Legislature(1999 - 2000)
05/04/1999 01:55 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE BILL NO. 85
An Act relating to licensure and professional
discipline of members of the teaching profession and
providing for related penalties; relating to grounds
for dismissal of a teacher; relating to the
Professional Teaching Practices Commission; relating to
limited immunity for procedures under the Educator
Ethics Act; making conforming amendments; and providing
for an effective date.
SANNA GREEN, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, PROFESSIONAL TEACHING PRACTICES COMMISSION (PTPC),
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, ANCHORAGE, stated that the bill
would enhance the State's ability to protect students and
the integrity of educators by strengthening, streamlining,
and consolidating licensure and discipline provisions for
members of the teaching profession.
The bill incorporates direction from the Board of Education
to change a teacher "certificate" to a "license". It would
streamline current law by consolidating regulatory grounds
for discipline into one statutory provision; allowing
reciprocal action of an educator who had been disciplined in
another jurisdiction, and clarifying the procedure for
revoking the license of a person convicted of certain sex
crimes. In addition, the bill would add misrepresentation
of material facts on an employment application as grounds
for discipline.
TERESA WILLIAMS, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ASSISTANT
ATTORNEY GENERAL, FAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES SECTION,
DEPARTMENT OF LAW, provided a sectional analysis of the
proposed legislation. She directed her remarks to the
handout included in member's packets dealing with changes
and deletions to the bill. [Copy on File].
*Section 1 - Technical conforming change.
*Section 2 - New section creating statutory authority
for mandatory criminal records check.
*Section 3 - New section addressing the compilation
base for denial.
Representative J. Davies asked the statutory sights
referenced in #1 & #2. Ms. Williams replied that #1 - AS
14.20.020 and that #2 is currently in existing law which
would be moved to another place.
Representative J. Davies asked what the Educator Ethics
Commission was. Ms. Williams explained that commission
previously was referred to as the Professional Teaching
Practices Commission.
Representative Foster questioned who paid for the "checks
and balances" provided by the commission. Ms. Williams
explained that teachers pay for there own criminal record
check.
*Section 4 - New section which makes Administrative
Procedures Act (APA) applicable to
review of denial.
*Section 5 - Addresses clean up language.
*Section 6 - Speaks to the grounds for discipline.
*Section 7 - Provides for the creation of the
Commission.
*Section 8 - Grants an executive director for the
commission.
*Section 9 - Outlines the duties of the commission.
*Section 10 - Speaks to the powers of the commission.
*Section 11 - Addresses the applicability of the
Administrative Procedure Act.
*Section 12 - Allows increased or changed discipline
as an option, based on hearing officers
factual findings.
*Section 13 - A new section on confidentiality of
investigative file.
*Section 14 - Technical conforming changes.
*Section 15 - A new section containing penalties for
teaching w/o required license and
unauthorized employment in the teaching
profession.
*Sections 16 - 25
These sections provide conforming
language changes.
Representative Foster asked if there was a penalty for those
person not licensed, claiming that they were and then
teaching. Ms. Williams replied that person could be charged
with forgery, however, there is no specific provision
addressing that concern.
Co-Chair Therriault questioned if there would be action
taken against that individual by the school district for
misrepresenting ownership of a license. Ms. Williams
suggested that the school district could create a civil
action suit, however, they usually would not pursue that
course of action because the guilty person probably would
not have any income. Additionally, they would need to prove
"harm". Representative J. Davies commented that the
consequence would be that the person would lose their job.
JOHN CYR, PRESIDENT, NATIOANL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION (NEA-
ALASKA), JUNEAU, asked Ms. Williams how many revocations
there had been this year. Ms. Williams commented that there
had been five or six this year. She noted that many
revocations are to those people who leave their post without
giving notice; also, there are the ones requested to leave
for matters of sexual misconduct.
Mr. Cyr stated that contrary to the opinion of the employees
of PTPC, NEA-Alaska does not believe that the legislation is
a clear rewrite of existing statute. NEA-Alaska does not
endorse the legislation in its present form. He spoke to
sections which are problematic. The first concern is on
Page 7, Section 14.20.375 - Disciplinary actions. NEA-
Alaska believes that if there is going to be a commission,
the burden of license revocation should fall upon the
commission and not the commissioner. The other concern is
listed on Page 9, Section (f). Again, the playing field
should be level and the commissioner should not need to be
in concurrence with the teacher. He pointed out that there
is conflict throughout the bill and that NEA-Alaska does not
believe that it is fair.
HB 85 was HELD in Committee for further consideration.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|