Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 106
04/02/2012 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Mat-su Borough School District | |
| SB170 | |
| HB352 | |
| HB369 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 369 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 170 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 352 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 352-RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT CURRICULUM
8:34:13 AM
CHAIR DICK announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 352, "An Act relating to public school curriculum
and textbook restrictions based on science, resource
development, and sustained yield principles."
8:34:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 352, labeled 27-LS1409\M, Mischel,
3/30/12, as the working document.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON objected for the purpose of discussion.
8:34:34 AM
ANNETTE KREITZER, Staff, Representative Alan Dick, Alaska State
Legislature, provided an explanation of the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 352, Version M. She explained that the
statute being amended is entitled "environmental education."
She outlined the changes in the proposed committee substitute.
She stated that discussions of language on page 1, line 6, of
the original bill included considering basing the curriculum
development and textbook selection on these constitutional
principles. She referred to page 1 of Version M and indicated
that "and textbook selection" has been removed from the
aforementioned language and from the title.
MS. KREITZER said discussions about including a similar
requirement for the University of Alaska (UA) were held, noting
the legislature delegated a lot of its authority to the Board of
Regents (BOR). She indicated this language appears in the BOR's
powers and duties and responsibilities on page 2, lines 9-19 of
Version M, which essentially parallels the language on page 1
for public schools.
8:36:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON removed his objection. There being no
further objection, Version M was before the committee.
8:36:37 AM
CHAIR DICK opened public testimony.
8:37:03 AM
FRED PARADY, Executive Director, Alaska Miners Association
(AMA), paraphrasing from a prepared statement, which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
The Alaska Miners Association is a non-profit
membership organization established in 1939 to
represent the mining industry in Alaska, making us one
of the oldest trade associations in the state. The
AMA is comprised of more than 1,400 individual
prospectors, geologists and engineers, vendors,
suction dredge miners, small family mines, junior
mining companies, and major mining companies. Our
members look for and produce gold, silver, platinum,
diamonds, lead, zinc, copper, coa1, limestone, sand
and gravel, crushed stone, armor rock, and other
materials. Our members live and work throughout the
state.
Let's turn to the bill before you, HB352, which is
relates to public school curriculum and textbook
restrictions based on science, resource development,
and sustained yield principles.
MR. PARADY stated it is really straightforward and
continued reading, as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Alaska State Constitution Section 2. General Authority
"The legislature shall provide for the utilization,
development, and conservation of all natural resources
belonging to the State, including land and waters, for
the maximum benefit of its people".
More than most other states, Alaska has educators who
come from various backgrounds who may be unfamiliar
with Alaska's constitutional directives regarding
State resources.
MR. PARADY stated he has served for the past four years as
the chief operating officer of the North Slope Borough
School District (NSBSD); however, he is not representing
them today. He pointed out that the turnover among the 172
teachers and hiring from out-of-state job fairs was
intense. More than other states, Alaska has educators who
come from various backgrounds and places so many educators
may be unfamiliar with Alaska's constitution. He continued
reading his prepared statement, as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
The purpose of this bill is to clearly state that the
curriculum in local schools supports the intent of the
Constitution.
Educational materials must give parity to the
viewpoint of use and development as well as
conservation of all natural resources. Educational
materials should recognize that the economic well-
being of the State is totally dependent upon careful,
sustainable resource development.
The Alaska Miners Association firmly supports the
sponsors efforts to bring balance to the teaching of
natural resource issues in the context of Alaska's
founding fathers and our constitution.
8:40:00 AM
MICHELLE BRUNNER, Executive Director, Alaska Resource Education
(ARE), paraphrasing from a prepared statement, which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
I'm here to testify today with regards to HB 352.
Alaska Resource Education (formerly AMEREF) is a
partnership between the State of Alaska Department of
Education and private industry. We are a nonprofit
organization that focuses on educating students and
teachers about Alaska's natural resources using our
Alaska Resource Kit and Curriculum. The Alaska
Resource Kit contains a standardsbased, science
focused interdisciplinary set of curriculum,
activities, and support materials providing K12
students with information about Alaska's mineral,
energy, oil & gas, and forest resources. We deliver
our curriculum to educators through our "Rock & Roll
around Alaska" course a 500 level, 1 credit course
offered through the University system. We also
educate students through our Minor Miner and Energy
Einstein programs. Our kit materials include:
A 40 sample Alaska rocks and minerals set complete
with oil and gold, DVD's, cd's, posters, maps, books,
a Sitka spruce crosssection and other educational
materials on Alaska's resources.
In the last 3 years we have had 333 teachers take our
Rock & Roll around Alaska course, we've distributed
640 Alaska Resource Kits to school districts across
Alaska, our education director has visited 116
classrooms and 172 students have participated in our
Minor Miner and Energy Einstein programs statewide. I
would invite you to visit our website
www.akresource.org to see firsthand a video from
students about "what minerals mean to me".
8:42:10 AM
MS. BRUNNER continued to read from a prepared statement, as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
We are interested in this legislation because ARE is
consistently providing resource education on a daily
basis throughout Alaska. The strength of ARE's
program is that it is a partnership between the
private and public sectors. Our experience in the
classroom is that our educational system is saturated
with environmental and conservation education that
does not follow Alaska's constitutional principles.
The idea of HB352 would assist in adding balance to
the classroom and to Alaska's future employees and
policymakers.
With regard to HB352, our board has not had time to
review the legislation and has not taken official
action specifically regarding HB352, but the overall
concept I believe ARE would support. We would suggest
that as you think about how to provide a science based
curriculum based on Alaska's constitutional principles
that you consider utilization of existing curriculum
that meets this criteria.
8:43:37 AM
MARLEANNA HALL, Projects Coordinator, Resource Development
Council, paraphrasing from a prepared statement, which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
In brief, RDC is a statewide business association with
members in forestry, oil and gas, mining, tourism,
fishing, all 12 Native regional corporations, and many
others. Our mission is to grow Alaska through
responsible resource development.
First, thank you to Representative Dick for
introducing HB 352 - an Act regarding Resource
Development Curriculum in Alaska's schools.
RDC recognizes Section 8.1 of the Alaska State
Constitution, reading, "It is the policy of the State
to encourage the settlement of its land and the
development of its resources by making them available
for maximum use consistent with the public interest."
RDC supports programs educating students on Alaska's
natural resources, and specifically on the responsible
development of our resources. It is a policy of RDC to
support programs, including Alaska Resource Education,
to educate students and the general public on
responsible resource development activities in Alaska.
8:44:35 AM
MS. HALL continued to read from her prepared statement,
which read, as follows [original punctuation provided]:
You've already heard about ARE this morning, so I will
not repeat details about their mission to educate
students about Alaska's natural resources.
The State of Alaska partners with Alaska Resource
Education, formerly AMEREF, which is an education non-
profit whose mission is to educate students about
Alaska's natural resources. ARE offers educators
across the state Resource Education Kits containing
nearly $300 worth of materials to help provide
students and teachers with balanced information about
Alaska's rich heritage of mineral, energy, and forest
resources.
These non-biased kits have been accepted by all 53
school districts, and are available at no cost to
teachers. In addition, a free training is offered,
when available, so that teachers are able to correctly
utilize the materials in the kits.
I would like to note, it is somewhat appalling that
incorporating resource development in the curriculum
isn't mandated while conservation education is.
Alaska's education curriculum should include educating
our students on activities related to and the
responsible development of our natural resources.
Future generations of Alaskans should have access to a
firm foundation of our constitutional principals that
guide our state, including multiple-use of resources
and land along side conservation education. Thank you
again Representative Dick for recognizing this
shortcoming in Alaska's curriculum, and for proposing
HB 352, which will help provide more balance in
educational curriculum in our public schools. In
addition to my comments today, RDC will submit a
formal letter of support.
8:45:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA referred page 2, line 18, of Version M,
and read, "(B) scientific principles, without bias and without
regard to personal opinion;." She indicated this language
applies to science only. but she offered her belief the specific
language should apply to each one of these principles. She
related a scenario in which a person with a small share of a
company developing a mine would have a bias. She surmised that
early Alaskans developed their own sustained yield principles
and did not take more than they needed; however, currently, the
state has observed "fishing out" of whole fishing industries,
such as crabs and other seafood or overfishing that has resulted
in small halibut. She suggested teachers should look at
teaching everything in their schools in a balanced and non-
prejudiced way and these principles should apply more broadly to
the teaching practices.
CHAIR DICK agreed it was something to consider, but he was
unsure of how to add her concept to this bill.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI stated that the current section of [AS
14.30.380] dealing with education already addresses this by
indicating the need to balance resource development and
conservation.
8:49:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA referred to page 2, lines 18-19 and
suggested removing "without bias and without regard to personal
opinion behind the scientific principles." She remarked that
teachers should be teaching everything without bias and without
regard to personal opinion. She further remarked that isolating
the requirement to "scientific principles" alone sounds "a
little spooky" to her.
CHAIR DICK pointed out that legislature must be careful to avoid
unintended consequences. At the same time the intent of the
bill is to allow parity with respect to conservation in overall
teaching concepts. He stated that "uses" refers to traditional
uses by the First Nations people in Alaska. In essence, the
intent of the bill was not intended to micromanage, but to speak
to the larger picture.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI reiterated that the current section of
[AS 14.30.380] pertaining to education addresses this by
indicating the need to balance resource development and
conservation.
8:52:00 AM
JANICE DAW, asked to point out overlap between HB 352 and a
CAPSIS proposal currently being discussed in the finance
committee on Alaska's learning adaptation production as it
relates to the state constitution.
CHAIR DICK restated that the focus of the bill is to achieve
parity in curriculum taught in schools that reflects [Alaska's]
Constitution.
MS. DAW agreed that she favored integrated curriculum that uses
the framework of the Alaska Constitution - Article 8 that
defines sustained yield natural resource management for the
purpose of maintaining, promoting, and using those resources.
She stated that has been the current framework used in the
school system for the last two years. She highlighted the
importance of using curriculum to teach the biological basis of
forest resources and to use a hands-on approach so students
learn how to make things. Further, students should learn how to
do experiments so they can get wrapped in as participants in
natural resource management. She explained how a project
beginning with a tree would be presented so students will learn
to become stewards, noting that first, the tree is harvested.
Next, students become involved in making things out of the tree
and learn how to sell the products at market. Finally,
discussions are held on the sustained yield principles and
sustainable forest management.
CHAIR DICK indicated that he is becoming familiar with her work,
which is directly in line with the bill's concept.
MS. DAW offered to provide further information to the committee
on the current CAPSIS project.
CHAIR DICK offered to distribute materials to committee members.
8:56:55 AM
CHAIR DICK, after first determining no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 352.
8:57:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON expressed concern with the bill. He said
he has not received any comments from his district that
environmental education should be drastically changed or
limited. He referred to current AS 14.30.380, which read:
The board shall encourage each school board to
initiate and conduct a program of environmental
education for kindergarten through grade 12. The
program should include, but is not limited to,
education regarding the need to balance resource
development with environmental safeguards, the
dependence of the state on resource development, and
the opportunity for pollution prevention, waste
reduction, and recycling. A school board may implement
environmental education as a part of regular classroom
studies.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON emphasized that the current statute
requires balance in teaching and must consider resource
development in all aspects including pollution prevention, waste
reduction and recycling. He expressed concern that HB 352 would
modify this language to indicate that in developing a curriculum
a school district shall base its curriculum on - indicating his
concern is focused on (1)(B) - the principle of "utilization and
development of all nonrenewable resources in addition to
encouragement of balancing resource development and conservation
...." He emphasized this is his biggest concern since it would
represent a total shift. The change would require the
curriculum, as developed, to be based on utilization and
development of all nonrenewable resources. He related his
understanding that resource development of minerals and timber
raises resource development issues, but much of what happens in
environmental education is to consider what is important and
happening in today's world. He pointed out five students at the
Homer High school developed a program for waste reduction
including recyclables. These students were given national
recognition for developing waste reduction. He provided an
anecdote noting one Southeast legislator encourages paper use
since it supports timber production in Southeast Alaska. He
pointed out that the language in subparagraph (B) relates to
utilization and development of all nonrenewable resources. He
recalled a previous presentation by the community of St. Mary's,
in which the environmental curriculum was based on the local
usage of moose hunting, fishing, Beluga whale hunting, and seal
hunting. He envisioned a mine proposed at the headwaters.
Under the bill, the curriculum would be required to be based on
the utilization and development of all nonrenewable resources.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON envisioned one or two people could oppose
the curriculum and point to the aforementioned language. If
nonrenewable resources were in the area, the curriculum must be
based on the utilization and development of those nonrenewable
resources. Additionally, classes in his legislative district
currently appear to be proactive and highly competitive in the
areas of resource development and environmental education. He
reiterated that students in his district have won awards for
their work in this area. He emphasized that the bill would
change environmental education. Lastly, dynamic teaching stems
from opinion and this bill may jeopardize teaching in the
classroom - whether it is for global warming or acidification of
oceans - since those types of classes may not base an
environmental educational curriculum on the development of those
resources. He maintained his concern for unintended
consequences of the bill.
9:04:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON disagreed. She offered her belief that
it is important to teach to both sides of the issue and that is
what HB 352 stipulates. She surmised that everyone is
interested in conservation. She emphasized that understanding
resource development and how it dovetails with conservation is
important. She expressed concern that the university lobbies
for funding, but at the same time does not want the state to use
its natural resources. She concluded by noting that Alaska is
different from other states.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON agreed, noting that AS 14.30.380 so
indicates; however, this bill would require the school district
to base its curriculum on utilization and development of all
nonrenewable resources in addition to encouraging balancing
resource development with conservation. He concluded that the
bill changes environmental education to resource development
education although it could be balanced with conservation.
Therefore, the standard is changed from environmental education
to resource development education.
9:07:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE agreed with Representative P. Wilson, in
that it is important to teach both sides of every issue since to
do otherwise does not truly provide education. He pointed out
that the state is concerned about conservation and resource
development and the permitting process takes that into account.
He suggested that HB 352 would not restrict environmental
teaching. He emphasized students must receive instruction on
both sides of any issue in order to receive a better education.
In doing so, students will be more competent to make their own
decisions based on a balanced presentation of the subject
matter. He offered his support for the bill.
9:08:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI declared that he has read Article 8. He
expressed concern that the existing K-12 programs don't teach
more diversity. He offered his belief that this bill would
change the existing language. He indicated that currently the
language requires a program should include, but is not limited
to the need to balance resource development and environmental
safeguards. He said, "I think it's fair. I think it does show
- not necessarily two sides - but a lot of gray area in
between." He highlighted that students should graduate from K-
12, middle school, and high school with an education that
encourages critical thinking. He suggested that if these
students later hear of a mining project that they would not
immediately support or oppose it, but will take it one step at a
time. He pointed out one reason he objects to HB 352 is that
the language tends to weaken the constitutional principles. He
read the general authority under Article 8 of Alaska's
Constitution, which reads:"... shall provide for the
utilization, development, and conservation of all natural
resources belonging to the State, ...." He offered his belief
that conservation has been relegated to the fourth tier.
Further, he pointed out that Section 4 relates to sustained
yield, and reads, "Fish, forests, wildlife, grasslands, and all
other replenishable resources belonging to the State shall be
utilized, developed, and maintained on the sustained yield
principle, ...." Finally, the bill changes that wording to
create an entirely different thought pattern. Certainly,
students should understand the tenets of the Alaska
Constitution, Article 8, and think critically, but this bill
falls short, he stated.
9:11:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA indicated that Alaska's Constitution
begins with the people of the state and this is why our
government exists. She read the title, "An Act establishing
curriculum restrictions based on science, resource development
...." However, what appears to be missing is human development,
which is a huge problem in Alaska. She said that students need
to know that human resource development is important and
understand they prosper when resource development is intertwined
with the environment they live in. Further, she pointed out the
reason for schools is to show them multiple ways for development
- not necessarily of the natural environment - so it might be
development of tourism, graphics, or writing skills. She would
like the resources to be human, which, she opined, is the
critical component.
9:13:55 AM
CHAIR DICK agreed; however, Article 8 doesn't refer to students.
He acknowledged that students are the primary resource, but they
are not renewable or non-renewable resources, which is what is
being addressed by the bill. He referred to "utilization" and
the major component of that is subsistence utilization. The
intent of this bill was to acknowledge the traditional and
contemporary utilization of resources by the First Nations'
people.
9:15:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT offered his support for HB 352. He
highlighted that the bill does address the environmental
safeguards; however, it is important to hold the discussion on
the utilization and maintenance of our renewable and
nonrenewable resources. He offered his belief that the bill
balances those aspects. He emphasized that tomorrow's leaders
must understand the impact of the renewable and nonrenewable
resources on our livelihoods, including the jobs and money
natural resources bring to the state. Additionally,
Representative P. Wilson touched on the concept that when "x"
takes place in our school system or when a program is
implemented it must be clear. Further, he mentioned he serves
on the Fiscal Policy Committee and that the committee is trying
to determine whether Alaskans truly understand where the money
in the state comes from and where it goes to get that
conversation started. He stressed that this bill provides a
fuller understanding of how Alaska's economic wealth originates
while balancing the conservation aspects of resource
development. He pointed out that a recent study suggests that
most kids are not focused on protecting the environment as
previous generations have been focused on the environment. He
agreed conservation should be included in education. Finally,
he offered his support for HB 352 because it balances
conservation and resource development. He reiterated his
support for the bill.
9:18:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI noted the subsistence aspect was
mentioned. He recalled that one of [Alaska's] constitutional
principles was also discussed. He asked whether that meant a
rural subsistence priority or preference. He said it is written
in the Alaska Constitution, but is a gray area; however, this
committee just brought it up.
CHAIR DICK assured members that HB 352 has nothing to do with a
rural subsistence priority, but it has everything to do with
people becoming aware of the broad spectrum of uses and needs
within the state.
9:18:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA expressed concern with the bill since
human resources is not mentioned. She offered that Alaska's
primary wealth has been received from multi-national global
corporations. She pointed out that renewable energy is an issue
and diesel fuel is a political issue. She prefers to focus on
fostering jobs in the community, which means energy development
in each community. She emphasized the need to consider the
people of the state so they can become economically viable, just
as the constitution begins with the people. She offered her
belief that his bill could change that by putting in a bias.
CHAIR DICK asked whether an amendment is being offered.
9:21:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1.
She stated that the title, and throughout the bill should
include human resource; and on page 2, line 1, remove "without
bias and without regard to personal opinion." She referred to
page 2, line 16 to remove language ...."
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT interjected to raise an objection. He
said he objected to removing scientific principles from the
bill.
CHAIR DICK asked Representative Cissna to restate her motion.
9:23:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1, on
page 1, line 1, to read, "human and" resource development.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT maintained his objection.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI commented that he was unsure whether
Conceptual Amendment 1 fits in this bill. He said he would also
probably object to it.
CHAIR DICK commented that he thinks it is an excellent thought,
but this bill is not the place for it.
9:24:56 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Cissna and Kawasaki
voted in favor of Conceptual Amendment 1. Representatives
Seaton, Feige, Pruitt, P. Wilson, and Dick voted against it.
Therefore, Conceptual Amendment 1 failed by a vote of 2-5.
9:25:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA moved to adopt Amendment 2, on page 2,
line 1 to remove on page 2, line 1, to remove "without bias and
without regard to personal opinion"; and on page 2, line 18 to
remove "without bias and without regard to personal opinion."
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT maintained his objection.
9:26:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON characterized the language as very
problematic. He offered his belief that nothing in science is
without bias or personal opinion. This language would basically
ensure that arguments would ensue, such that someone would
accuse someone else of bias based on science especially since
scientists rarely agree. Scientific principles means data
should support it, but he did not think this language would be
helpful to the discussion.
9:28:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT described personal college experiences.
He had one professor who could speak to the arguments for and
against an issue, and another who could not, in fact, the latter
professor called anyone who opposed his view an idiot. He
offered his belief that a person could speak about issues
without being biased. He said it is up to the legislature to
ensure that the issues are fully discussed. Further, students
can also develop critical thinking to think on their own. He
objected to Amendment 2 since the language "unbiased" is
important.
9:29:02 AM
CHAIR DICK highlighted that when controversial issues are
discussed that the authority must first present one view and
then another view without bias.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI said at one point in time the world was
considered flat and bias existed on both sides of that debate.
He suggested that Amendment 2 is problematic.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON related his understanding that the bill is
not about discussions in education in the classrooms, but rather
the bill speaks to the development of the curriculum. He was
unsure how curriculum could be developed based on science alone.
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE related his understanding that HB 352 is
about the balanced delivery of resource education. He offered
his belief that science is almost universally accepted since it
undergoes the process of peer review. He emphasized that it is
important to leave "without bias and without regard to personal
opinion" in the statute to ensure it is more likely that both
sides of a particularly contentious issue will be delivered to
the student and to maintain a balanced education.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON reiterated the importance of having
this type of language in statute in order to guide students.
She recalled educators used to teach students to memorize
material and now teachers teach to think.
9:31:49 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Cissna and Seaton
voted in favor of Amendment 2. Representatives Pruitt,
Kawasaki, P. Wilson, Feige, and Dick voted against it.
Therefore, Amendment 2 failed by a vote of 2-5.
9:32:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 3,
on page 1, line 9 of Section 1 to insert "renewable" after "all"
and on page 1, line 11 delete "and other renewable resources".
He read subparagraph (A), which would then read:
(A) utilization, maintenance, and sustained yield of
all renewable natural resources belonging to the
state, including fish, forests, wildlife, land, water;
and
CHAIR DICK objected for the purpose of discussion.
9:33:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI explained that the bill is about
teaching a constitutional principle, however, the bill
diminishes the language in Alaska's Constitution. Conceptual
Amendment 3 would mirror Article 8, Section 4 under the
sustained yield principles and add in part of the general
authority granted in Article 8, Section 2 under natural
resources. He pointed out that since the amendment is
conceptual it would also apply to Section 2 under the Board of
Regents' duties.
9:34:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked whether Amendment 3 would change
[subparagraph] (A), but not [subparagraph] (B), which pertains
to nonrenewable resources. She stated she would vote against
Conceptual Amendment 3.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI responded that he will also propose a
second amendment to address subparagraph (B), so only the order
is being changed. Conceptual Amendment 3 would apply
specifically to the sustained yield principle and the language
is almost identical to Article 8, Section 4, of the
constitution; however it is a little different.
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE said he did not see any reason to change
the language.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT suggested that the point has already been
addressed and he, too, did not see any reason to change the
language.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI pointed out that Conceptual Amendment 3
mirrors the language in Alaska's Constitution. He said if the
goal is to teach a constitutional principle and adopt policy
that says that scientific and resource development curriculum
ought to be based on the sustained yield principle, then the
wording should mirror Alaska's Constitution - which is exactly
what Conceptual Amendment 3 does.
The committee took an at-ease from 9:35 a.m. to 9:36 a.m.
9:36:30 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Cissna, Kawasaki,
and Seaton voted in favor of Conceptual Amendment 3.
Representatives Feige, Pruitt, Wilson, and Dick voted against
it. Therefore, Conceptual Amendment 3 failed by a vote of 3-4.
9:37:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI made a motion to adopt Conceptual
Amendment 4, on page 1, line 12, [subparagraph (B)] would read,
"utilization, development, and conservation of all natural
resources;" and to delete on line 13, "in addition to
encouragement of balancing resource development and" so line 14
would read, "including land and water for the maximum benefit of
its people."
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI then clarified Conceptual Amendment 4
subparagraph (B), which read, "utilization, development, and
conservation of all natural resources including land and water
for the maximum benefit of its people;" He stated that
Conceptual Amendment 4 would also include a conceptual
conforming amendment on page 2, lines 15-17.
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT objected for the purpose of discussion.
9:38:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI maintained that the specific language of
[Alaska's] Constitution would be appropriate to consider as
inclusive to the bill. He explained that the language under
Article 8, Section 2 indicates that the state should provide for
the utilization, development, and conservation of all natural
resources - belonging to the state was omitted - including land
and water for the maximum benefit of its people. He emphasized
that it is very clearly stated in [Alaska's] Constitution and if
the committee is adopting a constitutional principle it should
follow the original language.
9:38:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT stated that [Alaska's] Constitution is a
guideline and the legislature writes statutes that expand on the
constitution. He offered his belief that if this language needs
to change that AS 14.30.380 should be changed, as well. He
emphasized that this bill expands on the basic framework, which
is appropriate. He stated that Conceptual Amendment 4 would
neuter the language in the bill. Finally, he urged members to
stick with the language in the bill, which he characterized as
good language.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON stressed that Conceptual Amendment 4
would take out the balance in the bill. She acknowledged that
some areas of [resource development] have been done very well,
but others have not fared so well. She spoke against Conceptual
Amendment 4.
9:40:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA stated her support for Conceptual
Amendment 4, since it comes from [Alaska's] Constitution. She
elaborated on the development of the constitution, which looks
at all areas of the state and provides balance.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON stated his opposition to Conceptual
Amendment 4. He said that the bill would amend AS 14.30.380,
which relates to environmental education. He suggested that
going to utilization, development, and conservation of all
resources may further change the entire section of statutes.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI responded that [Alaska's] Constitution
is the supreme law of the land. He highlighted that this
statute speaks to the constitutional principles in this specific
curriculum. He offered his belief that interpreting [Alaska's]
Constitution and placing it into general law is not appropriate
in this context.
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE related that [Section 1] contains two
subparagraphs. One relates to renewable resources and the other
relates to nonrenewable resources. He said, "It's not our job
to rewrite the constitution. It's our job to translate the
constitution into reality so I oppose the amendment."
9:42:50 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Cissna and Kawasaki
voted in favor of Conceptual Amendment 4. Representatives
Seaton, Feige, Pruitt, P. Wilson, and Dick voted against it.
Therefore, Conceptual Amendment 4 failed by a vote of 2-5.
9:43:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON suggested that the bill title would need
to be changed, based on the new language proposed in the CS. It
should be titled, "resource development education" because that
is what the committee has said. The bill speaks to utilization,
maintenance, and sustained yield, or utilization and development
of all nonrenewable resources, which can be balanced with some
environmental or conservation principles. He maintained the
bill changes the entire first section of AS 14.30.380 to
resource development education in the classrooms instead of
environmental education in the classrooms. He said he would not
be supporting the bill, but did not wish to hold it in
committee.
9:44:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI offered his belief that it is
judiciary's role and responsibility to interpret [Alaska's]
Constitution and not the legislature's role to do so. He
stressed that this bill changes [Alaska's] constitution by
placing the watered down language in statute. He highlighted
that kids should be taught balanced education so they can make
good, critical decisions; however, he also will not oppose
moving the bill.
CHAIR DICK pointed out that Legislative Legal wrote the bill so
he assumes the bill drafter is familiar with all the issues.
9:45:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT moved to report the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 352, labeled 27-LS1409\M, Mischel,
3/30/12, out of committee with individual recommendations and
the accompanying zero fiscal note.
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA objected.
9:45:45 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Pruitt, Kawasaki,
P. Wilson, Seaton, Feige, and Dick voted in favor of reporting
the proposed committee substitute for HB 352, labeled 27-
LS1409\M, Mischel, 3/30/12, out of committee. Representative
Cissna voted against it. Therefore, the CSHB 352(EDC) was
reported out of the House Education Standing Committee by a vote
of 6-1.
The committee took an at-ease from 9:45 a.m. to 9:47 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 369 Version A 040212.pdf |
HEDC 4/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 369 |
| HB 369 Version A Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HEDC 4/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 369 |
| HB 369 Support Information Case for High School activities.pdf |
HEDC 4/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 369 |
| HB 369 Version A Sectional Summary.pdf |
HEDC 4/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 369 |
| HB 369 Version A Laws in other states.docx |
HEDC 4/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 369 |
| HB 369 Version A Fiscal Note EED-TLS-3-30-12.pdf |
HEDC 4/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 369 |
| CS HB 352 Version M 033012.pdf |
HEDC 4/2/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 352 |