Legislature(2007 - 2008)BELTZ 211
05/03/2007 01:30 PM Senate LABOR & COMMERCE
Audio | Topic |
---|---|
Start | |
HB136 | |
HB170 | |
SB117 | |
SB94 | |
Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
*+ | SB 94 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | HB 170 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | TELECONFERENCED | ||
+= | SB 117 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | SB 99 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | HB 136 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 94-SERVICES FOR THE BLIND 2:17:46 PM CHAIR ELLIS announced SB 94 to be up for consideration. KATE HERRING, staff to Senator Ellis, sponsor of SB 94, explained that Senator Ellis introduced SB 94 at the request of several constituents who feel that the blind community in Alaska would be better served by an office specifically addressing the blind community rather than the existing Vocation Rehabilitation Program that covers Alaskans with a variety of disabilities. Sometimes the blind community can get lost under the umbrella of the larger program. She said that SB 94 establishes a Division of Blind Services in the Department of Health and Social Services and makes related changes to the administration of the Vocational Rehabilitation Program (DVR). 2:20:14 PM SANDY SANDERSON, President, Alaska Independent Blind, said it is an organization of 450 blind members and that he supported SB 94 for two reasons. He said that nationwide 80.4 percent of blind are unemployed; but in Alaska the figure is 93 percent. This does not say much for those who are supposed to be working with and for the blind. 2:21:06 PM He and a friend started the Center for the Blind over 30 years ago and to this day it is not properly funded. It takes professionals who are trained to work with blind people to get them employment. This is not happening because the center is paid a fee for services which means it gets paid when someone comes to it for help. If no one comes, they don't get paid and you can't get people with university degrees on nickels and dimes. People have been brought in off the street to train blind people in various things not knowing the first thing about it and that should not be the situation. MR. SANDERSON said figures from the DVR indicate there are 29,000 disabled people in the State of Alaska. Of those, 10,000 to 12,000 are visually impaired. Being 40 percent of a disabled community, they should have their own area of health and guidance. 2:24:08 PM KARLA JUTZI, Director, Alaska Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired, said this is the agency that Mr. Sanderson helped found 30 years ago. She said the Center does not have an official position on this bill, but she wanted to point out several aspects that deserved more attention. One of them is that the definition of "blind person" who would be served by this agency is very narrow, because it is limited to those who are legally blind. In fact, with Vocational Rehab services as well as her older clients, she serves quite a few people who are not yet legally blind, but who have a visual disability that doesn't allow them to work or to live independently. She didn't want this legislation to reduce the number of people already being served. The second issue was on page 7, line 15, that establishes and maintains an orientation and adjustment center with qualified instruction for training eligible blind persons and that appears to set up a state-operated agency for training. This would put the Center out of business since that is the agency that provides this adaptive field training in Alaska and it is a nonprofit agency. She assumed it wasn't the intent of the legislation to put an effective organization out of business and though it important to discuss whether the intent is that the state would somehow take over her agency because it could not afford two training centers for the blind. 2:27:29 PM MS. JUTZI said it's also important that funding this bill wouldn't take funding away from current services provided to visually disabled people. LYNN CORRAL, Alaska, Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired, said that blind teachers need specialized training. She was told at first that she didn't have an impediment to employment. However she, like most people, felt that she wanted to do better. She appealed and now has a different counselor and has been working for the division for 13 months. We just believe that this is the right time to have a separate state plan for blind services - will give us better quality services. We know that separate agencies that exist in the United State have a better employment outcomes and better pay at closure. She was also concerned that the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation was using public funds to talk to vendors against this idea instead of using it to positively deal with their issues of services for the blind. JANICE WEISS, Juneau resident, said she has two daughters who are both visually impaired since childhood and they are now both adults. Both used DVR services and she has absolutely no complaints about the service they received. The reason they used the DVR services is because they wanted to become self- sufficient and also wanted college and professional careers. Had the same services been offered through the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), they would not have been nearly as willing to use them, because even though they were visually impaired, they did not see themselves as being dependent on any government services for their current living as opposed to using DVR which is under the DOLWD - and therefore much more inclined to be seen as helping people with careers rather than helping them with not being able to take care of their own lives. She said the Center for The Blind has been absolutely wonderful in working with both of her daughters in many different areas. Having a separate place for the blind to receive the services that DVR now provides would duplicate administration and services that are already established and doing a really good job. She said the DVR counselors have knowledge of many more resources that are available for many kinds of disabilities and often people who have visual disabilities have other disabilities as well. 2:34:25 PM ELMER LINDSTROM, Project Manager, Office of the Commissioner, Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS), urged the committee to also take testimony from the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, Department of Labor and Workforce Development (DOLWD), as that is the lead agency that has the expertise and knowledge of the underlying federal law. This bill would require a separate division in the DHSS to meet federal requirements and it would end up being a very small fish in a very big pond. It could easily have a result that is different than anyone intended. Having said that, he said he would be happy to work with the committee and all the advocates interested in this bill to discuss how services can be improved. 2:40:06 PM STEVEN J. PRIDDLE, President of the State Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind, said it is the largest national organization of blind persons in the United States and has chapters worldwide. In addition, he is a board member of the Assisted Technologies of Alaska, although he is not speaking on its behalf. He is a DVR recipient, but prior to losing his vision, he was a logger and construction worker. Through DVR's services, he was able to acquire several degrees including a juris doctorate. He has worked as a corporate finance attorney for the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission, a former assistant district attorney for the State of Alaska and a district attorney for the state in Whittier and he has his own practice. He has achieved all that through the services he has received from the DVR. MR. PRIDDLE said that historically and consistently the National Federation of the Blind has promoted separate services for the blind with the State of Alaska being the exception, because statistically speaking, he there is now way a separate agency for the blind could even come close to what the DVR is able to deliver at this time without a tremendous increase in costs and funds. A separate agency in the future might become more feasible when the state's population its budget are bigger. 2:43:11 PM MR. PRIDDLE said also that the registry for all blind persons the bill created was incredibly offensive to him. 2:44:35 PM BOBBI CLELAND, Anchorage resident, said the DVR has done an excellent job for her and concurred with Mr. Priddle that a separate center would duplicate the same services that DVR already provides. She has been a business enterprise program person for the past 15 years and thought it should remain within the Department of Labor. She was also disturbed and insulted by the idea of being on a registry saying it would also be a tremendous invasion of her privacy. 2:47:43 PM WILLIAM CRAIG, Anchorage resident, said he wanted to testify in person at the next meeting. 2:48:08 PM JOAN O'KEEFFE, Executive Director, Southeast Alaska Independent Living, opposed SB 94 saying the state already has the DVR and creating a separate division for the blind would duplicate and waste sparse state resources. She also allowed that it's possible this would be a good bill in states with a very large population of blind individuals and surplus funds, but pointed out that is not the case in Alaska now. She suggested that SB 94 would increase costs more than $500,000 annually. Also, she said that federal regulations require a new division to have a full-time director and staff, as well as a State Rehabilitation Counsel. Each would incur additional expense and be a duplication of effort. She said the DVR serves approximately 4,000 people, 2.6 percent of whom are blind. The new division could only serve folks who are legally blind leaving out people with multiple disabilities and the partially blind. There would be no single point of contact for DVR services. The federal dollars that are now granted by DVR to the Centers for Independent Living and the Alaska Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired would go through this new division of blind services. However, the current system is efficient and well managed, she said, and if passed, SB 94 would diminish its services and be a colossal waste of money. 2:51:25 PM CLAUDIA CRISS, Juneau resident, said she is visually impaired and is very happy with the services she now receives from the DVR and opposed SB 94. Her personal philosophy of disability is that under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), universal design has been introduced with accessibility for all. The City of Portland, Oregon, is an example of an accessible city. She did not think that establishing a separate agency for the blind wouldn't help or make anything in Alaska better for them. Funds could possibly become misused and mismanaged. She felt that people can have success through their own skills and others need to be educated about disability in a positive way rather than a negative way. Her life has demonstrated that. 2:53:31 PM RICK RENAUD said he is severely disabled and is one of the 12 vendors participating in the Alaska Business Enterprise Program. He is the only vendor that is not blind and operates the food services facility in the basement of the court house in Anchorage. He stated, "The Alaska Business Enterprise Program has been critical to my ability to function as an independent self-reliant and contributing member of the community." MR. RENAUD said his participation in the program has made it possible for him to employ others and to help train blind Alaskans to be successful vendors, too. Since this program is so successful and growing, he couldn't see why any change in the state law is needed. Section 10 of SB 94 would repeal AS 23.15 that allows severely individuals like him to take part in the Business Enterprise Program. He is concerned that if he is the only person now licensed and participating who would be affected, that he would lose his right to change his vendor site and beyond that, his existing vendor site could be challenged. He noted that 25 states provide services through combined agencies, not separate ones. In 2006, DVR serviced 3,967 individuals of which 104 were blind. He believed that the creation of a separate blind services division would hurt, not help, the blind population because it is unlikely that it could duplicate the expertise and experience as well as provide the specialized personnel now being served in the DVR. He concluded saying that SB 94 failed to identify a problem and didn't really offer a remedy for anything. It would create another layer of state government. 2:58:27 PM CHAIR ELLIS handed the gavel to SENATOR STEVENS as he had to go to another meeting. 2:58:45 PM JAMES SCHWARTZ, blind vendor with the Alaska Business Enterprise Program, supported SB 94. He explained that there were two applicants for the facility that Mr. Renaud won at the court house and he is the other applicant who lost - even though he is blind. State statutes clearly give priority to blind people and he has filed a grievance, but the administrative review supported awarding the site to the non-blind Mr. Renaud. So, he is still going through that grievance procedure. If the DVR has done one good thing for him it is to make him an advocate for the blind in this state. VICE-CHAIR STEVENS thanked everyone for their comments and held SB 94 in committee.
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|