Legislature(1995 - 1996)
04/20/1995 02:08 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 280 - HUMAN RESOURCE INVESTMENT COUNCIL Number 095 BOB RUBADEAU, Special Assistant to the Lieutenant Governor, said Representative Phillips began this initiative to allow Alaska to incorporate all of its federally mandated supervisory policy committees that oversee federal funding for many of the vocational job skill development and vocational education opportunities in the state. MR. RUBADEAU said these committees have the opportunity under a recently passed federal statute to consolidate into one oversight committee to help states plan for many of the coming funding opportunities. These committees will also have the opportunity to respond to the block grant scenario in a more consolidated way. Number 194 MR. RUBADEAU said HB 280 basically takes the Alaska Job Training Council, the Governor's Council on Vocational Education, and the Employment Security Advisory Council, and incorporates them into one body. Membership that is presently at 38 will be taken down to a minimum of 21 and a maximum of 26 members. The efficiency and economy of scale the Human Resources Investment Council (HRIC) hopes to accomplish by doing this will also provide some initial savings. MR. RUBADEAU said the opportunity for more cohesive and effective planning for all the vocational education and job training skills presents itself for the entire Alaska workforce in the coming decades. Number 261 MR. RUBADEAU said 21 states presently have taken advantage of this option under federal law. HB 280 was created after a study of all the different existing programs for all the HRICs. The drafters of the bill looked at many of the provisions in HB 280, hoping to raise the debate about policy and decision making for vocational education and job skill training. The drafters hope to place that debate into the Governor's office. MR. RUBADEAU offered to go through a sectional analysis of the bill. Section 1 of the bill basically sets out the legislative findings, and looks at the many job training and vocational education programs that exist within Alaska's workforce. It is estimated that there are approximately 16 different groups that may apply in the future for consolidation under the Alaska HRIC concept. MR. RUBADEAU continued that Section 2 directs the Board of Education to consider the advice of the HRIC in the development of their vocational education programs. Initially, it is a given that all education leads toward jobs and job skill development. Number 362 MR. RUBADEAU said Section 3 makes a member of HRIC a member of the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education. Within the bill, the Postsecondary Education is rescinded underneath HB 280. Section 4 includes HRIC as a state board or commission, whose membership is also subject to conflict of interest reporting requirements under AS 39.50. MR. RUBADEAU said Section 5 establishes the HRIC in the office of the Governor. This is very important. The bill that dealt with the HRIC that was previously passed through the House and the Senate last year, and was vetoed by Governor Hickel, did not have this provision. The drafters of the bill felt this was an important component as all of the different agencies in the bodies that are proposed for consolidation under this act are dealt with. Number 390 MR. RUBADEAU said Section 5 establishes the HRIC as the state planning and coordinating entity for certain state programs that are administered under a number of different federal provisions. This will allow the HRIC to anticipate and respond to whatever funding scenario is passed down through federal legislation. Mr. Rubadeau felt the council should be prepared for anything. MR. RUBADEAU summarized Sections 6 through 15, noting that they provide the statutory and session law changes for consistency with the shift of responsibilities to the HRIC, including the deletions of references to the Job Training Council and the other councils that are presently under state statute. MR. RUBADEAU felt the provision set out in Section 16 was also a very important part of HB 280. When Mr. Rubadeau began studying the different agencies involved and the different boards and commissions that were suggested for consolidation, he wanted to be sure that each of those had ownership and understanding of what was envisioned in the bill. Number 496 MR. RUBADEAU said because of the arcane requirements for the federal funding programs (such as Job Training and the Carl Perkins Grants), the sponsors of the bill needed to effectively make sure they were maximizing the state's revenue from the federal level by not missing any of the opportunities under the existing law. In addition, as the sponsors began to plan a coordinated effort for planning on the state level to make Alaska's plan unique to meet Alaska's needs, they kept in mind a sunset provision. This provision would basically give the councils an opportunity to plan their own consolidation efforts to give the sponsors some understanding of how their missions and funding requirements would be met. MR. RUBADEAU said the sponsor's office asked the councils to propose their own terms of consolidation over 18 months. Number 550 MR. RUBADEAU hoped that after the creation of the HRIC on July 1, 1995, the HRIC will be fully in place and empowered with the different missions of the consolidated boards and commissions by July 1, 1996. MR. RUBADEAU continued that Sections 18 and 19 address the specific federal requirements for reporting from the private industry councils and the other existing regional development councils. Those councils have been very effective in relaying the needs of the Alaska work force to the state legislature, and to the oversight and representative committees. MR. RUBADEAU noted that one of the most important aspects of this bill is that the bill has brought together the needs and desires of the agencies to fulfill their requirements on job skills and vocational education on the part of the Alaska work force. The bill's sponsors have explained the provisions to the different councils and commissions. Recently there was a joint meeting of all the commissions and boards that are proposed to be consolidated. Each of the commissions and boards have supported this concept, and are present at the HESS Committee meeting to testify to that fact. Number 1687 CO-CHAIR BUNDE agreed that HB 280 is a major piece of legislation, and input from representatives of the involved boards and commissions would be greatly appreciated. Number 734 JANICE TATLOW, Council Member, Private Industry Council, serving the Anchorage, Mat-Su area, testified via teleconference that she is pleased with the efforts that have been made toward the development of the HRIC. There is also a great effort going on in Alaska to see if there can be three pilot projects in the nature of career development centers that would improve service to Alaska. MS. TATLOW said it is her understanding that each career development center will be based throughout the state. Ms. Tatlow was concerned that the way the HRIC seats are configured may lack a link with the local communities and the local people. Job training is very effective in local communities, and Ms. Tatlow suggested a provision be made. MS. TATLOW stated lines 9 and 10, Section 5, says there would be four representatives from business and industry. She asked if the statement could be amended to include "...with at least two representatives from a private industry council, representing private sector business." Number 840 MS. TATLOW also suggested a change on line 22 of that section. line 22, she said, reads of "at least one, and up to four additional members of the private sector to insure a private sector majority in regional and local representation on the council." Ms. Tatlow asked if the phrase, "...with at least one member from the Private Industry Council, representing private sector business" could be added. MS. TATLOW also noted that HB 280 provides for a nonvoting member of the HRIC. In order to keep the links strong in each local area to insure continuity and stability in services and employment training programs, perhaps membership could be considered in the nonvoting segment for the three service delivery area managers. These are the people that have worked on all ends of the employment and training segment. These people work with the Governor's office, the local staff, and the patrons of the training. MS. TATLOW said these people, over the years, have developed a lot of expertise and professionalism. They know what will and won't work. Ms. Tatlow thinks Alaska is entering a time of great change. Career development centers are being investigated, Congress is considering block grants, and Alaska is considering the HRIC. These are very positive moves for the future. Anyone Ms. Tatlow has spoken with has well-received these ideas. However, Ms. Tatlow wants to be sure the state has a strong link to the local people who will be served. Number 970 CO-CHAIR CYNTHIA TOOHEY had been looking over the list of proposed HRIC members. She felt there was a wide representation from private sector businesses. That representation is covered better than any other sector. MS. TATLOW agreed. However, she was concerned that people who have been involved with employment and training programs, and have worked many years with the Private Industry Council, will not be included. Many of the council members are private sector business people. Ms. Tatlow would not like to see that talent and knowledge wasted. She felt to ignore their experience would be like reinventing the wheel. If their inclusion in the bill was expressed, their experience would help maintain the continuity of employment training. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY appreciated Ms. Tatlow's testimony. However, she asked Ms. Tatlow to look at line 24, page 4 of the bill. It speaks of additional nonvoting members. Co-Chair Toohey told Ms. Tatlow that if and when this bill passes, and the HRIC is comprised, that is the provision that can provide the balance Ms. Tatlow seeks. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY felt, however, that the Governor's office will certainly take Ms. Tatlow's testimony into consideration. CO-CHAIR BUNDE announced the arrival of Representative Robinson at 2:10 p.m. Number 1099 DEBRA CALL, Chairwoman, Alaska Job Training Council, said before she speaks, she would like to ask the previous chair of the Job Training Council (JTC) to provide HESS Committee members with a brief history of how this legislation developed. Then Ms. Call said she would provide a briefing on the current national status of legislation such as this. SARAH SCANLON, Vice-president of Human Resources, Northwestern Alaska Native Association (NANA); former Chairwoman, Alaska JTC; said she represents the private sector. The issue of consolidating the human resource initiatives has been ongoing for more than ten years. As some are aware, there have been attempts in the past to push policy through. Unfortunately, efforts have failed up to this point. MS. SCANLON understood the last bill was vetoed by Governor Hickel for reasons of state agency interference. She hoped that will not happen with this bill. Number 1195 MS. SCANLON said there is a need to consolidate the many human resource investment programs, and there are many reasons to do so. The rural economies demand that these changes move the state toward a quality work force. In the private sector, fragmented systems that make it difficult to find decent employees to fill the many jobs that are available cannot be tolerated. The lack of a connecting education system and the lack of communication between state and federal programs are great problems. MS. SCANLON said the creation of the HRIC provides the opportunity to solve those problems. In addition, the consolidation of the many councils is going to eliminate all the waste that is occurring in the multiple council staff configurations. The travel alone for a group of different people doing the same things is unnecessary. Ms. Scanlon fully supports what the bill attempts to do in eliminating the waste that is occurring. Number 1287 MS. SCANLON said this is one of those bills that makes sense to the private sector and to the state employees. Everyone wants to do a better job, and it will force people to communicate with each other more and work more closely together. MS. SCANLON stated it was important to have a system driven by the customer's needs. For too long, the system has paid too much attention to what the state workers want to do and what the federal requirements are. Not enough attention has been given to the customer and the end product. Therefore, the HRIC is beyond its time. Ms. Scanlon expressed her organization's support for the bill, and asked HESS Committee members to support it also. Number 1308 MS. CALL offered to bring HESS Committee members up to date on these issues. She said she currently serves as the chair of the JTC, and she also serves as a member of the national JTC. The national group has been meeting on a semi-annual basis to track what is going on in Congress. Currently, there are five bills in Congress that propose to consolidate employment training programs on the federal level. What that means, and as Ms. Scanlon explained, is that block grants may be received at some point. That is being anticipated. MS. CALL said a block grant to the state of Alaska will be setting the priorities on employment and training programs. Issues such as where those monies will go and what issues are going to be addressed will be taken into consideration. It looks very promising that Congress will pass one of the bills. She expects consolidation bills to pass in both the federal House and Senate. The House bill proposes block grants for each state, covering populations in need of employment training. Number 1363 MS. CALL understood that Senator Stevens is very much in support of the efforts on HB 280. He feels that nationally, the consolidation is an issue being discussed. Number 1406 JERRY LEWIS, Executive Director, Governor's Council on Vocational Education (GCOVE), said GCOVE just completed, on March 31, a biennial report that dealt with the coordination of the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA), its delivery system, and the Vocational Education delivery system. Out of that biennial report, the following recommendation was made. GCOVE is committed to helping promote vocational education and JTPA coordination in the state of Alaska. MR. LEWIS said after reviewing the JTPA delivery system and its coordination with vocational education programs along with current national trends, GCOVE recognizes the necessity of the formation of an HRIC. The specific provision of the JTPA amendments that most significantly affect the cooperation with vocational education and other systems concerns the HRIC, which the JTPA amendments empower the Governor to establish as a means of coordinating and integrating JTPA, vocational education, and other systems of Human Resources Development. Number 1414 MR. LEWIS continued that HB 280 facilitates this integration, and the GCOVE concurs with its premise. The expected benefit of this recommendation is the development of a statewide system that will serve all Alaskans more efficiently. Additionally, in order to accommodate the comprehensive system, the GCOVE would recommend that the School-to-Work Transition Council be included under the umbrella of the HRIC. MR. LEWIS said to neglect this would be to fall short of the complete consolidation necessary to avoid fragmentation of programs, resources, and the possibility of duplicated services. One of the members of GCOVE, David Stone, could not be present at the hearing although he wanted to be. He asked Mr. Lewis to apologize for his absence and express his support for the HRIC. Number 1511 CO-CHAIR TOOHEY asked if Mr. Lewis was requesting a specific space on the HRIC for a School-to-Work Transition Council member. MR. LEWIS answered that he was asking that School-to-Work be included in the list of representatives. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY agreed that was critical. REPRESENTATIVE GARY DAVIS noted that one of the first callers on teleconference requested a "slot" be made for Private Industry Councils. On page 4, line 10, it indicates "four representatives from business and industry, with at least one representative from the private industry councils appointed under 29. U.S.C. 1512." Representative Davis asked how those federal statutes relate to the Private Industry Council that is currently in place. MR. LEWIS answered that the job training partnership amendments of 1992 are the ones that allow the creation of the HRIC. They specifically had a percentage of the representatives on the council. A percentage has to be from the private sector, a percentage has to be union, a percentage must be included from the public sector. The membership numbers that were arrived at for the HRIC, the 21 to 26, was to fit that formula. Number 1566 MR. LEWIS said GCOVE is required under the Carl D. Perkins Act, which is up for reauthorization right now. The Administration's bill has been submitted by Senator Kennedy and Representative Clay, and a committee is working on the committee's bill. That is going to change the Carl D. Perkins Act considerably. The Administration's bill in itself eliminates Section 112, which requires that there be a state council on vocational education. With the elimination of that council, something will have to be in place within the state to handle the predicted block grants. MR. LEWIS said no one knows if the state is going to receive one block grant, or four. That depends on which bill in Congress passes through. Having an HRIC in place when the legislation is passed will help Alaska be ahead of the game. Number 1621 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS asked to follow up on those comments. He asked if the current private industry council that is currently in place was formed under the U.S. Code referred to in the bill. MR. LEWIS noted there is more than one private industry council in the state. The statewide private industry council, of which David Stone is the Juneau Chair, just completed its last meeting yesterday. That council is under the authorization of that U.S. Code. Number 1661 REBECCA NANCE, Director, Employment Security Division, Department of Labor, said the Alaska Department of Labor (DOL) is in support of the Alaska HRIC legislation for a variety of reasons. Alaskans are the most important resource available in the state. The HRIC is good public policy because the bill provides for the coordination and consolidation advocated by the public for more efficient and effective government. MS. NANCE also believed it was good for the DOL because it will help it realize its mission of promoting the wage-earner of Alaska and assuring that Alaskans will obtain the training they need in order to be competitive for the available jobs. Therefore, the need to rely on the nonresident work force will be reduced. MS. NANCE stated the DOL is in support of this legislation as a partner to the jobs program. This bill will strengthen the ability of the DOL to get welfare recipients back to work. It will provide a little more flexibility in terms of systems delivery. MS. NANCE concluded by saying that when the time comes for the creation and implementation of this legislation and the HRIC in Alaska, the DOL will be poised and ready to receive the federal block grants that seem imminent for employment and training programs. Number 1739 JACK SHAY represented himself at the hearing. He said he is a former member of the JTC and the private industry councils, serving under four different governors. He is also a former director of the Employment Security Division. He has been involved in training programs and private industry councils for quite some time. He mildly disagreed with Janice Tatlow about a concern that perhaps there would not be enough private industry involvement in this council. MR. SHAY was virtually sure there will be plenty of involvement. It is designed into the law, and it is part of the JTPA. In addition, Ms. Scanlon noted that this legislation has been in progress for quite some time. Mr. Shay is currently retired, but he is still interested in this arena because he agrees very strongly that the people are Alaska's greatest resource. Number 1776 MR. SHAY said the federal government came up with the enabling legislation for this type of provision. As a matter of fact, the federal legislation was actually encouraging states to consolidate these bodies, focus more on the problems at hand, avoid duplication efforts, and generally coordinate all the provisions of employment and training. MR. SHAY felt this legislation is a good idea. There might be one possible amendment the HESS Committee members might like to consider, however. The way the council is currently designed, there will be 23 to 26 members. That seems to be rather unwieldy. Mr. Shay has served on bodies containing that many members. If there was some good way of perhaps reducing the number (and Mr. Shay did not have any cogent suggestions at the time), he would urge HESS Committee members to look into it. MR. SHAY noted that the JTPA does require a certain percentage of persons on the board. In fact, it requires a majority of the private industry. Other than that, drawing on his many years in this field, Mr. Shay felt this legislation was splendid, and he urged its passage. Number 1828 REPRESENTATIVE CAREN ROBINSON asked where the recipients of these services fit in on the board. She asked Mr. Shay what he thought. MR. SHAY said that was an excellent question. He said he was involved in the design of policy, and not in the design of actual delivery and procedures. He deferred the question to perhaps someone from the Governor's office. However, he said the bottom line is training individuals for jobs that exist in the labor market. CO-CHAIR BUNDE asked Mr. Rubadeau to speak to the fiscal note. He also asked if Mr. Rubadeau had a grasp on what the state could expect to save from consolidation. Co-Chair Bunde understood that an efficient operation may mean better service, but he was concerned about funding. Number 1897 MR. RUBADEAU agreed everything boils down to dollars and cents. The state, however, needs to focus on more of the "sense" part of this legislation. By efficiency of scale, by dropping from 38 members to 23 to 26 members, there will be a slight economy of meeting. There will not be duplication of effort. The state is looking at doing a lot of the initial work in subcommittees (there will be standing subcommittees of this group) which will report on specific parts and portions of the job training in vocational education aspects around the state. Number 1924 MR. RUBADEAU said the dollars reflected in the fiscal note are all interagency transfers. These are dollars that are already identified by the enabling legislation to coordinate the planning, to perform responsible oversight, and to look at how to more efficiently deliver the product. MR. RUBADEAU said as his office studied the issue, and they identified nine PCNs that have been formally allocated over ten years through different scenarios to the ongoing policy development under the federal guidelines. Presently, there are three PCNs that are servicing these three councils, as well as a lot of in-kind donations from the agencies under which these councils exist. The bill's sponsors are seeking to consolidate those three PCNs into one, and adding a higher-level staff person. That person would not be at a higher level than those that exist currently, but would be a staff person in the Governor's office who will bring the private industry's concerns to a higher policy level of debate on a daily basis. MR. RUBADEAU said by the consolidation effort, it is hoped the efficiency of delivery will be realized. In addition, the private industry employers and employees are the customers of the HRIC. The efficiency in planning, the long-term policy and strategic development that could be envisioned under the HRIC idea will be the savings, but in the long run, there will not be significant savings from a fiscal standpoint. Number 2005 CO-CHAIR BUNDE asked Mr. Rubadeau to address the concerns of Mr. Shay regarding the large membership of the proposed council. MR. RUBADEAU said he has operated with many large-sized groups. As the sponsor's office studied federal legislation, the group membership was pared down as closely as possible. However, the requirements of the enabling federal laws had to be met. It is imperative that resources from the federal government be maximized. There must be no opportunity for any federal programs to tell the state it did not meet requirements. The federal program could then audit the state, and the state could lose funding. MR. RUBADEAU said as different scenarios were investigated, 21 was the minimum membership. Everyone needed to come to the table with a private sector majority. That is what bumped the membership up to 23 members. The line agency commissioners had to be involved, and there also had to be a private sector majority. That is how the membership rested at 23. Many of the day-to-day working aspects of the HRIC will be handled in subcommittees that are specifically targeted for the Carl Perkins Grant and the oversight of the UI trust fund. MR. RUBADEAU said those grants and funds will be handled and reported back to the general council. Therefore, the sponsors envision that much of the work will be done in the subcommittee and brought back. Number 2063 CO-CHAIR TOOHEY read page 4, line 4 of the bill: "or each respective commissioner's designee." She asked if there was anything that precludes the other members from having their own representatives if he/she cannot make the meeting. Co-Chair Toohey was concerned about the legality. MR. RUBADEAU said it is not specifically pointed out in the legislation. However, he feels there also will be bylaws developed by the HRIC once it is developed. Those laws will most certainly address those issues. If a quorum is hard to come by, there will be some sort of enabling working document that will allow work to get done. Number 2100 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS noted that Mr. Rubadeau had mentioned sunset dates for the existing councils that will be incorporated into the HRIC. Representative Davis thought the size of the proposed HRIC will be closely scrutinized. What the state will need is some verification that the federal law is really driving this size. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS can foresee many people trying to whittle the group down. If the group is not going to work whittled down, then people must be shown documentation as to why the group size should be left alone. In addition, federal legislation is currently in the works. It has not yet passed, therefore there may be changes in those laws as they progress as to how large the council may be required to be. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS was thinking, therefore, of a possible sunset clause on the HRIC so it will be revisited by statute, as opposed to needing a bill to go through the process to even get the review before the legislature. Representative Davis asked if a sunset date has been discussed, and how a proposed sunset date would be received. Number 2145 MR. RUBADEAU felt Representative Davis brought up a very good point. The situation at the federal level is very fluid at the present. Therefore, HB 280 seeks to operate under the best case scenario. The sponsor's office feels there will always be federal monies coming to states to help with job training and vocational education components of a state plan. MR. RUBADEAU envisions this council to meet the present federal requirements at the minimum. He hopes the federal laws will not change so drastically. There always will have to be some body present to accept the federal funds, and some body to disperse the funds. If the membership is studied closely, the following line agencies need to be identified: Agencies such as the Department of Education, the Department of Labor, and the Department of Community and Regional Affairs. Number 2181 MR. RUBADEAU stressed that it is very important that those agencies be at the table. In addition, labor needs to be at the table. The private sector needs to have the majority. There needs to be some sort of Alaskan Native component. If one person could be identified which was not necessary to the legislation, Mr. Rubadeau assured HESS Committee members that person would not be included. MR. RUBADEAU said the sponsor's office would have loved to present a 12-member board. However, it could not be done legally. If the board could pare down to narrow its focus, it may well envision itself doing so. However, to envision that the state of Alaska can get by with regional representation, cultural sensitivity, governmental, and nongovernmental entities as well as a private sector majority, Mr. Rubadeau doubts the council can get by with less. Number 2245 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked if Mr. Rubadeau envisioned the one, consolidated position of which he previously spoke would be in Juneau, Fairbanks or Anchorage. MR. RUBADEAU said the sponsor's office feels very strongly that with the sunset provisions in the bill, it does not want to anticipate the council's wishes. Sarah Scanlon testified that this legislation has been in development for ten years. Mr. Rubadeau does not want to prejudge what the council would plan to be the most effective delivery system for vocational education and job training. MR. RUBADEAU continued that three councils are proposed, and the fourth, School-to-Work, is of course a natural member. They are all on parallel lines right now. It is envisioned that, once this enabling legislation allows those groups to look at a sunset provision, they converge on their own and with their own plans. It is anticipated they will work together to develop a staffing pattern with a regional representation on the HRIC. That would indicate what those groups felt was the most effective use of the available dollars. The sponsor's office therefore did not prejudge where the position would be placed at the moment. Number 2300 CO-CHAIR BUNDE closed public testimony. As this was the first time this bill was heard, it was the inclination of Co-Chair Bunde to hold the bill. Co-Chair Bunde asked for the wish of the committee. REPRESENTATIVE TOM BRICE expressed a willingness to move the bill from committee. TAPE 95-39, SIDE B Number 000 REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG was concerned about the membership of the HRIC. He had previously thought the bill would be referred to a subcommittee, where his concerns could be addressed. Number 035 MS. CALL spoke via teleconference in response to Representative Rokeberg's concerns about council size. She said HB 280 will take the three councils, which now consist of 40 members, and which are now doing employment and training in the state of Alaska, and reduce that number down to 23. If representatives are concerned about size and cost, the first step would be to downsize to 23 members. MS. CALL said the second item is that the consolidation is taking place under the 1992 JTPA amendment. No matter what happens in Congress, this legislation is still valid. HB 280 provides the flexibility needed to address the employment training issues in the state. Therefore, HB 280 correctly addresses what can be done, and in the long run it will be more effective and efficient for Alaskans. MS. CALL reiterated that Alaskans are Alaska's most important resource, and the HRIC should be a priority. When the state speaks about mining, oil and timber, it certainly does not mind developing those resources and spending the money to do so. However, that type of development is not discussed in relation to the Alaskan people. Therefore, Ms. Call encouraged HESS Committee members to support HB 280, and move it through the legislature this year. Number 165 CO-CHAIR TOOHEY asked how many meetings Mr. Rubadeau envisioned the council having each year. MR. RUBADEAU answered that the three councils now meet at least quarterly. Currently, GCOVE meets quarterly also. Therefore, there are a total of 12 meetings per year. Those 12 meetings will probably shrink to 4 consolidated meetings. CO-CHAIR BUNDE pointed out that the HESS Committee members had quite a bit more work to do. He again asked the wish of the committee on whether to hold the bill or not. Number 229 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS did not have a preference either way. However, if the bill was going to be moved, he had a few questions. On page 4, line 6, it says the council will be made up of four additional representatives of education. One will be from local public education, one from secondary vocational education.... Representative Davis did not see a distinguishing factor between those two members, as opposed to basic education in the public schools. Of course, the public schools do have vocational education. The bill separates those two things in public education. MR. RUBADEAU agreed. He said that if Representative Davis could be procured as an advocate for school-to-work, it would be desirable to erase those barriers. All education leads toward work, and that differentiation should be eliminated in any statute. However, the bill presently seeks to not preclude someone perhaps in a middle school who would like to be involved in this. Then, secondary vocational education, which is felt to be a very important component now, would be working with high school educational facilities. Number 329 MR. RUBADEAU said the postsecondary vocational education institution is viewed as not only the public but the private vocational education institutions. These four members are part of the 15 percent requirement. This is mandated by the federal government. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS said line 9 on that same page reads, "...four representatives of business and industry...." That is then broken down. Representative Davis then read another requirement: "...at least one representative from an organization representing employment and training needs of Alaska Natives...." He asked if that membership place may serve as one of the four stipulated on line 9. MR. RUBADEAU answered yes. He said the bill aims for as much flexibility as possible, and to be culturally and regionally sensitive. Number 394 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked to pursue the same line of questioning as Representative Davis in terms of membership on the council. He asked if there was anything required by federal statute that requires the Lieutenant Governor to be on the commission. MR. RUBADEAU replied that there was not. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked if there was anything in federal statute that requires that both the Commissioner of Commerce and the Commissioner of Community and Regional Affairs be on the commission. MR. RUBADEAU again replied no. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said it was indicated in the bill that it was a policy call as to insuring a private sector majority. Squeezing the best possible out of 23 members, he can only find nine that might even be considered as representing the private sector. He asked Mr. Rubadeau to explain the breakdown of those members. CO-CHAIR BUNDE interrupted and asked Representative Rokeberg, Co- Chair Toohey and Representative Brice to work with Mr. Rubadeau to answer just those types of questions. He then asked that the bill be heard again. He asked for the wish of the committee, and the committee indicated agreement with that decision.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|