Legislature(2021 - 2022)BUTROVICH 205
02/25/2022 09:00 AM Senate 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 | |
| SB198 | |
| SB146 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 198 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 146 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 146-UNIVERSITY: TEXTBOOKS/MATERIALS COST
9:28:21 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND reconvened the meeting and announced the
consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 146 "An Act relating to costs
of and charges for textbooks and other course materials required
for University of Alaska courses; and providing for an effective
date."
9:28:58 AM
SENATOR MYERS, District B, Alaska State Legislator, Juneau,
Alaska, stated that legislators are unable to change the cost of
textbooks by dealing with the publishing industry directly.
Instead, SB 146 seeks to provide cost transparency for students
so they will know the cost of materials before selecting
courses. He provided the sponsor statement as follows:
[Original punctuation provided.]
For decades a major roadblock to the acquisition of
higher education in this country has been costs.
Students in Alaska and throughout the United States
often find themselves in difficult situations
attempting to balance the various costs of higher
education such a tuition, room and board, and course
materials. For many students cost of material can be a
deciding factor in the decision to take a course due
to the sometimes-exorbitant prices of required course
materials. Students often find themselves as consumers
subject to a captive market that has experienced a
colossal growth in price over the last several
decades. The costly and unique nature of the textbook
and course material market has led to many students
being forced to "shop around" and attempt to engage
the market as informed consumers.
The Textbook Cost Transparency Act provides students
with vital information about their textbook and course
materials while they are registering for classes,
allowing them to make informed choices and financially
plan. The goal of this legislation is to provide
students with as much information regarding cost as
early as possible in the registration process with
clearly defined definitions integrated into the
University of Alaska's shared online course catalog
(UAOnline). By allowing students to see which classes
come at "zero-cost" or "low-cost" they will be able to
make more informed finical decisions more easily.
While faculty will remain the paramount deciders of
class materials, we believe that by providing students
this information we will be building towards a more
equitable and cost-effective University System for
students at the class level.
9:31:04 AM
DAWSON MANN, Staff, Senator Robert Myers, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, read the sectional analysis for SB
146:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Section 1: Page 1, Lines 4-6 This section establishes
that this act may be known as the "Textbook Cost
Transparency Act".
Section 2: Page 1, Lines 7-14, Page 2, Lines 1-16 This
section outlines the information that the University
of Alaska must provide in the University systems
online course schedule relating to class materials and
automatic fees required for the materials. This
section provides statute definitions for "course
materials", "online course schedule", "zero-cost
resources", and "low-cost resources".
This section also directs that the universities online
course schedule must include search functions to
identify courses with only zero-cost materials
required.
Section 3: Page 2, Line 17 This section establishes an
effective date for the bill of July 1st, 2023.
9:32:10 AM
SENATOR STEVENS stated that as a former history professor at the
University of Alaska, he had experienced frustration with minor
textbook changes, such as chapter numbering, that have left
students unable to use a sibling's textbook. He stated he does
not want to give textbook manufacturers the advantage but asked
if there were any drawbacks to SB 146.
9:33:04 AM
SENATOR MYERS replied that a couple of organizations at the
university helped craft definitions for SB 146. There was
flexibility in determining the best way to implement the
concept. He stated that invited testimony could share any
drawbacks they see in SB 146, but no drawbacks have been
specified.
SENATOR STEVENS sought verification that the intent of SB 146 is
not to interfere with faculty textbook selection or that a
textbook could be used for a course university-wide.
SENATOR MYERS responded that it is not the intent of SB 146 to
tell the faculty which textbooks to use. It only asks that
information be released so students can make informed choices in
course selection.
SENATOR STEVENS expressed concern that SB 146 could have
unintended consequences that might disadvantage students.
9:33:47 AM
SENATOR BEGICH asked how many states have a bill like SB 146.
SENATOR MYERS stated SB 146 was modeled after Maryland
legislation passed in 2020. Washington, Oregon, and a few other
states have similar legislation. He deferred to Mr. Mann for an
exact number and stated that textbook costs have been rising
across the country.
MR. MANN replied that Maryland, Oregon, and Texas had similar
legislation and other states like Louisiana had related
statutes. The definition of low-cost material came from
Louisiana after conversing with university representatives.
9:35:24 AM
SENATOR BEGICH stated he was aware that Maryland had passed a
similar bill. Senator Cheryl Kagan, a Maryland colleague,
identified that it was Senator Rosapepe's bill. He stated he
reached out to Maryland for its equivalent of a fiscal note
after seeing that the fiscal note for SB 146 was an outrageous
ongoing $822,900. He stated he was shocked that the university
had produced a fiscal note showing an ongoing cost of nearly a
million dollars following implementation just to tell students
the value of a textbook. He read Maryland's fiscal summary,
"Once the online scheduling applications have been updated, USM
[University of Maryland] institutions can make the information
regarding course materials available using existing resources as
explained below. Revenues are not materially affected, as
effectively a zero fiscal note after the first year of
implementation." He asked if the sponsor or university could
speak to the fiscal note.
9:36:51 AM
SENATOR MYERS responded that he received the fiscal note on
Monday. The university did not give specifics but expressed
interest in addressing the committee.
SENATOR BEGICH stated he would like to hear how the university
justified an ongoing expense of nearly $1 million when another
state has implemented a similar law with no ongoing cost.
9:37:22 AM
SENATOR HUGHES stated she was shocked by the narrative for the
fiscal note and found it concerning. It allows one hour per
course for faculty or staff to enter the textbook information,
and there are 13,671 courses offered. She opined that having
been an instructor, entering the data should take five minutes
or less.
SENATOR BEGICH added that the University of Maryland has over
40,000 students, which is larger than the University of Alaska
and offers as many, if not more, courses.
9:38:22 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND opened invited testimony on SB 146.
9:38:54 AM
At ease.
9:39:25 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND reconvened the meeting and resumed invited
testimony on SB 146.
9:39:48 AM
SARA PERMAN, State Government Relations Manager, University of
Alaska, Anchorage, Alaska, stated that the university's priority
is to educate Alaskans and expand the Alaskan workforce.
Education must be as accessible and affordable as possible to
accomplish this. Having costs available upfront for students has
value because it eliminates surprises. The university has taken
several measures to make cost transparency accessible to
students by creating a list of textbooks and course materials so
they can know the cost before taking a course.
UAA has a zero-cost textbook program (ZCT). It can purchase
books, and students can access the materials free through
licensing with the Alaska Consortium Library. The university's
online bookstore lists the materials needed for a course and the
cost. This summer, zero textbook courses will be marked in the
scheduling platform and the registration course catalog. UAF has
material costs, course fees, and registration fees listed on its
online bookstore for students to view before registering. The
online course catalog has a search option for no-cost or low-
cost courses. UAS's open initiative brought forward by faculty
and students in 2016 says they would like textbook transparency
and lower costs. In 2021 almost 30 percent of courses used no-
cost materials. A no-cost marker to flag no-cost materials is
being developed for online registration.
9:43:13 AM
MS. PERMAN stated that regarding the fiscal note, the university
flagged areas of SB 146 that it found concerning. There are two
portions of pricing, upfront capital cost and an ongoing
component. The initial component of $397,500 is to update the
university's information technology system so it can align with
SB 146. The system is from the early 90s. It is an extensive
background system that is old and tough to navigate. Many online
components cannot be utilized because the system contains
student registration, financial fees, employee costs, and other
private information. A capital request for $20 million has been
made to help upgrade the system because presently it is onerous
to update. Obtaining the capacity to store course information
and material lists requires the Office of Information Technology
to design, develop, test, and implement the capabilities
described in the legislation. This includes building new
integrations with multiple third-party software vendors and
refactoring the course catalog to support differentiation
between materials for the same course catalog. The university
has 13,671 courses. Instructors can choose the materials they
want even when a class is duplicative. Entering all the pieces
into the system will require third-party software and internal
staff hours.
9:45:27 AM
rd
MS. PERMAN said the estimate for 3 party contractors would
charge $200 per hour for 1500 hours. Internal staff to rebuild
the system would be $65 per hour at 1500 hours. This is how
$397,500 was determined for the front-end work of the
university's banner system.
9:45:51 AM
MS. PERMAN said that in addressing the ongoing cost component
the university recognized that some professors would know the
course materials needed, the costs, and how to enter the
information quickly. However, some courses, like those high in
software components, would be more difficult for instructors to
track down. So, while it may take some instructors five minutes,
others may take more than an hour. Therefore, one hour per
course at $60 per hour was used to reach $822,900, including a
$2,600 component from information technology to maintain the
more extensive banner system.
MS. PERMAN relayed that during yesterday's board of regents
meeting, the coalition of student leaders was encouraged by
efforts to provide cost transparency in course materials across
all university systems. It is an effort the board of regents is
very interested in and would like to see continued. The
university also wants it but does not want to take money away
from education programs to cover administrative costs.
9:47:59 AM
SENATOR BEGICH stated the university is already going through a
process to make costs more transparent. It can be done under the
current budget without a fiscal note for SB 146. He opined that
the fiscal note implies the university does not support SB 146.
He suggested the vice chancellor speak about this and why the
university might not support SB 146. He mentioned Ms. Perman
describing a process designed to keep the cost of transparency
ongoing. He asked whether this cost was in the budget and, if
so, to identify it. He supports the university's $20 million
request to upgrade its computer system and asked why funds for
cost transparency could not be included in that capital request
since it is not yet funded or implemented. He stated he is not
satisfied that the fiscal note is fair. Whether in the minority
or the majority, legislators rely on departments to provide
accurate fiscal notes. It is critical. He gave an anecdotal
example of finding $4 million in inflated Medicaid Reform fiscal
notes. He stated that the description of what the fiscal note
entails was substantial, but the numbers were unsatisfactory.
9:50:48 AM
At ease.
9:51:14 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND reconvened the meeting.
9:51:33 AM
MICHAEL CIRI, Vice Chancellor for Administration and Director of
Information Technology, University of Alaska Southeast, Juneau,
Alaska, stated he is essentially the chief financial and chief
information officer at the University of Alaska Southeast (UAS).
He said he takes primary responsibility for the fiscal note and
would be transparent in disclosing the degree to which costs
were known when creating it. He declared his support for the
goals in SB 146. He has led a team on course scheduling at UAS
for 20 years with a specific goal to make course costs accurate,
itemized, and available at the time of registration. He stated
his belief that this goal is shared across the university
system, and he is passionate about it. However, it is more
difficult to achieve than it seems.
9:53:54 AM
MR. CIRI said he began his career in information technology (IT)
and considers it a responsibility to be clear about costs and
risks. IT projects tend to become far more expensive than
necessary, and cost overruns are typical. Therefore, he tries to
ascertain how costs might escalate. He said he would like the
goals of cost transparency to be accomplished within the student
modernization project. However, no funding for that project has
been received, and the effective date of SB 146 begins long
before the student modernization project would be completed.
Therefore, the fiscal note for SB 146 assumed there would be no
funding from the modernization project. He agreed that the
modernization of UAS's Student Information (SI) System would
help solve cost transparency obstacles and other issues that
students face. UAS's information system does not have the
ability to store the data needed to achieve cost transparency. A
contract with the current vendor would be necessary to learn how
to modify the system to store the data. Federal regulation
requires that textbook costs be visible to students. This is
achieved through the bookstore systems at the time of
registration. There is currently no way to integrate the
workload entered into the bookstore systems with the course
schedule found in the SI system.
9:56:29 AM
MR. CIRI stated he takes responsibility for the one-hour cost
estimate for faculty to enter the textbook and materials data.
The estimate was not just for faculty time but included the cost
for the help desk and staff to resolve technical and compliance
issues that faculty encounter. The methodology for moving the
needle on textbook cost transparency has been to educate
faculty. SB 146 would create a need for staff to engage and
ensure new and adjunct faculty fulfill their compliance
obligations. He reiterated that one hour represented faculty and
other staff involvement. He further noted that there is no
system in place for textbook cost transparency, so the workload
for faculty members is unknown.
9:58:29 AM
MR. CIRI stated he has worked for the university for 40 years,
and reducing student costs is very important, but he has
concerns about unintended consequences from SB 146. He asked
whether the university would be considered out of compliance if
course materials changed between the time a schedule was posted
and a course began. He asked whether SB 146 would discourage
faculty from practicing continuous improvement. Faculty would
need to post resource decisions eight months before the start of
a semester. For example, in the fall semester, resources would
need to be posted by the end of the preceding fall semester. He
asked for clarification on how adjunct faculty would be handled
when brought in to teach a class after the course schedule has
been posted, but a decision on the materials for the course has
not been decided. He affirmed that as a director, complying
would be a goal. However, a push for strict compliance could
create barriers for faculty trying to find low-cost alternatives
to the original textbooks they picked before a schedule is
posted. He stated his preference is for faculty to make their
own choices.
10:00:11 AM
SENATOR MICCICHE said he did not want his comments to sound
nefarious. However, the university could have done better in
reaching out to the sponsor with ideas to improve SB 146 rather
than dropping a fiscal note bomb that committee members find
unacceptable. He stated that course catalogs are reviewed
annually and suggested that each textbook in the system could
have a unique identifier. Since prices change, the course
catalog could provide an approximate price, while a link to the
course materials could provide the actual cost. He suggested
that the university speak with the sponsor and determine how to
make cost transparency happen. He stated his belief that
universities should not be dragged into the nefarious practices
of publishing companies. SB 146 will force instructors to
consider the textbook's value relative to its cost and benefit
to the students. He opined that the effective date for SB 146
could be adjusted until other options became available. He
provided three reasons why the university would present an
inaccurate fiscal note to the committee: it does not like the
bill, wants to justify its capital budget request, or intends to
offset budget reductions. He opined that SB 146 does not deserve
to be negatively impacted for any of those reasons. He stated
that committee members are tired of seeing fiscal notes used as
a game.
10:04:07 AM
MR. CIRI stated that working with the sponsor of SB 146 would be
a welcomed opportunity. He is on the steering committee for SI
modernization and is passionate about obtaining it. Some of the
suggestions are the types of ideas being contemplated. He said
the intent of the fiscal note was as he presented and none
other. While there are thousands of faculty members, those he
has talked with deeply care about textbook costs. The progress
and efforts that were heard have been led by faculty directly
involved in reducing textbook costs. He assured the committee
that he is committed to working on ways to achieve cost
transparency. He stated his concern is with SB 146 itself. He
recognizes that the role of the faculty needs to be respected.
The gap in cost information is already being made visible by a
faculty member through the bookstore system. Finding ways that
accomplish the goal of reducing textbook costs and increasing
transparency will benefit the university, students, and the
state.
10:05:59 AM
SENATOR BEGICH stated that he sees the need to upgrade a 1995
computer system. He asked if the upgrade would eliminate most of
the costs in the fiscal note.
10:06:37 AM
MR. CIRI responded that, as an IT director, he is passionate
about automation, and it is offensive that the university cannot
integrate systems. Anytime information is entered more than once
state money is wasted, which drives up the cost of tuition.
Textbook information should only be entered once per course
section. That entry should feed into the bookstore and the SI
systems. It should be visible in the course schedule and on the
course websites published to students. He said that if a system
like this were in place, his main concern with SB 146 would be
compliance. It would need to be clear whether refining textbook
lists would be allowed once a course schedule was posted and
registration began.
10:07:59 AM
SENATOR BEGICH replied that he appreciated the compliance
concern and suggested the sponsor could address it through
nuanced language or perhaps in a way managed by another state.
He said he would like to meet with the university to review the
$20 million capital budget request for a new system and be part
of helping to achieve it.
10:08:35 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND opened public testimony.
10:09:04 AM
JEFFRY CREWS, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, said he is a
US Coast Guard veteran who returned to school after a 20-year
hiatus. The cost of textbooks has gone up about 300 percent. His
veteran affairs book stipend provides approximately $350 a
semester, but it is not always enough. He has paid $75 for an
online textbook that he does not get to keep. He is on a fixed
salary as a retired veteran. Unexpected expenses take money away
from rent and food. Twelve credit hours a month are required for
a GI bill housing stipend. He would need to find extra work to
afford to attend UAA without it. UAA has a lot of financial
objections to SB 146 becoming law. The university says that it
is too expensive to upgrade the system, and it is already being
transparent. The military uses the same tactic to kill a new or
unpopular regulation. Exceptional people drive the ideas that
get pushed forward. The ideas fall by the wayside once those
people are gone. Course marking will be done for a while and
then be replaced or streamlined if left to universities. The
people hurt by this are the students. SB 146 asks universities
to mark the cost for a class so students can decide if taking
the class fits their budget. For example, when taking a
psychology class, he signed up for a course that required a $50
textbook. He later learned that a different class offered the
same course using a free online textbook. He opined that this
difference could impact a student's ability to stay in school or
pass a test. He knows of students who felt they had everything
needed for a course when they purchased an electronic version of
a textbook but later learned they needed a physical textbook for
quizzes and the homework system. The university may incur costs
to implement SB 146, but the costs will be recouped by having
additional students want to sign up for classes they can afford.
10:14:02 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND closed public testimony on SB 146..
10:14:11 AM
SENATOR STEVENS stated he knows textbooks are extremely
expensive and the cost can discourage students, so finding ways
to lower costs should be sought. However, he would like to hear
the opinion of the faculty regarding SB 146. He stated his
belief that faculty are concerned about textbook costs and the
impact on students. He has concerns about unintended
consequences. Strict compliance means restrictive lines could
deny or discourage professors from choosing cutting-edge
material. The student must be the person benefiting. He
questioned whether students would be denied the most up-to-date
information by selecting only the free material.
10:15:32 AM
SENATOR HUGHES stated that the compliance issue could be easily
resolved by having a publication date with a note to students
that the cost is subject to change and they should check with
the bookstore for current pricing. She said she would be willing
to work with the sponsor and the university on language to amend
SB 146. She agreed that the discussion has been excellent, and
there are issues to be worked out. One problem could be resolved
by moving the effective date of SB 146 since the university
requires a new SI system.
10:16:56 AM
MS. PERMAN stated she appreciated the concerns that were brought
up. She agreed to work with the sponsor earnestly. The
university values textbook cost transparency and will
incorporate feedback from the committee. She stated she would
work with Senator Begich on the capital budget system request.
10:17:37 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND held SB 146 in committee.