Legislature(2015 - 2016)CAPITOL 106
03/16/2016 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
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 | |
| SCR1 | |
| HB102 | |
| HB156 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SCR 1 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 102 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 156 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 102-RESIDENTIAL PSYCH CTR; EDUC. STDRS/FUNDS
8:27:01 AM
CHAIR KELLER pointed out there have been a number of versions to
the bill with concerns the committee has tried to accommodate,
and the at ease was to ascertain a possible understanding.
8:27:28 AM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 102 "An Act providing for funding of educational
services for students in residential psychiatric treatment
centers." [Before the committee, adopted as a work draft on
2/1/16, was the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 102,
Version 29-LS0519\I, Glover, 1/29/16.]
8:27:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 102, labeled 29-LS0519\S, as the working
document. Without objection Version S was before the committee.
8:28:29 AM
JANET OGAN, Staff, Representative Wes Keller, Alaska State
Legislature, described the changes contained in Version S, which
include: page 2, line 20, "may" was removed, and "shall" was
inserted; page 2, line 23, "school board" was eliminated, as it
will now apply to a proposed contract; page 4, line 19, the term
of the contract was extended from "one" year to "three" years,
to accommodate this pilot program.
8:30:01 AM
EVELYN ALSOP, Education Director, North Star Behavioral Health,
on request of Chair Keller, confirmed the proposed changes in
the new version, as described.
8:31:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON directed attention to the CS page 2, line
20, to ask the intent behind the insertion of "shall", and what
mandate it places on districts for contracting with a licensed
provider.
MS. ALSOP responded that the "shall" was inserted to allow for
an appeal process.
8:32:36 AM
CAELA NIELSEN, Parent, stated support for HB 102, paraphrasing
from a prepared statement, which read [original punctuation
provided]:
I am writing this letter in support of HB 102. My
name is Caela Nielsen and I am the parent of a child
who has received mental health treatment in both the
long term and short term facilities at North Star.
The stress created in a family and a child when they
enter treatment is great and can often exacerbate the
already pre-existing conditions requiring treatment.
This is multiplied many times over when your child
does not receive education that is equivalent to the
education he would receive in his regular school
setting. My child has fallen behind in his schooling
and struggles to reintegrate into the public school
system due to this. Can you imagine being a child who
just received help for a serious mental health problem
and then being told you are now one year behind in
high school? This causes even more stress to the
family when trying to convince the child to continue
their education rather than drop out. My family
received the appropriate transition material for my
child to return to the community, however the struggle
was in getting the educational records needed for him
to transition back into school. Many of the classes
he took while in treatment did not align with classes
being offered at his high school. The treatment
facilities are in need of support in order to properly
meet the educational goals of all children. My son
has often times wanted to give up, but I have
advocated for him and he will return to school
however, it took a full week after we left North Star
to transition back into the public education system,
so he will now have even more educational material he
has missed. The current system for educating this
population does not work. I believe by passing HB102
the education and school transitions for children
receiving mental health treatment in Alaska will
greatly improve. North Star has the ability to
incorporate education with mental health, and when
working through the treatment team process create a
sound, supportive educational and transition plan for
each child. Please support this population of children
and pass this bill to support their educational
undertakings.
8:41:57 AM
ED GRAFF, Superintendent, stated opposition to HB 102,
paraphrasing from a prepared statement, which read [original
punctuation provided]:
The Anchorage School District is committed to working
collaboratively with other organizations for the
benefit of our students. We have enjoyed strong
partnerships with Providence Hospital, Alaska
Psychiatric Institute, Alaska Child and Family,
Volunteers of America and Office of Children Services
to name a few. Through collaboration with clinical
care providers, we have continued to increase our
educational service and supports for our children with
the most complex mental health and behavioral needs.
The Anchorage School District agrees with most of the
legislative findings set forth at Section 1 of this
bill. Students admitted to residential treatment
facilities are entitled to educational services and
those services should not be compromised by virtue of
the fact that a student needs psychiatric treatment.
Where ASD disagrees is with paragraph (3) of Section
1, which provides that a treatment center, in some
instances, is able to provide more effective
educational services to a student than a school
district can provide. Additionally, ASD disagrees
with paragraph (7) that there is a demonstrated need
to provide uniform requirements to allow school boards
to enter into contracts for treatment centers to
provide educational services.
School districts exist to meet the educational needs
of students. That is their primary role. ASD is
unaware of any statistics or anecdotal information
supporting the premise that psychiatric treatment
centers are more able to provide educational services
to students than the public school district.
ASD believes that a strong working relationship with
these treatment centers is critical so that the
corresponding needs of students for education and
treatment can be accomplished. However, ASD also
believes that this bill is not premised upon a need of
students; but rather, upon a desire of certain private
treatment centers to take over educational services at
public expense. For this reason and others, ASD does
not support HB 102.
The Anchorage School District has several psychiatric
treatment facilities within its geographical
boundaries. Under current law, ASD is obligated to
and does serve all students who are admitted to these
treatment facilities, regardless of whether they are
ASD students or students from other Alaska school
districts. These current laws include both state law
(AS 14.30.186, AS 14.30.340, and AS 14.14.090) and
federal law (34 CFR 300.323).
Because of the presence of treatment facilities in
Anchorage, ASD serves a large number of Alaskan
students who are in need of residential psychiatric
treatment. For decades, ASD has met the general
education and special education needs of these Alaskan
students and intends to continue doing so. ASD
provides direct instructional support to students
through qualified teachers, administrators, and
support personnel. In Anchorage, where most students
are served, there is not a need for residential
treatment centers to provide educational services, nor
does ASD agree that such a center can provide more
"effective" educational services.
HB 102 has been compared to the charter school laws.
The "contract" provided for in HB 102 is comparable to
the charter school application required to be
submitted by charter school applicants. There is an
important difference, however, Charter schools are
public schools. They are not private treatment
centers.
Additionally, the charter school laws allow public
school districts to carefully consider the need for an
educational program like that proposed by the charter
school applicant. Under the law, the School Board has
broad authority and discretion to approve or deny a
charter school contract. Unlike the charter school
laws, HB 102 removes all discretion from school boards
because it requires a school district to execute a
contract so long as the contract meets the
requirements of the law. ("A school board shall enter
into a contract to provide payments to a residential
psychiatric treatment center ..." HB 102, Section 2.)
ASD believes that HB 102 is unconstitutional. Article
VII of the Alaska Constitution prohibits the
expenditure of public funds for the direct benefit of
a private educational institution. The Alaska Supreme
Court has stated that "the direct benefit prohibition
involves government aid to education conducted outside
the public schools." Sheldon Jackson v. State, 599
P.2d 127, 130 (Alaska 1979). HB 102 does exactly what
Sheldon Jackson v. State prohibits - it establishes a
system of education to be provided by a private
organization.
The fact that the private entities at issue also
provide treatment services does not mean that the
educational services they provide can be supported
with public funds. There's been some testimony that
by providing ancillary services these treatment
centers may not run afoul of the Constitution. This
is not accurate. Even if non-educational services are
provided, these private treatment centers would still
be accepting public funds for providing educational
services. The "contract" requirements of HB 102 are
designed to ensure that the educational services
comply with the same requirements in existence for
public schools.
The Alaska Supreme Court has also found that even
indirect support of private schools (such as providing
bus transportation to students) violates Alaska's
constitutional prohibition of using public funds for
private education; Matthews v. Quinton, 362 P.2d 932
(Alaska 1961). Here HB 102 provides for direct
payment of a local school district's educational funds
to a private treatment center for the sole purpose of
allowing that private center to provide educational
services to students.
Finally, ASD believes the appeal process provided for
in HB 102 is inappropriate. The proposed law provides
a private vendor with a statutory right to appeal the
district's decision to the Commissioner and the State
Board of Education. No other private vendor is
afforded this type of appeal in Alaska's system of
public education. This represents yet another example
of how public funds will be expended to support
private institutions.
Thank you to members of the committee for your
consideration of our written comments about HB 102.
We would welcome and appreciate an opportunity to
address the committee and describe in further detail
our program to support students in treatment
facilities, our record of success meeting these
students where they are and keeping them on track to
meet their educational goals, and our commitment to
serving these students now and into the future.
8:47:05 AM
KATHIE WASSMANN, Executive Director, Special Education,
Fairbanks North Star Borough School District, testified with
concern for HB 102, pointing out the individualized education
program (IEP) needs and requirements that the bill has not
addressed. The lack of an IEP becomes a liability to the school
district, not the contractor. Additionally, a means for
tracking student funding is not clearly stated in the bill, and
she provided several anecdotal scenarios for how special
education funds are determined and the administrative issues
that may arise. Solving the administrative concerns will incur
costs as a tracking system will need to be established. As a
parent with a daughter who has been in treatment, she said, when
a student falls behind in school issues can arise and the IEP
becomes crucial.
8:54:10 AM
CHAIR KELLER closed public testimony.
8:54:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE VAZQUEZ inquired what the procedure is for a
student to receive an IEP.
MS. ALSOP described the collaborative process that is entered
into when a student arrives. Parent's, certified teachers, the
designated oversight administrator from the district, and other
care providers, are included in meetings with the North Star
staff when addressing/modifying an IEP.
CHAIR KELLER confirmed that the parent is involved in the
process.
MS. ALSOP stressed that parental involvement is imperative.
8:56:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER noted that federal law holds a school
district responsible for providing special education services to
students. He asked about the school district's ability to
contract for those services, and how the districts
responsibilities are satisfied.
MS. ALSOP the intent of HB 102 is for the contractor to work
closely with the district to develop the IEP, with the parents
or other agencies involved with the student.
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER commented that this is a highly litigious
area and parents may become dissatisfied and bring charges
against any/all of the agencies involved.
CHAIR KELLER pointed out that the concept of an education is
held under the constitution.
9:00:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND noted that a number of changes have
recently been made to the North Star facility. She asked for an
updated overview from the contractor, as well as ASD.
9:02:14 AM
MS. ALSOP reviewed the situation beginning in September, and the
beginning of the school year. An immediate increase in
allocated time allowed for additional teaching staff, and the
hiring of an administrator to oversee the special schools
department was completed. Committee members visited in the
succeeding two months and during that time several issues were
apparent, some in the area of high priority needs, which
included: absence of computer equipment for accessing on-line
education; clear transitions between the neighborhood schools,
the treatment facility, and re-entry to school; oversight by the
administrator was not clear and apparent; transcripts were not,
and are still not, being aligned; and other lingering high
priority leads. She said that although the district has put
forth a good faith effort, to try to meet these needs, it is
still not possible for students to [matriculate] forward, as
expressed in the previous testimony, and continued:
It is our belief, she stated, that if we are allowed
to be able to integrate mental health with education,
we can provide a system that will help that child be
able to move forward and go back into their
neighborhood residential school and be on the same
track with their like peers. We also, do belief that
we have the ability to be able to provide a much
clearer transitional process.
9:05:32 AM
MR. GRAFF reported on the improvements, paraphrasing from a
prepared statement [subsequently made part of the committee
packet], which read [original punctuation provided]:
In order to support students in psychiatric treatment
and provide educational services at NSBHS in
Anchorage, ongoing conversations with the local
Educational Director and the Vice President of
Specialty Education of United Health Services of
Delaware, Inc., have occurred and resulted in the
following improvements;
1. Updated registration process with current ASD
enrollment packet;
2. Enhanced communication with parents of students
in psychiatric treatment at enrollment including
personal calls by the transitional counselor to ensure
appropriate course placement, IEP goals are addressed,
and accurate contact information is shared;
3. Facilitated communication with parent or guardian
and the receiving school to discuss transition plans
upon student discharge;
4. Scheduled weekly meeting between ASD Counselor
and NSBHS clinicians;
5. Purchased and installed technology upgrades by
ASK for NSBHS facility: 92 new computers; ten radio
controllers; complete reinstallation of an Anchorage
School District wireless network;
6. Increased staffing:
a. Sue Doherty was recently named as Principal of
Special Schools upon the death of Jerry Koetje in
December. Ms. Doherty has thirty years of special
education experience as a resource teacher, transition
specialist, department chair, supervisor of special
education, and an administrator. Most recently, she
served as an assistant principal at a comprehensive
high school transitioning students from residential
treatment facilities back to their neighborhood school
programs.
b. Transition Counselor position increased from .5
FTE (half time) to 1.0 FTE (full time).
c. Teacher positions increased from 6 FTE to 10
FTE.
7. Created Special Schools Office in ASD Education
Center as home base for ASD Special Schools Principal
and non-teaching staff;
8. Scheduled and conducted monthly staff meeting
with Special Schools personnel;
9. Conducted daily site visits to NSBHS by the
principal, counselor or special education department
chair;
10. Increased communications between ASD Special
Schools Principal and the hospital staff;
11. Established weekly meeting between the NSBHS
Education Director and ASD Special Schools Principal;
12. Affirmed all teachers are "Highly Qualified" in
relevant core areas of instruction;
13. Increased instructional day for acute care
students from a half-day to full day program at the
request of the NSBHS Director;
14. Established regular progress meetings with NSBHS
staff Mike Lyons and Evelyn Alsup, and ASD staff Mike
Henry, Executive Director of Secondary Education and
Sue Doherty, Special Schools Principal;
15. Scheduled quarterly progress meetings with NSBHS
staff Mike Lyons and Evelyn Alsup, and ASD staff Mike
Graham, Chief Academic Officer, Linda Carlson,
Assistant Superintendent for Instructional Support,
Mike Henry, Executive Director, Secondary Education
and Sue Doherty, Special Schools Principal;
16. Addressed reported staff shortages experienced by
North Star Behavioral Health System that result in
relocation of classrooms and increased class sizes,
without prior notice and on any given day, by
remaining flexible and committed to serving our
students.
In addition, ASD has responded to a list of priority
areas in need provided by NSBHS in December of 2015.
Because we are committed to serving all students and
enhancing our services through communication and
collaboration with community providers, we have
accommodated every request made by North Star
Behavioral Health System through United Health
Services of Delaware, Inc.
The Anchorage School District enjoys strong
partnerships with Providence Hospital, Alaska
Psychiatric Institute, Alaska Child and Family,
Volunteers of America and Office of Children Services
to name a few. Through cooperative engagement with
clinical care providers, we have continued to increase
our educational services and supports for our children
with the most complex mental health and behavioral
needs.
Anchorage School District is providing a supportive
educational program for students with acute
challenges. ASD disagrees with the premise that a
treatment center is able to provide more effective
educational services to a student than a school
district can provide. School districts are in the
best position to provide high quality public
educational services.
Given all that has been accomplished in providing
comparable general and special educational services to
students in psychiatric treatment, we believe this
bill is unnecessary legislation and could negatively
impact the school district's ability to support our
special needs students. As noted during the meeting,
the bill raises concerns about accountability under
IDEA, a highly litigious area, opening the door for
future conflicts.
HB 102 has been compared to the charter school laws.
Charter schools are public schools. They are not
private treatment centers. HB 102 abrogates the local
control of school boards to determine the need for
educational programs and circumvents school board
authority and discretion for approving or denying a
charter school contract. HB 1202 removes all
discretion from school boards because it requires a
school district to execute a contract so long as the
contract meets the requirements of the law.
HB 102 has far-reaching implications for districts
across Alaska. ASD has consistently expressed
concerns about HB 102. The Anchorage School District
cannot support HB 102 because districts will not
maintain control over the quality of education
delivered, there is potential for conflict over
accountability under IDEA a highly litigious area, and
the bill strips local school boards of the authority
to determine what educational programs are needed in
their districts.
For decades ASD has met the general education and
special education needs of Alaskan students in need of
residential psychiatric treatment and intends to
continue doing so. We appreciate the opportunity to
share these accomplishments and express our concerns
relative to HB 102.
9:09:51 AM
CHAIR KELLER closed public testimony.
9:09:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO offered Conceptual Amendment 1, labeled
29-LS0519\S.1, Glover, 3/15/16, which read:
Page 1, line 1, following "Act":
Insert "relating to school districts;"
Page 2, line 20, following "(a)":
Insert "A school district may enter into a contract to
provide payments to a residential psychiatric
treatment center that provides an educational program
for a student admitted to the center. If a school
district and a residential psychiatric treatment
center are unable to agree on a proposed contract on
or before April 1 immediately preceding the first
school year for which the residential psychiatric
treatment center is seeking funding, the school board
where a student who is admitted to the center is
enrolled shall enter into a contract with the center
as provided in (b) of this section.
(b)"
Page 2, line 7:
Delete "(b)"
Insert "(c)"
Page 2, line 26:
Delete "(b)"
Insert "(c)"
Page 3, line 6:
Delete "(b)(21)"
Insert "(c)(21)"
Page 4, line 14:
Delete "(a)"
Insert "(b)"
Page 4, line 23:
Delete "(c)"
Insert "(d)"
Page 4, line 24:
Delete "(a)"
Insert "(b)"
Page 4, line 27:
Delete "(d)"
Insert "(e)"
Page 4, line 30:
Delete "(e)"
Insert "(f)"
Delete "(a)"
Insert "(b)"
Page 5, line 7:
Delete "(f)"
Insert "(g)"
Page 5, line 12:
Delete "(g)"
Insert "(h)"
Page 5, line 15:
Delete "AS 14.30.800"
Insert "AS 14.30.800(f) - (g)"
Page 5, line 17:
Delete "AS 14.30.800(b)"
Insert "AS 14.30.800(c)"
CHAIR KELLER objected for discussion.
9:10:58 AM
JOSHUA BANKS, Staff, Representative David Talerico, Alaska State
Legislature, explained that Conceptual Amendment 1 is offered on
request of Legislative Legal Services due to concerns regarding
potential constitutional conflicts by setting different
standards for school districts which had entered into a contract
prior to January 1, of a given school year.
9:13:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO expressed concern for schools that have
working contracts in place with a treatment center. Without a
provision for them to continue the relationship, it will cause a
disruption in services in order to recreate a working system.
CHAIR KELLER removed his objection. Without further objection
Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted.
9:14:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE VAZQUEZ clarified the intent of the amendment,
and asked for comment from the contracting agency.
9:16:30 AM
MS. ALSOP stated support for the amendment as adopted.
9:17:03 AM
CHAIR KELLER REPRESENTATIVE offered Conceptual Amendment 1 to
Conceptual Amendment 1, to wit:
page 1, line 8:
following "contract"
insert "with the provision in (c)"
[No objection was voiced and the motion was treated as
withdrawn.]
9:18:13 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 9:18 a.m. to 9:21 a.m.
9:21:24 AM
CHAIR KELLER moved to rescind action on the adoption of
Amendment 1. Without objection Amendment 1 was withdrawn.
CHAIR KELLER announced HB 102 as held.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SCR1_CivicsEd_BillText_VersionI.pdf |
HEDC 3/16/2016 8:00:00 AM |
SCR 1 |
| Work Draft for {versioni} 3/16/2016.pdf |
HEDC 3/16/2016 8:00:00 AM |
|
| SCR1_CivicEd_VersionI_Summary_of_Changes.pdf |
HEDC 3/16/2016 8:00:00 AM |
SCR 1 |
| SCR1 Fiscal Note.pdf |
HEDC 3/16/2016 8:00:00 AM |
SCR 1 |
| Work Draft for {version s HB102} 3/16/2016.pdf |
HEDC 3/16/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 6 HB102 Fiscal Note EED-SS 3-13-15.pdf |
HEDC 3/16/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB 102 ASD Opposition House Education Committee Letter 031516.pdf |
HEDC 3/16/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB156 Fiscal Note.pdf |
HEDC 3/16/2016 8:00:00 AM |
|
| 1. HB156 Work draft Y.pdf |
HEDC 3/14/2016 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/16/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 156 |
| HB102 North Star Response to Kenai Peninsula School District.pdf |
HEDC 3/16/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |