Legislature(2005 - 2006)
05/07/2005 06:12 PM House FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB37 | |
| SB102 | |
| SB124 | |
| SB125 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 125(JUD)
An Act relating to the licensing, regulation,
enforcement, and appeal rights of ambulatory surgical
centers, assisted living homes, child care facilities,
child placement agencies, foster homes, free-standing
birth centers, home health agencies, hospices or
agencies providing hospice services or operating
hospice programs, hospitals, intermediate care
facilities for the mentally retarded, maternity homes,
nursing facilities, residential child care facilities,
residential psychiatric treatment centers, runaway
shelters, and rural health clinics; relating to
possession of a firearm at licensed entities and
facilities; relating to criminal history requirements,
and a registry, regarding certain licenses,
certifications, approvals, and authorizations by the
Department of Health and Social Services; making
conforming amendments; and providing for an effective
date.
DR. RICHARD MANDSAGER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF PUBLIC HEALTH,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES, provided Committee
members a handout - Public Health, Protecting and Promoting
the Health of All Alaskans. (Copy on File).
Dr. Mandsager pointed out the three goals of the bill.
· The Department currently licenses or certifies 19
programs administered under at least 12 different
statutory schemes. The Division of Public Health
has been given the responsibility of managing the
licensure and certification of the programs. Dr.
Mandsager explained that each program has different
rules and the goal is to standardize and simplify
regulatory and statutory law.
8:05:16 PM
· The second goal is to determine how to minimize the
risk to vulnerable clients by utilizing background
checks as they work with the institutions. There
would be a two-part background check modeled on
existing programs.
· The bill envisions a private registry.
Dr. Mandsager noted that Amendment #1, clarifies the
immunity language. (Copy on File).
8:08:22 PM
Co-Chair Meyer asked about the zero fiscal notes. Dr.
Mandsager explained that the original bill had a small
fiscal note from the Department of Law, however, that
Division received a large federal grant from the Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services to pilot the approach to the
background checks. There is money in the grant to pay for
regulation development; hence, the notes were zeroed out.
MICHAEL MACLEOD BULL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN CIVIL
LIBERITIES UNION (ACLU), voiced concern with how vague the
criminal registry was and the prohibition conflict with the
State's duty to provide service to prisoners.
Mr. Bull supported the link between the restriction imposed
on a person coming out of prison, who may or may not have
been rehabilitated. Basically, ACLU opposes implementing
more barriers for those re-entering society.
Mr. Bull proposed use of a mechanism to define the listing
process. If the name were on a registry then that person
would be barred from interacting with the entity.
Objections exist on two levels:
· Policy level - The more barriers placed on a person,
the more difficult it becomes to reenter society;
and
· Constitutional right for rehabilitation of
prisoners.
8:13:40 PM
MARIE DARLIN, COORDINATOR, ALASKA ASSOCIATION OF RETIRED
PERSON'S (AARP) TASK FORCE, JUNEAU, spoke in support of the
legislation, which would put all regulations for assisted
living into one place.
AMY ONEY, ASSISTED LIVING HOME, ANCHORAGE, spoke in support
of the reorganization, but expressed concern with the
registry. She believed that the language was too broad.
8:17:10 PM
Representative Holm inquired if the proposed legislation
could level the playing field between profits and non-
profits. Ms. Oney agreed, pointing out that the bill has
brought attention to that matter, yet voiced concern that
licensing costs for funding would not be able to keep up
with regulation requirements.
8:19:24 PM
Ms. Oney discussed the regulations detrimental to the
existing homes because of extensive requirements for those
homes. There is no way for those costs to be recouped,
which places the home in a difficult position.
Representative Holm mentioned his concerns with the
regulation requirements. Ms. Oney explained that in the
proposed regulations, there are requirements on food
handling such as the number of times hand towels must be
laundered and how that is documented.
8:21:26 PM
Representative Holm felt that regulations could be onerous
in regard to family-style dinner situations. Ms. Oney
agreed.
Representative Holm reiterated his concern about the process
and asked if the elderly are threatened in the homes in any
way. Ms. Oney responded that in some homes, there are
existing beds. If there is no quality level of care, the
homes loose clients. There are regulations now regarding
the certification process; the next step proposed could
place a "huge burden" on the administrative process for the
smaller homes.
8:24:21 PM
Representative Holm recalled the arbitrary decision made to
cut back dollars allocated for each patient. Ms. Oney said
that resulted from refinancing room and board cap. It went
from beyond the indicated amount for Adult Public Assistance
(APA) and refinanced that into the Adult Medicaid funds.
The amount changed from $75 dollars per day to $18.54 per
day. She added, her business has experienced a net loss of
$4,000 to $5,000 per month. Homes have gone through the
regulatory review for those extra funds in order to meet
their business obligations.
8:26:32 PM
Representative Holm was disturbed with the way the State of
Alaska treats elderly. It is not in the best interest for
the State to make the regulatory practice so difficult that
it impacts providing consistent care.
8:27:44 PM
SHERRY METTLER, (TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE), ASSISTED
LIVING INDUSTRY, FAIRBANKS, addressed concerns of the non-
profit versus the profit playing field. Larger homes have
higher resources and time to review regulations, which total
230 pages. She addressed "safety issues" and how
regulations affect the simplest tasks.
Ms. Mettler commented on the registry and the process of
hiring. She indicated concern with misconduct and abuse
issues the registry proposes, pointing out that every person
working in the industry must have a criminal background
check. To create another level of criminal justice could
potentially destroy lives and discredit homes. It puts
everyone at risk working in that industry. She reiterated
her concerns regarding the registry, the burden on those
homes and cuts to administrative costs.
8:31:22 PM
Representative Hawker MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #1, #24-
GS1016\L.1, Mischel, 5/7/05. Co-Chair Meyer OBJECTED.
STACY KRALY, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LAW,
noted that Amendment #1 provides a technical correction.
Co-Chair Meyer WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment #1 was adopted.
8:34:28 PM
Representative Croft MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #2. Vice-
Chair Stoltze OBJECTED for the purpose of discussion.
Representative Croft pointed out that there are different
classes of volunteers. He maintained the purpose of the
amendment was to remove the requirement for criminal
background checks for "supervised" volunteers in facilities
listed.
Dr. Mandsager agreed with the intent of the amendment. He
pointed out that problems arise where volunteers might form
a regular relationship with the home's clients and then
might take advantage of that client. Dr. Mandsager
suggested alternative language on Page 11, Line 15, deleting
"or" and inserting "and who have regular contact with
individuals who receive services from the entity or". That
language should cover volunteers that are coming on a
regular basis.
8:38:20 PM
Representative Croft pointed out that there could be a
regular volunteer group such as a Sunday church group. He
suggested that the Department provide guidance through the
regulations.
8:39:05 PM
Representative Croft reiterated his argument in support of
the amendment.
Vice-Chair Stoltze noted that he has regular contact with
the homes in his district, as do the Eagle Scouts and other
groups.
8:40:36 PM
Dr. Mandsager noted that the intent was to limit the number
of crime background checks on volunteers to those that spend
regular, unsupervised time with the clients. He hoped to do
that through regulation.
8:41:25 PM
Vice-Chair Stoltze mentioned clerical visitations as being
one of the most regular-type of volunteer help.
Representative Hawker spoke in support of the amendment,
suggesting that "unsupervised" would be the correct
approach. Discussion followed between members regarding the
intent of "unsupervised".
8:43:59 PM
Representative Holm stressed the importance of encouraging
volunteers and cautioned against creating more bureaucracy
than necessary. He requested that the bill be held in
Committee.
Vice-Chair Stoltze WITHDREW his OBJECTION. There being NO
further OBJECTION, Amendment #2 was adopted.
8:45:32 PM
Representative Croft MOVED to ADOPT Amendment #3. Co-Chair
Meyer OBJECTED.
Representative Croft explained that the amendment would
insert language on Page 14, Line 25, "shall be notified of
such placement and", and on Page 14, Line 28 insert, "if the
department finds no relation between the information placed
on the registry and the risk of harm to the entity's
clientele".
Ms. Kraly noted that the Department would support that
language.
In response to Representative Hawker, Representative Croft
reviewed the definition of "substantial". Representative
Hawker questioned if "substantial" should be struck.
Representative Hawker MOVED to AMEND the New Amendment #3,
by deleting "substantial". There being NO OBJECTION, it was
amended.
Co-Chair Meyer WITHDREW his OBJECTION to the amended
amendment. There being NO further OBJECTION, amended
Amendment #3 was adopted.
Vice-Chair Stoltze MOVED to REPORT HSC CSSB 125 (FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and with the
accompanying fiscal notes. Representative Holm OBJECTED.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Joule, Stoltze, Croft, Hawker, Meyer,
Chenault
OPPOSED: Holm
Representative Kelly, Representative Moses, and
Representative Foster were not present for the vote.
The MOTION PASSED (6-1).
HCS CS SB 125 (FIN) was reported out of Committee with
"individual" recommendations and with zero note #2 by the
Department of Health & Social Services and zero note #3 by
the Department of Law.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|