Legislature(2017 - 2018)CAPITOL 106
02/20/2018 03:00 PM House HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
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 | |
| HB162 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 162 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 162-DHSS CENT. REGISTRY;LICENSE;BCKGROUND CHK
3:09:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR announced that the only order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 162, "An Act relating to criminal and
civil history requirements and a registry regarding certain
licenses, certifications, appeals, and authorizations by the
Department of Health and Social Services; and providing for an
effective date."
3:10:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 162, labeled 30-GH1676\J, Glover,
2/15/18, as the working draft.
3:10:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR objected for discussion.
3:10:41 PM
STACIE KRALY, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Statewide
Section Supervisor, Human Services Section, Civil Division
(Juneau), Department of Law, paraphrased from the Summary of
Changes in CS [Included in members' packets], which read:
Section 1 contains the amendment requested by the
Department of Public Safety to ensure compliance with
federal laws relating to the sharing of criminal
history information with the Department of Health and
Social Services.
Section 2 contains a technical fix that removes the
word "registry" and instead refers to databases to
avoid the concern raised by the Ombudsman regarding
confusion over the term "registry."
Old Section 7 was deleted as it was determined in
consultation with legislative legal the section was
redundant. It was determined that keeping what is now
section 7 in the CS was sufficient to require relative
placement to have background checks.
Section 10 is re-written to address the concerns
raised by the Ombudsman's office. Specifically, the
rewrite:
? Removes the confusion caused by using the word
"registry." Similar to Sections 2, 8, 18, and 21, the
change redefines registry to "databases";
? Clarifies that we are looking to evaluate health,
safety, and welfare issues when reviewing databases
related to licensed entities, not technical violations
that may lead to a nonrenewal, suspension or
revocation of a license;
? Clarifies that we are looking to identify persons
whose children are subjects of a child in need of aid
petition;
? Clarifies that we are looking to evaluate health,
safety, and welfare issues when reviewing databases
related to licensed providers (occupational licensing
under AS 08), not unrelated technical violations;
? Adds that a person who works for the state not
just the Department of Health and Social Services is
subject to a barring condition if they are terminated
from employment for a substantiated allegation of
assaultive, neglectful, or exploitive behavior.
Section 12 is amended as requested by the Ombudsman's
Office to clarify persons who are seeking variances
have access to information they need to pursue a
variance.
Section 14 adds a new section to effectuate the access
of information under AS 47.10 for variance committees.
Section 17 (former Section 16) contains a technical
fix that remove the word "registry" that refer to
databases to avoid confusion as articulated by the
Ombudsman.
Section 19 (former Section 18) removes the qualifier
of "unsupervised" before "volunteer" as to persons who
can be investigated. The Department wants to be able
to investigate any volunteer unsupervised or
otherwise who has engaged in abusive, neglectful, or
exploitative behavior against a child or adult in
care.
Sections 20 is added to this CS to amend AS
47.32.140(d) to remove the word "registry" and instead
refer to databases to avoid the concern raised by the
Ombudsman regarding confusion over the term
"registry."
Section 22 (former Section 20) is amended to add a new
subsection to clarify that information can be shared
with law enforcement if that information is from a
concurrent investigation.
3:15:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN referenced the concurrent investigations
mentioned in Section 22 of the proposed bill and asked about the
ability of the department to share information with law
enforcement if it was not yet a concurrent investigation,
although there was the possibility.
MS. KRALY explained that, under the current statutory scheme, it
was necessary to obtain a search warrant signed by a judge or a
court order to share any confidential information with law
enforcement. She explained that, as the amendment contemplated
a criminal allegation or offense in a licensed facility, and, as
the police and licensing were both called, there would be an
intersection of the investigations. She stated that an
allegation from the past could not be turned into a concurrent
investigation.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN offered an example and asked if there was
anything that would keep the department from reaching out to law
enforcement if there was the possibility of a concurrent
investigation.
MS. KRALY offered her belief that should the department have the
impression that a crime had been committed and felt that a
report should be made to law enforcement, there would not be
anything to preclude them from making that report.
REPRESENTATIVE EASTMAN asked if there was a specific benchmark
that determined at what point it became an investigation.
MS. KRALY explained that the department could receive a number
of calls or reports of allegations that something had happened
in a licensed facility. At that point, the department would go
through a qualitative evaluation of the report to determine
whether there was probable cause for an investigation. She
stated that not all reports required an investigation. She
explained that there would be a formal process that could
trigger an investigation, and the agency would then inform the
license provider that there was an investigation to an
allegation.
3:20:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked about the new name for the civil
registry.
MS. KRALY explained that the civil registry was now the civil
history portion of the criminal background check, and that the
centralized registry was the database managed by the Office of
Children's Services (OCS), which kept track of all the reports
of harm and protective services reports identifying when an
event had happened. She stated that this centralized registry
had been renamed the Child Protection database. She reported
that civil databases had been identified through statute and
regulation for review.
REPRESENTATIVE TARR asked if civil databases was the umbrella
term for these various data bases. She directed attention to
page 10 of the proposed committee substitute (CS), Version J,
which still spoke about a child protection registry.
MS. KRALY explained that this was one of the data bases to be
reviewed for purposes of the civil history data base check.
3:23:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR removed her objection. There being no
further objection, Version J was adopted as the working draft.
3:23:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR opened public testimony.
3:24:07 PM
THOMAS GARBER expressed his concern with the due process of
civil rights and shared a personal anecdote about his challenge
and interaction with the judicial law and OCS systems.
3:30:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE TARR closed public testimony.
3:30:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON moved to report CSHB 162, Version 30-
GH1676\J, Glover, 2/15/18, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal note. There
being no objection, CSHB 162(HSS) was moved from the House
Health and Social Services Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 162 Fiscal Note DHSS-HCS 01.22.18.pdf |
HHSS 1/23/2018 3:00:00 PM HHSS 2/20/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 162 |
| HB162 Governor Transmittal Letter 1.22.18.pdf |
HHSS 1/23/2018 3:00:00 PM HHSS 2/20/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 162 |
| HB 162 Fiscal Note DPS-SS 01.22.18.pdf |
HHSS 1/23/2018 3:00:00 PM HHSS 2/20/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 162 |
| HB162 Sectional Analysis ver A 1.19.18.pdf |
HHSS 1/23/2018 3:00:00 PM HHSS 2/20/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 162 |
| HB162 Supporting Document-FAQs on Background Checks 1.19.18.pdf |
HHSS 1/23/2018 3:00:00 PM HHSS 2/20/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 162 |
| HB162 Supporting Documents-Proposed Background Check Process 1.22.18.pdf |
HHSS 1/23/2018 3:00:00 PM HHSS 2/20/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 162 |
| HB162 SB81 - FAQs 050317.pdf |
HHSS 2/20/2018 3:00:00 PM SHSS 2/2/2018 1:30:00 PM SHSS 3/16/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 162 SB 81 |
| HB162 SB81 - Sectional 050317.pdf |
HHSS 2/20/2018 3:00:00 PM SHSS 2/2/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 162 SB 81 |
| HB 162 amendment Dept of Public Safety (SB 81) 30-GH1676 A.1.pdf |
HHSS 2/20/2018 3:00:00 PM SHSS 2/2/2018 1:30:00 PM |
HB 162 SB 81 |
| HB 162 CS vers. J 2.19.2018.pdf |
HHSS 2/20/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 162 |
| HB162 - Summary of Changes to CS HB 162 v J Feb 20 2018.pdf |
HHSS 2/20/2018 3:00:00 PM |
HB 162 |