Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/17/1993 01:33 PM HES
* first hearing in first committee of referral
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
= 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.