established as provided under sections 12 - 19
of this Act upon the application for a charter school,
approval of the local school board, and the State Board of
Education." Chairman Rieger referred to page 7, line 3,
"after procedure" delete the words "by which an initial
board of directors may apply" and insert the words "for an
application." It would read, "Each local school board shall
prescribe a procedure for an application by the
establishment of a charter school in that school district."
SENATOR SALO suggested saying, "prescribe an application
procedure." Chairman Rieger agreed. It would then read,
"Each local school board shall prescribe an application
procedure for the establishment of a charter school in that
school district." CHAIRMAN RIEGER referred to Senator
Leman's concern and said there is a desire to address it.
He said, "The application procedure must be sponsored by at
least one parent of a perspective student of a charter
school and one person who is a perspective teacher of that
school." SENATOR ELLIS said he had proposed a much higher
and also a lower standard in a previous amendment and
neither was adopted. He indicated he doesn't agree with
Chairman Rieger's suggestion.
SENATOR LEMAN said he doesn't see the problem with the
organization and calling it a "board of directors." He said
he doesn't care what it is called. They are operating under
contract through the school board, and if the problem is
with calling it a board of directors, it can be called
something else. He said it will be a functioning group that
will execute on the contract. It is going to maintain the
highest level of local control within the confines of that
contract. He said he isn't so concerned with the name. It
is the function that is important. Senator Leman said there
would be nine members, and there would be at least one
parent of a perspective student, and one perspective
teacher. It forms a nucleus of people who are going to be
actively involved in the school. They are going to be
interested in the success of that charter school.
TAPE 93-25, SIDE B
Number 001
CHAIRMAN RIEGER said language could be included that says
that the application must include provisions for an academic
policy committee consisting of at least three teachers in
the school or something similar.
Chairman Rieger suggested that on page 7, at the end of line
4, insert "The application must include provisions for an
academic policy committee consisting of faculty and parents
of the school." SENATOR SHARP asked if there would be one
for the whole school district or if an applicant must
consist of an academic policy committee for the proposed
charter school. Chairman Rieger said it isn't for the
people submitting the application, it is to provide that
when a school is established that there be an academic
policy committee to guide the school through its charter.
The committee would give additional input to make sure that
whatever the charter school is attempting to do is
implemented.
SENATOR LEMAN said he doesn't have an objection to replacing
"board of directors" with "academic policy committee" if the
function remains the same.
SENATOR SALO said if that is adopted, then on page 10, "(4)"
under the definitions section, the academic policy committee
should be described the way Chairman Rieger just did.
SENATOR DUNCAN said what Senator Leman is proposing is that
all the language on page 7 would remain. The wording "board
of directors" would be changed to "academic policy
committee." He indicated he isn't very enthused by the
suggestion. He said nothing is being changed. There would
still be competing boards. SENATOR LEMAN said it is a
function that is under contract to the school board and the
function is restrictive by the contract and the legislation.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER said he would like to offer a final version
of that language to say, "The applications must include
provisions for an academic policy committee consisting of
faculty and parents of the school."
SENATOR ELLIS said he is becoming confused and suggested the
amendment be in written form. Chairman Rieger said he would
have it in written form and suggested reaching a conceptual
agreement. SENATOR DUNCAN asked Chairman Rieger if what he
initially suggested in the amendment remains. He also asked
if Chairman Rieger is just suggesting changing language on
lines 3 and 4, on page 7. CHAIRMAN RIEGER said there is
also something on page 6. He referred to Senator Salo's
suggestion on page 10, lines 15 and 16, and said "academic
policy committee" means "A group supervising the academic
operation of the school to help ensure that the measure of a
charter school is fulfilled."
SENATOR SALO indicated she has a concern regarding page 9,
lines 22 and 23, "(c) In addition to other requirements of
law, a charter school may not discriminate in the selection
of students on the basis of intelligence, achievement,
aptitude, or athletic ability." She asked if the part that
reads "In addition to other requirements of the law" is
meant to encompass race, religion, etc. Senator Salo said
she would like that section to be specific. Chairman Rieger
said he wouldn't be opposed to Senator Salo's suggestion.
Number 093
Chairman Rieger moved the amendment. He said on age 6, line
30 and 31, as revised would read "...established as provided
under sections 12 - 19 of the Act upon the application for a
charter school and the approval of the local school
board..." Page 7, lines 3 - 4 would read "(b) Each local
school board shall prescribe an application procedure for
the establishment of a charter school in that district. The
application must include provisions for an academic policy
committee consisting of faculty and parents of the school.
Senator Salo referred to page 7, line 1, "The State Board of
Education may not approve more than 40 charter schools to
operate in the state at any one time." She suggested a
pilot program to find out how the schools will function.
She suggested changing "40 to "10." Chairman Rieger said he
doesn't feel it is necessary to say "pilot" as the whole
program is a pilot program because it repeals in four years.
There was discussion regarding the repeal date.
Chairman Rieger continued to explain the proposed amendment.
Page 7, lines 15-16
Delete "A board of directors for the charter school
shall oversee the operation of that school."
Page 7, lines 17-31
Delete all material.
Insert "(b) The charter school shall"
Page 8, line 3
Delete "(e)"
Insert "(c)"
Page 8, lines 6-7
Delete "permanent charter school board"
Insert "charter school"
Page 8, lines 27-28
Delete "permanent charter school board"
Insert "charter school"
Page 9, line 8:
Delete "initial and permanent boards of a"
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked Senator Salo if she would like move to
amend the amendment. SENATOR SALO referred to lines 22 and
23 and moved to change the wording to read "a charter school
must be non-sectarian and may not discriminate on the basis
of race, religion, intelligence, achievement, aptitude, or
athletic ability." SENATOR ELLIS suggested including
gender. SENATOR DUNCAN suggested including disabilities.
SENATOR MILLER said sometimes when the lists are expanded,
the courts look at the list as all inclusive. He said we
must comply with federal law anyway. SENATOR SALO said the
present laws don't necessarily include discrimination on the
basis of the four things that are in current section "(c)."
SENATOR SHARP said that would probably make a charter school
less desirable. He said why would parents be interested in
establishing a charter school if it didn't have something to
do with the items listed. If you are going to maintain a
leveling effect in a charter school, you may as well not
have a charter school. If there isn't a goal or a
particular agenda that is different from what the overall
school board agenda is, what would be the purpose. SENATOR
ELLIS said it would be O.K. to set up a school for math and
science, or computers, if the kids were picked on their
interest to go there. SENATOR SALO said she believes it is
important to include a nondiscriminatory clause. SENATOR
SHARP asked how a school can be set up targeting a special
skill or goal if you eliminate anyone that has special
aptitude or achievements. CHAIRMAN RIEGER said he thinks
that there are two things that you can be trying to achieve
with a charter school. You can be trying to give an
opportunity to people who have demonstrated a particular
aptitude and they are not receiving the opportunities they
want in the public school system. The other purpose would
still be allowed with Senator Salo's amendment which is to
treat charter schools as demonstration projects. To show a
different format for education gives better opportunity to
everybody.
Number 363
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked if there was an objection to Senator
Salo's amendment to the amendment. Hearing no objection,
the motion carried. Chairman Rieger asked if there was an
objection to the amendment. SENATOR LEMAN objected. A roll
call vote was taken. Senators Rieger, Sharp, Duncan, Ellis,
Miller and Salo voted in favor of the amendment. Senator
Leman voted against the amendment. So the amendment was
adopted.
SENATOR DUNCAN referred to Section 16, page 9, and said
there is some language on line 31 that needs to be changed
relating to the permanent charter school board. He said in
an amendment by Senator Ellis there was a proposal to delete
language on page 9, line 26 through page 10, line 2, and
replace it with other language. He questioned what the
language in subsection "(b)" means, "(b) After June 30,
1993, a local school board may not negotiate or renew a
provision in a negotiated agreement or collective bargaining
agreement that grants a teacher a right to transfer to a
charter school based on seniority." He said Senator Ellis'
language is worthy of consideration. Senator Ellis'
language was "(b) The provisions contained in a negotiated
agreement or collective bargaining agreement applicable to
teachers or other employees who transfer into a charter
school may not be altered or changed as a result of the
creation of a charter school. (c) A teacher in a charter
school shall be evaluated in the same manner as all other
teachers in the school district."
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked Mr. Barry to explain why the language
in "(b)" was included in the bill. MR. BARRY said it is his
understanding that the local school board may not negotiate
or renew a provision in a negotiated agreement or collective
bargaining agreement that grants the teacher the right to
transfer. Members of the Alaska 2000 Committee didn't want
it to be set up so that the board would be allowing the
transfer of teachers. Chairman Rieger asked if teachers
have the right to choose their school in negotiation
contracts. SENATOR SALO said in most contracts, there is a
section that deals with transfer rights so that if a job
becomes open in a certain school, the school district has a
procedure or a means of deciding who, amongst ten applicants
that applied for it, have rights. In some districts it is
wide open to administrative discussion. Mr. Barry noted
that there are also involuntary transfers. SENATOR DUNCAN
indicated concern with the section as it says you can no
longer negotiate transfers based on seniority.
SENATOR SALO said she would like to offer an amendment
saying that all provisions in a negotiated agreement or
collective bargaining agreement shall apply to charter
school teachers and school employees except where provisions
of the negotiated agreement have been altered to accommodate
the mission of the charter school, and that agreement to
change the negotiated terms of employment must be done
between the bargaining agent and the local school board.
She indicated that the agreement couldn't be changed unless
both sides agree. Senator Salo said a charter school
provision should not be an end-run on a negotiated
agreement. Senator Salo said she thinks wording should be
added to say that a negotiated agreement remains in effect
unless there is agreement to change it in order to
accomplish the mission of the charter school. The language
should read, "All provisions of a negotiated agreement or
collective bargaining agreement shall apply to charter
schools and charter school employees unless exemptions to
that (those) agreements are agreed to by the district and
the recognized employee bargaining unit(s)."
TAPE 93-26, SIDE A
Number 031
An at ease was taken for the purpose of copying Senator
Salo's proposed amendment.
When the meeting was called back to order, Chairman Rieger
indicated that the members had Amendment #12 by Senator Salo
before them. He said he will rule that Senator Salo's
language would be inserted as "(b)" after the word
"assignment" on line 25. SENATOR SALO asked if the current
wording in "(b)" would stay in the bill as is. Chairman
Rieger said it would as there wouldn't be a conflict.
Senator Salo said they do conflict as all provisions include
transfer provisions. Chairman Rieger said he doesn't read
the existing "(b)" as overriding any existing provisions.
Senator Salo said it limits the scope of bargaining.
Chairman Rieger said he wouldn't have a problem if Senator
Salo moved to delete the existing "(b)." Senator Salo moved
to delete the current "(b)" and insert the new "(b)."
Chairman Rieger said the motion on the table is to amend
Amendment #12 to add deletion of the existing "(b)." There
was objection. A roll call vote was taken. Senators
Rieger, Duncan, Ellis and Salo voted in favor of the motion.
Senators Sharp and Miller were against the motion. So the
motion carried.
Number 118
CHAIRMAN RIEGER moved to amend page 9, line 29, by deleting
the words "the same" and inserting "an equivalent." Hearing
no objection, the amendment was adopted.
SENATOR DUNCAN moved on page 9, line 31, delete "permanent
charter school board" and insert "charter school." Hearing
no objection, the motion passed.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked if there were any other amendments to
Amendment #12. There being none, he asked if there was an
objection to Amendment #12. Hearing no objection, Amendment
SENATOR SALO moved to amend page 7, line 1, by changing "40"
to "20." There were objections to her motion. A roll call
vote was taken. Senators Rieger, Duncan, Ellis and Salo
were in favor of the motion. Senators Sharp, Leman and
Miller were against the motion. So the motion carried.
Number 196
The next section of SB 61 the HESS Committee addressed was
advisory school boards. SENATOR SALO indicated she had a
proposed amendment. She said her idea was to add a clause
that didn't force the creation of another layer of
bureaucracy but instead validates the existence of already
active parent involvement groups. Her amendment would be
"The following are exempt from the requirements of this
section: 1. A school district that has only one school and
has a school board; and 2. A school in which there is an
existing parent advisory group." She explained that if they
didn't have a functioning parent advisory group, then they
would follow the provisions of the new statute in the
formation of one. If a school had a very active PTA, a
portion or all of its parent advisory group might serve in
that capacity without having to create a new group.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER asked Senator Salo how she would define an
"existing parent advisory group." Senator Salo said it
would be a group that has officers and regular meetings. An
unidentified speaker indicated that there is existing
language in statute that defines "parent advisory group."
Senator Salo read from statute: "advisory school boards and
borough school board - a borough school district board may
establish advisory school boards, and by a regulation, shall
prescribe their manner of selection, organization, powers
and duties." She said she doesn't believe that helps in
this case because it is the motivation for her amendment.
In her experience, those advisory school boards, which were
created by the districts, had an entirely different function
and purpose than the groups that were purely parental groups
such as the PTA. Often, those groups were owned and
controlled by the administration that had formed them versus
the parent groups that had formed purely to support the
school's mission of education. Senator Salo referred to
testimony by Abby Hensley and pointed out that she had said
the PTA could serve in this capacity and has, in other
instances, for Chapter 1. She indicated Chapter 1 has some
very strict guidelines about who should serve on those
boards.
Chairman Rieger recommended the following definition:
"parent advisory group means a group which is recognized by
the school as representative of parents having children
attending the school which has regular meetings and to which
membership is open to all parents within the school's
attendance area." Chairman Rieger said the definition would
be inserted on page 10, line 19. Chairman Rieger asked if
there was an objection to the amendment to Amendment #13.
Hearing no objection, the motion carried. Chairman Rieger
asked if there was an objection to the adoption of Amendment
Number 315
Chairman Rieger indicated that SB 61 would be held until the
next meeting and if there were any more proposed amendments,
it would be appropriate to bring them forward then.
Number 343
There being no further business to come before the Senate
HESS Committee, Chairman Rieger adjourned the meeting at
3:30 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|