Legislature(2007 - 2008)CAPITOL 106
03/06/2008 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
Audio | Topic |
---|---|
Start | |
HB353 | |
HCR20 | |
HB406 | |
Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
*+ | HB 396 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | HB 261 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | TELECONFERENCED | ||
+= | HB 353 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | HCR 20 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | HB 406 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 353-PUBLIC LIBRARY INTERNET FILTERS VICE CHAIR ROSES announced that the first order of business was HOUSE BILL NO. 353, "An Act relating to the blocking of certain Internet sites at public libraries and to library assistance grants." 8:12:35 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS), Version 25-LS1356\M, Bannister, 3/5/08, as a work draft. There being no objection, Version M was before the committee. 8:13:38 AM REPRESENTATIVE WES KELLER, Alaska State Legislature, as sponsor of HB 353, said the change made in Version M was the exemption of the university libraries from the proposed required Internet filters. He said he supports Version M. In response to a request for information pertaining to the cost of the filtering system, made by Representative Doll at the last bill hearing, he said the commissioner of the Department of Administration [Annette Kreitzer] has committed to researching cost comparisons and looking into the possibility of a group license, and has said she would send someone to testify before the next committee of referral. In response to a question from Vice Chair Roses, he said Ms. Kreitzer did not indicate how long it would take to compile that information; however, he guaranteed that the information would accompany the bill into the next committee of referral. 8:16:55 AM BARBARA BERG, Director, Juneau Public Libraries, addressed a misconception she heard at a prior bill hearing that if an application was not made for the federal E-rate, then the state would have to pick up the cost. She explained that the federal E-rate is a reimbursement and discount program. A library applies for the discount, based on the services it is receiving, and the Internet service provider (ISP) or telecommunications provider is the one that gets the payment from the federal government. The ISP or telecommunications provider passes that on to the library either in the form of a discounted bill or by requiring the library to apply in July after the end of the fiscal year, and not reimbursing the library until fall. She said there really is not a way that E-rate funding can ever displace state budgeted funding, because the state budgeted funding is something for which libraries can plan in their budgets and use for operations. Ms. Berg said when she prepares her budget, she budgets for the full telephone cost, as if the E-rate did not exist, in order to guarantee bills will be paid when they arrive. 8:18:25 AM MS. BERG said there had also been a statement made that libraries that did not filter the Internet were out of compliance with CIPA. She stated that the provision in the FCC ruling that implemented CIPA was that if libraries did not accept funding for Internet service, they were not obligated to filter under CIPA; they would not be out of compliance with CIPA, because CIPA would not apply to them. She said, "It was a community decision that we not filter." She said that decision comes about for libraries, not just because of the cost, but also because the E-rate program is a complicated program for which to apply and to which to comply. She added, "It makes filing your income taxes look like a walk in the park." She said she has one librarian who spends weeks every year trying to comply with the telecommunications application process. She stated that many of the small libraries operating only on the state grant have no technical staff and don't have the ability to spend weeks doing a total of [four] filings with the federal government annually in order to get this money. Furthermore, the level of complication rises "when you go for the Internet funding." She offered further details. She concluded: MS. BERG said at some point the discount the library gets is not worth the staff hours. She said the Juneau Public Library increased its Internet bandwidth last year and finds that the discounts that Alaska Communications Systems, Inc. (ACS) and General Communications Incorporated provide are greater than the discount the library would receive from the federal program. She concluded, "So, as a responsible administrator, I cannot waste my city's money doing something that has no return, and I think a lot of libraries are in that same situation." 8:21:07 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG urged members to look at Ms. Berg's handout. He said he is troubled by [the information on the handout] and urged "the committee or some other to take up these subjects that you mentioned." MS. BERG, in response to a remark from Representative Gruenberg, said she does not remember what the authorizing legislation for the E-rate subsidies is, but she would provide that information later. She continued: The universal service fund was set up - we all pay into it when we pay our telephone bills. And ... for years they had an offset for rural areas for telecommunications, for telephone connections, so that rural areas could get on telephone, and it was extended under the universal service fund to cover Internet connection, as well, for schools and public libraries. And the universities have never been covered by this funding. REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked if ISPs and telecommunication companies are required under federal law to pass on the discounted rate to libraries. MS. BERG answered, "If they receive the payment under the universal service fund, they are obligated to reimburse the discounted portion of the bill." REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG asked, "Must they do that immediately, or can they [make] significantly delays in receiving that fund?" MS. BERG answered, "They can make significant delays in receiving it. In fact, one year ... there was a dispute in Congress as to whether they were going to authorize the funding or not, and our application process was held up, and it was unclear as to how much would be funded or if it would be funded." REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG cited a sentence from Ms. Berg's handout, which read: "In all-volunteer libraries, the administrative burden of complying with E-rate and CIPA can make it impossible to apply for these funds." He asked, "So, really, it is meaningless in some cases, and in that case the companies keep this extra money they receive, right?" MS. BERG responded that because she does not understand the vendor's side of the operation, she probably should not make a statement. However, she surmised that "they have to go through an application and justification process to show who they're giving a discount to." She said Representative Gruenberg would have to ask someone from ACS or GCI "how it works on their end." REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG reiterated his concern regarding Ms. Berg's written information. 8:24:23 AM REPRESENTATIVE DOLL asked how local control is measured and put into effect. MS. BERG replied that Juneau is unique, in that it has no formal library board, but instead is authorized in the city charter; therefore, Ms. Berg said, she answers to the city manager. She said she discusses major decisions, such as whether or not to filter the Internet, with the Friends of the Juneau Library; however, that board is more of an informal advisory board than a governing board, and its membership is drawn from "anybody who's interested in the libraries." If there are complaints or problems, the library manager hears about them and they are heard before the Juneau Assembly. 8:26:00 AM REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG offered his understanding that there is a document by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law which presents both sides of the issue related to HB 353. 8:26:41 AM VICE CHAIR ROSES announced that HB 353 was heard and held.
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|