03/22/1993 03:00 PM House HES

  Number 440                                                                   
                                                                               
  MARC GROBER testified via teleconference from Nenana in                      
  support of HB 82.  He said school districts select hearing                   
  officers from a limited list compiled by DOE, according to                   
  statute, which he said meant officers favorably disposed to                  
  the school districts.  He said Ms. Howe might be lying about                 
  DOE's use of the CINA statute.                                               
                                                                               
  According to MR. GROBER, "We raised the China act issues                     
  last year.  We also spoke to Barbara Rauch, who is the, a                    
  compliance officer who was with the state.  Ms. Rauch                        
  clearly stated that she had never heard from the state of                    
  Alaska regarding CINA.  In fact, there is no such process as                 
  Myra described in place now.  At present time that is the                    
  reason that the federal government wanted to make sure that                  
  there was something in place.  In point of fact, the CINA                    
  act specifically provides for recourse where there is                        
  neglect, including educational neglect.  There are ample                     
  protections, and it is a very well thought out procedure,                    
  that provides counsel to the parents and to the child."  He                  
  said the due process Ms. Howe discussed does not provide                     
  counsel to parents and was a "shadow process."                               
                                                                               
  MR. GROBER said he knew of several examples in which school                  
  districts have refused to provide services for gifted                        
  children.  He said the three-year evaluations were not just                  
  for eligibility, but also for maintaining an understanding                   
  of the child's needs.  He said IEP meetings included no                      
  assessment or evaluation.                                                    
                                                                               
  Number 472                                                                   
                                                                               
  CHAIR BUNDE interrupted to remind Mr. Grober that he had                     
  exceeded the testimony limit.                                                
                                                                               
  Number 475                                                                   
                                                                               
  PAUL VERHAGEN, PARENT OF GIFTED CHILDREN, testified via                      
  teleconference from Nenana in support of HB 82.  He                          
  expressed strong dissatisfaction with the amount of public                   
  notice of the hearing, and asked the committee not to pass                   
  HB 235.  He said he did not disagree that changes were                       
  necessary, but had hoped for more public notice of any                       
  changes.