Legislature(1993 - 1994)

01/26/1994 03:00 PM HES

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
  HB 84 - IMPLEMENTATION ALASKA 2000 RECOMMENDATIONS                           
  Number 112                                                                   
  REP. TOOHEY asked all present to observe the art work that                   
  was sent to the committee by Turnagain Elementary School in                  
  Number 145                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE brought to the floor HB 84 and asked for the                     
  first witness.                                                               
  Number 151                                                                   
  CARL ROSE, Executive Director, Association of Alaska School                  
  Boards, felt he would be testifying inappropriately on HB 84                 
  as he had signed up to testify for the committee substitute                  
  Number 170                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE apologized and clarified by asking Rep. Toohey                   
  if she had a motion.                                                         
  Number 174                                                                   
  REP. TOOHEY made a motion to accept CSHB 84 as a working                     
  (Rep. Brice arrived at 3:17 p.m.)                                            
  Number 196                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE stated that the work draft was dated 1/20/94,                    
  identification #8-GH1033/O.  He asked Mr. Rose to continue.                  
  Number 222                                                                   
  MR. ROSE testified in support of the work draft and shared                   
  comments on the CS for HB 84.  He expressed sadness at the                   
  elimination of charter schools from the CS.  He said the                     
  portion on grants was supported by his association, but                      
  there were concerns.  He felt that organizing the PTAs and                   
  school district boards together to form advisory boards for                  
  individual schools was a good idea, unless it was a cost                     
  item.  Mr. Rose continued on, stating that the extension to                  
  five years for acquiring tenure was favorable.  The                          
  application, as well as the acquisition process, would be                    
  movement away from an "automatic tenure system."  The longer                 
  length of time could possibly save many careers.  Mr. Rose                   
  found that the advisory committee would actually be involved                 
  in some evaluations.  He felt that regulations as to what                    
  role the committee would fulfill, what process they would                    
  use, and what assistance they would receive would be                         
  helpful.  Mr. Rose suggested that the cost factor would                      
  increase as there would be one advisory committee for small                  
  districts and in large districts perhaps many.                               
  Number 388                                                                   
  (CHAIR BUNDE noted that Rep. Bettye Davis arrived at 3:14                    
  p.m. and Rep. Tom Brice at 3:17 p.m.)                                        
  CHAIR BUNDE addressed the cost factor that Carl Rose had                     
  referred to by stating that there would be a cost to employ                  
  a substitute teacher while teachers attended their advisory                  
  duties, but he felt there wouldn't be a significant impact                   
  on the district.                                                             
  CHAIR BUNDE stated that there were oversights on his part                    
  and subsequently some language was left out of the CS.  He                   
  moved to amend by putting the language back in and added                     
  that Sheila Peterson had additional language to put back                     
  into the working draft.                                                      
  Number 475                                                                   
  SHEILA PETERSON, Special Assistant to Commissioner Covey,                    
  Department of Education (DOE), testified from Juneau in                      
  support of CSHB 84.  Ms. Peterson began by expressing                        
  disappointment that charter schools had been dropped in the                  
  CS.  She named California and Minnesota as leaders in                        
  adopting charter schools and mentioned that eight more                       
  states were considering legislation to allow for charter                     
  schools and requested that the committee consider charter                    
  schools at a later date.  Ms. Peterson said the DOE was                      
  pleased that tenure was being addressed and said the                         
  proposal was an excellent start.  She did suggest the                        
  addition of a parent on the "tenure reform committee."  She                  
  felt the public should have a chance to participate in the                   
  tenure process.  She said she submitted a proposed amendment                 
  regarding the fund for school improvement.  She said                         
  clarifications were needed to ensure a more equitable                        
  approach in distribution.  She said the clarification would                  
  allow the $50,000 cap to apply to the applicant and not to                   
  the district.  She stated that currently the $50,000 cap was                 
  per district.  Ms. Peterson continued on to say that the                     
  language inadvertently left out of the proposal dealt with                   
  under subparagragh A.  She asked the committee to consider                   
  adding the language "including appropriations from the                       
  earnings of the public school trust fund, AS 37.14.110".                     
  She stated that the aforementioned language was in HB 84 but                 
  it wasn't in the proposed amendment that she submitted.                      
  Number 577                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE confirmed that the committee had a copy of the                   
  proposed amendment and a copy of the CS 10033-A that                         
  indicated Section 4.  He then asked Ms. Peterson if her                      
  amendment was in addition to Section 4.                                      
  Number 604                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON answered yes, and continued to say that the                     
  amendment had four subsections that would rewrite the                        
  language and allow for the applicant to have a $50,000 cap                   
  and not the school district, but the applicant would have to                 
  go through the school district to apply for the grant.  The                  
  restriction to three of the five years would apply to the                    
  applicant and not the school district.                                       
  Number 620                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked Ms. Peterson what specific occurrences                     
  happened during the grant procedure that warranted the                       
  Number 626                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON stated that applications were ranked on merit,                  
  and that Mat-Su and Anchorage could not be awarded grants                    
  above the $50,000 cap, yet they ranked higher than other                     
  school districts.                                                            
  Number 647                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said that, as he understood it, the various                      
  schools within a district could apply up to a $50,000 cap.                   
  Number 650                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON agreed and said that current law states that a                  
  governing body, an advisory board, a non-profit                              
  organization, or a teacher or principal employed by a public                 
  school in the state, may apply for a grant.  The $50,000 cap                 
  would apply to the aforementioned applicants.                                
  Number 660                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE clarified again by stating that rather than a                    
  district receiving $50,000, several schools within the                       
  district would be allowed to apply for the grant.                            
  Number 665                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON agreed.                                                         
  Number 672                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked Mr. Peterson to give an example of a grant                 
  that was applied for and was received.                                       
  Number 676                                                                   
  SHEILA PETERSON referred to a hand out (attachment 1) that                   
  outlined 25 programs that had been awarded, citing the                       
  Craig, Hydaburg and Klawock School districts that had joined                 
  together to offer interactive, computer assisted classrooms.                 
  Number 706                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY asked MS. Peterson if she helped draft the CS the                 
  committee was working with.                                                  
  Number 710                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON replied that she had worked on the proposed                     
  amendments to the CS.                                                        
  Number 715                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY asked if the DOE excluded for-profit                              
  organizations from applying for the grant.                                   
  Number 729                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON said the decision of whether to allow for-                      
  profit organizations to apply for grants would be best left                  
  up to the legislature.                                                       
  Number 740                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY stated that at the proper time he would like to                   
  make a motion to amend the wording to include "a person."                    
  Number 747                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE replied, saying that change was discussed last                   
  year, and thanked Rep. Vezey for resuming the point.                         
  Number 750                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS asked Ms. Peterson what the total amount spent                 
  on grants was last year and how many school districts                        
  received funds.                                                              
  Number 755                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON stated that over $500,000 was granted to 16                     
  school districts - 25 applicants.                                            
  Number 761                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS asked if the grant money came from the school                  
  trust fund or the general fund.                                              
  Number 764                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON said it was a reappropriation by the                            
  legislature from Pupil Transportation.  Half the funds left                  
  over from Pupil Transportation was reappropriated by Rep.                    
  Larson and the other half was appropriated to the fund for                   
  school improvement.                                                          
  Number 783                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS asked for clarification, saying that there was                 
  a school improvement fund and a school trust fund.                           
  Number 784                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON answered yes.                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS asked Ms. Peterson what her intentions were                    
  for the school trust fund.                                                   
  Number 802                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON stated that the amendment would allow for a                     
  portion of interest earnings from the public school trust                    
  fund, which now totalled $6.8 million, to be used                            
  for the grant program.  She continued by saying that                         
  currently the interest from the public school trust fund was                 
  going to the foundation formula.  She wanted the legislature                 
  to know the fund was there and that it was to be used for                    
  improving school performance.                                                
  Number 823                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS asked if $500,000 was the cap for the total                    
  amount granted each year.                                                    
  Number 826                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON said that would be favorable, but it would                      
  depend on the appropriations by the legislature.                             
  Number 829                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS clarified by stating that if there was no                      
  money appropriated, there would be no grants.                                
  Number 830                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON agreed.  She said the current budget did not                    
  include any funds for the grant program and applications                     
  were sent out January 15, 1994, but the school districts                     
  were told there were no funds to award grants.                               
  Number 840                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE clarified by stating that the amendment was a                    
  mechanism for distributing funds if and when they were                       
  Number 845                                                                   
  REP. G. DAVIS asked if the grants were direct proposals to                   
  the DOE without any supporting resolutions from the school                   
  Number 849                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON answered, no, and followed by saying the grants                 
  must be signed off by the school superintendent.  The DOE                    
  wanted direct involvement and the encouragement of the                       
  school districts.                                                            
  Number 858                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS made a motion to move the amendment.                           
  Number 875                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG objected to the motion for purposes of                           
  Number 878                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked for further discussion.                                    
  Number 879                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG stated that it was a curious time to be                          
  developing new ways to give away money.                                      
  Number 881                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said the committee was trying to tailor an                       
  existing way to provide grants for schools.                                  
  Number 887                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG stated that it was "sort of new" and asked if it                 
  had been done once before.                                                   
  Number 888                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON said that was correct.                                          
  Number 893                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY said he would be interested to hear comments from                 
  Chair Bunde.                                                                 
  Number 896                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE stated, again, that the amendment was a                          
  mechanism for providing grants to individual schools when                    
  the legislature chooses to fund the grants.  He said it was                  
  not his intention, in this "fiscal crisis," to recommend                     
  that money be placed in the grant program at this time.                      
  Number 908                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY said he was interested in Chair Bunde's comments                  
  on the proposed amendment.                                                   
  Number 912                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE expressed his support and accepted the proposed                  
  amendment, saying the mechanism would be available to                        
  distribute funds at a future time when funds were available.                 
  Number 919                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY made a motion to amend the amendment.                             
  Number 933                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE stated that for housekeeping purposes the                        
  amendment needed to be adopted so it could be further                        
  Number 940                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG clarified by saying that the committee should                    
  adopt the amendment.                                                         
  Number 949                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked for a roll to be called to adopt the                       
  amendment before the committee.                                              
  Rep. Toohey         Yea                                                      
  Rep. Bunde          Yea                                                      
  Rep. G. Davis       Yea                                                      
  Rep. Vezey          Yea                                                      
  Rep. Kott           Yea                                                      
  Rep. Olberg         Nay                                                      
  Rep. B. Davis       Yea                                                      
  Rep. Nicholia       Excused                                                  
  Rep. Brice          Yea                                                      
  Number 965                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE stated that the adoption was passed and the                      
  amended CS was before the committee.  He urged the committee                 
  to continue on with further amendments for discussion.                       
  Number 967                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY asked for clarification of the adopted amendment,                 
  stating that as he understood it the committed had amended                   
  the CS for HB 84 so that Section 2 would read as per the                     
  Number 996                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE, after some discussion, stated that Rep. Vezey                   
  was correct.                                                                 
  Number 997                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY made a motion to amend Section 2 by deleting the                  
  words "a governing body, district advisory board, or non-                    
  profit organization," and replace them with "a person."                      
  Number 004                                                                   
  REP. TOOHEY said for further clarification, that the words                   
  "a teacher, a principal" might be added.                                     
  Number 006                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY indicated that his change did not go as far into                  
  Section 2 as Rep. Toohey was indicating in her response.                     
  Number 010                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE clarified, stating that the amended portion to                   
  be accepted would be Section 2, subsection B.  It would                      
  read, "a person located in a state, or a person or a                         
  principal employed by a public school in the state..." may                   
  apply for a grant.                                                           
  Number 018                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY said that was the intent, but it was not read                     
  Number 017                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked Rep. Vezey to read it correctly.                           
  Number 018                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY replied, "...a person located in the state or a                   
  teacher or a principal employed by a public school in the                    
  state...may apply through a district for a grant of up to                    
  $50,000 to improve public school performance by submitting                   
  an application to the commissioner.  The application must be                 
  signed by the superintendent the district that agrees to                     
  receive and administer the grant and be accountable for the                  
  Number 029                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked Rep. Vezey to speak to his amendment.                      
  Number 030                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY said he suggested the amendment because the                       
  statutory definition of "person" is much broader than the                    
  three organizations mentioned.  He felt that the previous                    
  language might exclude a resource that might be available.                   
  Number 037                                                                   
  REP. TOOHEY asked if there were caps put on individual                       
  grants relative to the total amount in the fund, questioning                 
  with the example that if there were only $50,000 in the                      
  account, would there only be $10,000 grants.                                 
  Number 049                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON said that a grant cannot receive more than                      
  $50,000.  If there was only $50,000 in the fund and ten                      
  applications, the DOE would rank the applications according                  
  to merit and disburse the money accordingly.                                 
  Number 061                                                                   
  REP. BRICE asked Rep. Vezey what the statutory definition of                 
  "person" was and what type of definition he would intend to                  
  use in the amendment.                                                        
  Number 079                                                                   
  After some discussion, an at-ease was taken to ascertain the                 
  statutory definition of "person."                                            
  TAPE 94-03, SIDE B                                                           
  Number 000                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE called the meeting back to order and asked Rep.                  
  Vezey to share the statutory definition of "person."                         
  Number 010                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY read directly from the statute, Title 01.10.060,                  
  Paragraph 8:  "person includes a corporation, a company,                     
  partnership, firm, association, organization, business                       
  trust, or society, as well as a natural person."  He stated                  
  that he felt there was no entity that was not included in                    
  the definition.                                                              
  Number 040                                                                   
  REP. BRICE stated that the entities listed seem to be                        
  outside the realm of public government and felt they may                     
  refer to specific private organizations.  He felt that other                 
  public entities should be included.                                          
  Number 073                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked Rep. Vezey if his purpose would be                         
  accomplished "if you added to a governing body...a district                  
  advisory board, a non-profit organization, or a person."                     
  Number 082                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY felt that it would not be contrary to the intent                  
  of his motion, but perhaps it would be redundant.                            
  Number 090                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE stated that he shared some of the concerns that                  
  Rep. Brice had stating that the statutory definition seemed                  
  to be in the commercial and private aspect.  Chair Bunde                     
  asked if his proposed amendment to Rep. Vezey's proposed                     
  amendment would not defeat Rep. Vezey's purpose.                             
  Number 111                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY said he wanted to withdraw his amendment and move                 
  that Paragraph B in Section 2 be amended to read:  "a                        
  governing body, district advisory board, or a person located                 
  in the state, or a teacher or principal employed by a public                 
  school in the state may apply through a district..."                         
  Number 143                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE stated that the definition of person includes                    
  non-profit.  He asked for further discussion on Rep. Vezey's                 
  amendment.  The amendment was adopted with no objections to                  
  the motion.  Chair Bunde asked for Ms. Peterson's response                   
  on the newly amended CS.                                                     
  Number 188                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON stated that the DOE was pleased with the                        
  Number 207                                                                   
  REP. TOOHEY questioned Ms. Peterson as to whether the DOE                    
  would send out invitations to bid for the grants, knowing                    
  that there were no funds.                                                    
  Number 216                                                                   
  MS. PETERSON said that regulations state that on January 15                  
  the DOE shall send out applications.  The DOE honored that                   
  regulation, sent out the applications, and made the school                   
  districts aware that there were no available funds.                          
  Number 234                                                                   
  REP. TOOHEY felt that there should be a little more "house                   
  work" to avoid the cost of sending out grant requests when                   
  there are no funds available.                                                
  Number 248                                                                   
  REP. G. DAVIS stated that, indeed, it would be a regulatory                  
  Number 254                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said, "we don't have to send the message:  Yes,                  
  we have no bananas."                                                         
  Number 259                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY noted for clarity that the amendment has amended                  
  the committee substitute in Section 2, and Section 3, and                    
  has added two additional sections.                                           
  Number 276                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE stated that Rep. Vezey was correct.  He then                     
  asked for teleconference testimony.                                          
  Number 303                                                                   
  JIM SIMEROTH, Teacher, Kenai Middle School, testified via                    
  teleconference from Kenai.  He felt that the grant system                    
  was inequitable, saying that grants often went to the more                   
  "well-to-do" schools.  He felt grants could be distributed                   
  in another more equitable manner.  He expressed his concern                  
  about the tenure clause.  Mr. Simeroth felt the present                      
  tenure law was effective, and he opposed peer review.  He                    
  said that the peer review system was based on a university                   
  system and he felt that the environment was vastly different                 
  than that of a university.  He also felt there would be                      
  additional costs.                                                            
  Number 419                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said that Mr. Simeroth was in the minority as a                  
  person who felt that the present tenure system was                           
  Number 448                                                                   
  REP. G. DAVIS stated, in regards to Mr. Simeroth's concerns                  
  about the grant system, that the local districts should                      
  approve grants to make sure they are equitable.  Rep. G.                     
  Davis felt that the problem with tenure was public                           
  Number 474                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked for further testimony.                                     
  Number 480                                                                   
  STEVE McPHETRES, Executive Director, Alaska Council of                       
  School Administrators, testified in Juneau in support of                     
  CSHB 84.  He stated that the tenure proposal would allow for                 
  creativity.  In regards to the advisory school boards, he                    
  said the council met with the state PTA and, as a whole,                     
  they felt the proposal would encourage parental involvement.                 
  The council was encouraged by the amendment for the                          
  acquisition of tenure.  He felt the five year tenure review                  
  was a professional approach to the teaching profession by                    
  allowing peer review.  However, the principal should be a                    
  strong part in the tenure review.                                            
  Number 552                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked if it was Mr. McPhetres' assumption that                   
  principal participation in tenure review had been excluded                   
  from the amendment.                                                          
  Number 555                                                                   
  MR. McPHETRES stated that he assumed the amendment included                  
  principal involvement.                                                       
  Number 559                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said that his intention was not only for                         
  principal participation, but also a vice-principal who would                 
  work in that capacity.                                                       
  Number 574                                                                   
  REP. BRICE inquired if there would be one committee per                      
  Number 585                                                                   
  MR. McPHETRES responded to the question by saying building                   
  sites in the larger school districts would have the tenure                   
  review committees.                                                           
  Number 599                                                                   
  REP. BRICE asked approximately how many teachers were                        
  brought up for tenure review each year.                                      
  Number 602                                                                   
  MR. McPHETRES said it was difficult to respond to that                       
  Number 606                                                                   
  REP. BRICE asked approximately how much time it took                         
  administrators to review a tenure application.                               
  Number 611                                                                   
  MR. McPHETRES asserted that, at a minimum, the administrator                 
  was in the classroom twice.                                                  
  Number 618                                                                   
  REP. BRICE asked if it was approximately six to seven hours.                 
  Number 620                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE interjected by saying that with all the other                    
  demands on a principal, in actuality, that figure would                      
  probably be closer to two or three hours, maximum.                           
  Number 628                                                                   
  REP. BRICE clarified by saying two hours were for                            
  observation along with two 30 minute conferences.                            
  Number 630                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said that it varied.                                             
  Number 638                                                                   
  REP. BRICE asked how long it would take to review a tenure                   
  applicant under the proposed new system.                                     
  Number 659                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE stated that, as he envisioned it, if there were                  
  five members on the tenure committee, each would observe the                 
  applicant, therefore amounting to at least five hours twice                  
  a year.  Then there would be a few hours of thorough                         
  Number 677                                                                   
  MR. McPHETRES concurred with Chair Bunde's scenario.  He                     
  furthered by saying that the CS would impose additional time                 
  requirements for members of the committee and the                            
  administrator.  Mr. McPhetres emphasized that there still                    
  had to be due process of law.                                                
  Number 697                                                                   
  REP. BRICE asked how the time requirement would impact the                   
  Number 706                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said the teacher participating on a tenure                       
  committee, involved in the observation, would be relieved by                 
  a substitute teacher.  He did not anticipate additional                      
  compensation to the teacher on the tenure review board, but                  
  foresaw the expense of hiring a substitute.                                  
  Number 724                                                                   
  REP. BRICE said he would assume the burden of being on the                   
  committee would be evenly delegated.                                         
  Number 732                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE stated that the members would be elected.                        
  Number 736                                                                   
  MR. McPHETRES said he felt it was a two way dialogue.  The                   
  teacher would be going into the classroom not only to                        
  observe, but also perhaps to learn and to share ideas.                       
  Number 755                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE assured all those participating that HB 84 would                 
  not be moved out of committee that day.  He asked for                        
  further testimony.                                                           
  Number 766                                                                   
  ALEXANDER McFARLANE, President, Fairbanks Education                          
  Association, testified via teleconference from Fairbanks in                  
  opposition to the proposed CSHB 84 and specifically to the                   
  section dealing with the acquisition of tenure.  He felt the                 
  CS would usurp the efforts of the Fairbanks school district,                 
  who at that time was putting together a new plan for tenure                  
  evaluation for the next school year.  He felt the CS would                   
  not help in the process of training or eliminating a                         
  deficient teacher.  He felt there was no criteria within the                 
  CS for the committee to judge the teacher.  Mr. McFarlane                    
  asked what the role of the principal would be if non-tenure                  
  teachers were being reviewed each year and tenured teachers                  
  reviewed every five years.  The bill did not offer the                       
  freedom teachers required to teach.                                          
  Number 830                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE stated that the CS would mandate that a school                   
  administrator (principal) be part of the tenure review                       
  committee.  He also indicated to the HESS Committee that in                  
  their packets was an endorsement of the five year tenure                     
  Number 851                                                                   
  SUE HALL, President, Alaska Parent/Teacher Association,                      
  stated via teleconference from Fairbanks that there were two                 
  particular items that they found troublesome in the bill.                    
  She felt that there did not have to be an advisory board for                 
  parents to be involved.  She felt the advisory school board                  
  would be another level of bureaucracy.  She further stated                   
  that the role of the PTA would be changed in a negative way                  
  by politicizing it.  Ms. Hall felt that the proposal for                     
  tenure would reduce the principal's role in school                           
  accountability.  She felt it would be costly in terms of                     
  relief time to allow for evaluation.  Ms. Hall encouraged                    
  the committee to recognize the risk involved in the proposed                 
  Number 945                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked if Ms. Hall was testifying as a                            
  representative of the Alaska PTA and if it was the PTA's                     
  official position.                                                           
  Number 948                                                                   
  MS. HALL stated that no position had been taken by the PTA,                  
  but her comments were based on the PTA's legislative program                 
  and were in line with positions taken previously.                            
  Number 953                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE further asked if the Alaska PTA would be taking                  
  a position.                                                                  
  Number 954                                                                   
  MS. HALL said a position would be taken on February 14.                      
  Number 964                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked, if there was to be a separate parent                      
  advisory board, how would she view that board's relationship                 
  with the PTA, and would it seem competitive?                                 
  Number 970                                                                   
  MS. HALL said she felt the two could co-exist, but she felt                  
  there would be a better way to go about it.                                  
  Number 986                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE requested Willie Anderson to come forward with                   
  Number 991                                                                   
  WILLIE ANDERSON, Representative, National Education                          
  Association of Alaska (NEA-AK), stated from Juneau that NEA-                 
  AK had major concerns as to the expense that would be                        
  incurred by implementing the proposals.  He felt that in the                 
  short term few people would be impacted, but in the long                     
  term, one-half of the teacher population would be subject to                 
  review by the tenure committee.  The time dedicated by the                   
  teachers would "exponentially expand" and it would cost more                 
  and more money each year to make the committee work.  Mr.                    
  Anderson felt that the new proposal left the tenure review                   
  committee open for litigation if a teacher were granted                      
  tenure by the committee and then denied by the advisory                      
  board.  He felt additional costs would be inevitable.  He                    
  asked Chair Bunde what would be the outcome regarding tenure                 
  rights for teachers hired prior to July 1, 1994.  He asked                   
  if they would be subject to the new legislation.  NEA-AK                     
  felt the bill was lacking as there was no clear procedure                    
  stating how to implement the proposal.  He asked how the new                 
  proposal would interface with existing legislation, stating                  
  that the term "deficiency", used in the new proposal, is not                 
  used in the current legislation.                                             
  TAPE 94-04, SIDE A                                                           
  Number 000                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE made the committee and witnesses aware of the                    
  time constraint and asked for questions.                                     
  Number 037                                                                   
  LARRY WIGET, Director, Government Relations/Legislative                      
  Liaison, Anchorage School District, stated via                               
  teleconference from Anchorage that there should be a more                    
  thorough analysis of the proposed legislation.  In regards                   
  to school advisory boards, he felt that the schools should                   
  voluntarily participate in shared decision-making/site based                 
  management, and further stated that the Anchorage school                     
  district supported the establishment of site council with                    
  the PTA remaining the most "viable parent organization."  He                 
  stated concerns "about the membership of the Local Tenure                    
  Review Committees and whether by having included a majority                  
  of tenured teachers currently employed in the district                       
  creates a conflict of interest with NEA-Alaska which has a                   
  legal obligation to fairly represent its members."  The NEA-                 
  AK did not support expiration after seven years of tenure.                   
  Mr. Wiget said that a sound annual evaluation process that                   
  would eliminate poor teachers from the classroom was needed.                 
  He furthered stated that if change was sought, the NEA-AK                    
  would prefer it be directed toward reducing the burden                       
  imposed on districts which attempt to non-retain or dismiss                  
  tenured teachers.  Mr. Wiget expressed the NEA-AK's                          
  intention to work with the legislature to seek further                       
  Number 224                                                                   
  JOHN CYR, President, National Education Association -                        
  Alaska, stated via teleconference from Anchorage that NEA-AK                 
  was opposed to CSHB 84.  He stated that if a private                         
  corporation or a "money-making concern" could siphon school                  
  dollars from the school district under the proposed                          
  amendment by Rep. Vezey, within the definition of "person,"                  
  there would be problems.  He said it would be too costly to                  
  proceed with the proposed legislation for establishing a new                 
  tenure review committee.  He pointed out the enormous amount                 
  of time and cost that would be spent on review committee                     
  meetings in the large school districts and the cost for air                  
  travel for rural communities.  Mr. Cyr felt tenure                           
  protection would be lost.  He questioned the process, asking                 
  if a teacher could apply who already gained tenure to a new                  
  school district.  He stated that the proposed legislation                    
  would make the process secretive, political, and a                           
  popularity contest.                                                          
  Number 364                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE observed that there were varying opinions                        
  regarding the effectiveness of the current tenure and stated                 
  that there was considerable public interest in eliminating                   
  tenure completely.                                                           
  Number 384                                                                   
  LORRA KEENAN, Concerned Citizen, stated via Anchorage her                    
  opinions on the original HB 84.                                              
  Number 417                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE told Mr. Keenan that her testimony did not                       
  pertain to CSHB 84 or the discussions at hand.  He continued                 
  on with testimony from Anchorage.                                            
  Number 459                                                                   
  LUCILLE HOWITT, Tenured Teacher, Anchorage School District,                  
  testified on behalf of herself via teleconference from                       
  Anchorage.  She felt that Anchorage currently had an                         
  effective evaluation system involving principals and                         
  teachers.  She thought undue stress would be created by                      
  having the public involved in the review process.                            
  Number 477                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE stated that there was no provision in the CS to                  
  have parents on a tenure review committee.                                   
  Number 491                                                                   
  MS. HOWITT continued on with other comments by saying that                   
  taking a teacher out of the classroom would directly affect                  
  the students' learning environment.  She felt peer review                    
  would be effective if it was non-threatening.  She asked if,                 
  under Sec. 14.20.153 (d), it would allow for public comment                  
  on teachers applying for tenure.                                             
  Number 532                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said that in that aspect her assumption was                      
  Number 540                                                                   
  MS. HOWITT felt parent comments should be directed, in                       
  private, with the principal regarding their child's needs                    
  and which teacher would best meet the child's needs.                         
  Number 557                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked for testimony from Mat-Su.                                 
  Number 566                                                                   
  ERNEST LINE, Concerned Citizen, questioned via                               
  teleconference the performance standards of Alaska 2000.                     
  Number 590                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said that the HESS Committee was not involved in                 
  that issue.  He briefly outlined the proposal of CSHB 84.                    
  Number 604                                                                   
  MR. LINE asked if the proposed bill was going to be a part                   
  of Alaska 2000.                                                              
  Number 607                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE answered no.                                                     
  Number 610                                                                   
  MR. LINE suggested the committee watch the video, "Who                       
  Controls the Children."  He also suggested further analysis                  
  of the proposed legislation and Alaska 2000.  He further                     
  commented on the grant program, asking if it was not the                     
  purpose of the school district and school administrators to                  
  improve school performance, and questioned the need for                      
  additional grants.                                                           
  Number 670                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said it was necessary to fund specific projects                  
  and that the grants would only be approved by the local                      
  school board.                                                                
  Number 683                                                                   
  MIKE WILEY, Member, Kenai Peninsula School Board, testified                  
  on behalf of himself via teleconference from Kenai.  He                      
  expressed his concerns in regards to the advisory boards.                    
  He suggested site council as a better decision-making                        
  process.  He felt that there needed to be changes in the                     
  tenure process and he needed further time to look at the new                 
  Number 744                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE closed public testimony on CSHB 84, stating that                 
  the bill would be carried over until the following Monday.                   
  Seeing no further business from the committee, Chair Bunde                   
  ADJOURNED the meeting at 4:52 p.m.                                           

Document Name Date/Time Subjects