Legislature(2015 - 2016)BUTROVICH 205
04/15/2015 08:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB89 | |
| SB1 | |
| HB142 | |
| SB74 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 1 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| = | SB 74 | ||
| = | SB 89 | ||
| + | HB 142 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 89-PARENT RIGHTS: EDUCATION; SCHOOL ABSENCE
8:06:11 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE announced the consideration of SB 89. [The work
draft CS for SB 89, version 29-LS0735\G was adopted on 4/14/15.]
Noting that public testimony was closed, he asked if any
committee members had amendments to offer.
8:06:51 AM
SENATOR COGHILL moved to report the committee substitute (CS)
for SB 89 from committee with individual recommendations and
attached fiscal note.
CHAIR STOLTZE objected for discussion purposes.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI stated that he was not expecting the bill
to move during the current committee meeting. He said the bill
is a pretty significant change to Alaska's law and there are
some pretty significant problems with the bill. He said he was
wondering if the committee could hear from the Department of
Education.
CHAIR STOLTZE said the committee will hear from the Department
of Education.
8:07:51 AM
SENATOR MIKE DUNLEAVY, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau, Alaska,
sponsor of SB 89, introduced himself.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked the following:
On page 2, lines 13-17, there is a requirement for
parental notification of not less than 2 weeks, but
not more than 6 weeks before any activity, class, or
program that includes content involving human
reproduction or sexual matters.
He asked if a penalty is involved if a teacher or school does
not follow the strict notification timeline.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY replied that currently there are no penalties
in the bill. He specified that following the timeline is
"expected" to be followed once the bill is passed into law.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI inquired if a teacher is prohibited from
answering a student's question on date rape without first
receiving a permission slip.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY specified that the bill is an attempt at being
reasonable, meaning there will always be questions that come up
in the classroom with the teacher. He replied no, there would
not be a situation where a child asks a question and the teacher
says, "Hold that thought, we'll get back to you in two weeks."
CHAIR STOLTZE welcomed him to depart from Senator Dunleavy to
Superintendent Dunleavy and noted he is probably aware of
existing reporting requirements.
8:10:00 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said language on page 2, lines 18-20,
states that parents can remove children for any reason for
religious holidays as defined by the parent. He asked if the
parent needs to notify the school district as to what religious
holiday they would be following.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered that parents would notify the school
so that absence is understood and allowed.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if a pagan holiday would be allowed
as a religious holiday.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered that the religious holiday is the
parent's choice.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI addressed page 2, lines 21-22 as follows:
The school district must provide the parent with an
opportunity to review the content of an activity,
class, performance standard, or program.
He asked if the proviso gives parents the opportunity to review
tests before being administered.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered no. He detailed that there will be no
avenue to read an assessment and breach security.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI remarked that the way he reads the language
is that parents would have the opportunity to review tests. He
asked if clarifying language should be considered that excludes
tests.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered that there is no wording regarding
testing.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked where "performance standard" is noted
if that included tests.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered no. He specified that "performance
standard" would include publicly listed standards for each of
the courses.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how long the parent has to review.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY replied that the period of time for a parent to
review has not been stipulated in the bill. He said the school
board could decide on the local level.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if guidance should be provided on the
length of time a parent has to review.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY replied that the bill allows the school
district to decide.
8:12:59 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI addressed page 3, Section 3, the Alaska
Association of School Boards (AASB) testified against the
provision. He asked if Senator Dunleavy considered AASB's
concerns.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered yes. He specified that the belief is
the concerns of parents outweigh AASB's concerns.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI said he contacted AASB the previous day and
asked for information on what sort of survey questionnaires are
being asked. He disclosed that AASB agreed to provide the
information and asked that the committee not move the bill out
prior to receiving the information.
CHAIR STOLTZE noted that mail has been received on the issue.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY remarked that he was the president of the Mat-
Su schoolboard and was familiar with AASB's purpose in terms of
what it advocates for.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked what the rationale was behind Section
3, page 3.
8:14:54 AM
SENATOR DUNLEAVY responded that after discussions with many
parents that any type of questionnaire should get permission
from parents before their children are surveyed. He summarized
that parents should be informed so that they can make informed
decisions.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI addressed page 4, Section 6, and noted that
the section was new where school districts may require physical
examinations of teachers as a condition of employment. He asked
if Senator Dunleavy could provide background information on the
proviso.
8:16:02 AM
BETHANY MARCUM, Staff, Senator Dunleavy, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, answered that there is no state
requirement for school districts to conduct physical exams for
teachers. She detailed that should a school district decide to
require a physical exam, the section allows the school district
to require the examination. She added that the school district
would not be required to pay for the physical exams.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked to clarify that the purpose of the
section is not to allow school districts to discriminate against
those who may have physical disabilities.
MS. MARCUM answered that school districts requested to have
their burden reduced regarding state requirements like physical
exams.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI addressed Section 7 and said the section
states the following:
A school district may not permit an abortion services
provider or an employee or volunteer of an abortion
services provider to offer, sponsor, furnish course
materials, or provide instruction relating to human
sexuality or sexually transmitted diseases.
He asked if the school district is required to perform a
background check to ensure that people who are volunteering in
the classroom or offering instruction are not volunteers for
abortion services providers.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered no.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if there is a penalty if a volunteer
of an abortion services provider is allowed to teach one of the
classes.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered that there is no penalty to the school
district if unknowingly there was an individual in an official
capacity that taught the class. He detailed that there are no
background checks to determine if somebody was related to an
abortion service provider.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the proviso would apply to those
who have financially contributed to abortion services providers.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered that the intent of the bill is not to
do what Senator Wielechowski described.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if a parental classroom volunteer who
happens to be a volunteer at an abortion services provider would
be banned from the classroom.
8:18:24 AM
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered that the intent of the bill would not
ban the individual that Senator Wielechowski described.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if a school nurse who happened to be
a volunteer for an abortion services provider would be able to
provide instruction relating to human sexuality.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered that the school nurse's capacity would
be that of an employee and not as an individual acting as a
representative or activity presenter on behalf of an abortion
service provider. He specified that the bill would not preclude
the individual in being employed by the school district.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI noted that the bill does not have a penalty
or require a background check. He asked to verify that a school
district that repeatedly allows a volunteer from an abortion
services provider to offer a class would not face a penalty or
punishment.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered as follows:
I think in a court proceeding they would say that is a
leading question. If there is an individual that is
hired in an official capacity, has been vetted by the
school district, whether they would be a nurse or
classroom, and their primary purpose or function is to
teach the content and adopt the curriculum of the
school district or to perform the duties as adopted by
the school district, this bill would offer no
penalties for that individual.
CHAIR STOLTZE stated that his hope is the questions will be not
to affirm a statement but to really ask a question.
8:20:32 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI noted that some hospitals offer abortion
services in emergencies, primarily in the case of the life of
the mother. He asked if the bill's definition of abortion
services provider includes the hospitals that he described.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered that the hypothetical hospitals that
Senator Wielechowski alluded to could possibly be covered by the
bill.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the Alaska Regional Hospital or
the Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital performs emergency abortions,
would volunteers from Alaska Regional or VA hospitals be
permitted to provide instruction.
CHAIR STOLTZE asked to verify that the instruction pertains to
sexuality.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered that a person would not be allowed if
the individual has a direct association with an abortion
provider and their purpose is to educate children on human
reproduction and human sexuality.
8:22:17 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI stated that he has heard concerns that
performance standard reviews could be affected if more than 5
percent of parents opt out of testing.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY presumed that Senator Wielechowski was alluding
to federal funding where sanctions are possible if assessments
are less than 95 percent.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked what the potential sanctions are.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered that there could be a loss of federal
funding through Title 1 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA).
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if a loss of funding would occur on a
school, district, or statewide level if 5 percent of parents
from a particular school decided to opt-out their children from
testing.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY replied that Senator Wielechowski's question
cannot be answered because to his knowledge, the loss of funding
through sanctions has not been tested.
8:24:21 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked how much federal funding does the
state receive for education.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY answered that based upon the types of programs,
federal funding ranges from $60 million to $220 million. He
specified that federal funding is in the $60 million range for
the state's instructional or title grants.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the state could be losing funding.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY replied that since the advent of the No Child
Left Behind Act of 2001, a state could lose everything, but the
sanction has not been tested. He noted that the recent iteration
of ESEA by the U.S. Department of Education was a unilateral
change that was done without Congress and its constitutionality
has been questioned.
CHAIR STOLTZE asked that a representative from the Department of
Education & Early Development address the committee.
8:26:19 AM
SUSAN MCCAULEY, Director, Division of Teaching & Learning
Support, Alaska Department of Education & Early Development,
Juneau, Alaska, revealed that there is a potential loss of
funding for all title programs where a state law permits
students to opt out of federally and state mandated assessments.
She specified that the U.S. Department of Education is concerned
that participation under the mandated 95 percent threshold may
mask student performance. He disclosed that total funding for
Alaska's title programs is $96.8 million.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if Ms. McCauley had other concerns
with any other parts of the legislation or did she support the
legislation.
CHAIR STOLTZE inquired if Ms. McCauley's statement addressed a
concern or some issues.
8:28:34 AM
MS. MCCAULEY replied that the department's primary concern is
with the potential federal funding implications from state
legislation that permits opting out. She asserted that her
statement does not question a parent's right to advocate what
they feel is best.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if there are other implications from
the bill that the committee should be made aware of.
MS. MCCAULEY remarked that the state's accountability system for
student learning is based largely on the result of the state
assessments. She detailed that the state assessments drive
improvement plans for schools and districts. She asserted that a
domino-effect could occur if participation falls under 95
percent where the state does not receive a good indication of
how schools and districts are doing.
8:30:23 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE asked if asserting parental rights is the piece of
the puzzle that collapses everything.
MS. MCCAULEY answered that she would not characterize the opt-
out implications the way Chair Stoltze did. She explained that
student learning growth from year to year and current mechanisms
of school accountability are largely based on student
performance on state mandated assessments.
CHAIR STOLTZE noted that the conversations he has had with
educators is that testing is one of the most wasted activities
in their classrooms.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the testing is mandated by state
or federal law.
MS. MCCAULEY answered that that assessments are mandated by
both.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked to verify that state law could be
changed to say "no testing."
MS. MCCAULEY answered yes.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI remarked that the committee could consider
the "no testing" option. He asked to verify that the state could
decide not to test and say that it does not want the federal
government's $96.8 million.
8:32:23 AM
MS. MCCAULEY answered that current federal law requires
assessments to be administered to all students. She concurred
with Senator Dunleavy that potential consequences are a bit
untested.
CHAIR STOLTZE commented that the state will have to look at all
of its relationships with the federal government. He asked if
the department is looking at the cost-benefit from federal
enticement.
MS. MCCAULEY replied that a daily tension exists in the line
between funds that hopefully do good things for students,
particularly students with challenges, and the state's system of
education done in a manner that the state wants to do.
8:34:38 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if Ms. McCauley is concerned with the
requirement on page 2 to provide parent notification not less
than two weeks, but not more than six weeks prior to discussions
on human reproduction or sexual matters. He remarked that
showing the movie "Gone with the Wind" where people are kissing
could be defined as human reproduction or a sexual matter.
MS. MCCAULEY replied that school districts are probably better
equipped to respond to how parent notification timelines have
impact on their processes. She noted that many districts have
chosen to have parent notification processes in place because
notification is considered to be a good practice for educational
topics that parents may wish to not have their children
participate in. She said the districts that do not have
notification processes in place will consider the new
requirement burdensome, for others the requirement won't be
different from current practices.
8:36:18 AM
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI asked if the current law allows parents to
withdraw their children from classes, programs, or activities.
MS. MCCAULEY replied that currently there is no state law that
requires or prohibits parents from withdrawing their children.
She noted that some districts do allow parents to withdraw their
children.
SENATOR WIELECHOWSKI stated that to his understanding, school
districts currently allow parents to withdraw their kids for
issues that they are concerned with. He asked if a problem
exists that the Legislature needs to fix.
MS. MCCAULEY stated that she is not informed in a manner that
can answer Senator Wielechowski's question. She reiterated that
there are districts that have processes that would comply with
the language in the bill.
SENATOR HUGGINS said he is proud to disclose that he had three
children that graduated from Alaska school systems. He opined
that the most important component for success of a child is
parental involvement. He asked where Ms. McCauley would rank
parental involvement on her scale as a professional.
MS. MCCAULEY answered that she agreed with Senator Huggins that
parent involvement has an enormous impact on student learning,
achievement, and success.
CHAIR STOLTZE asked where Ms. McCauley would rank parent
involvement on her scale.
MS. MCCAULEY answered that parental involvement would be right
at the top.
SENATOR HUGGINS commended the bill sponsor for introducing
legislation that will reinforce the bonding between the system,
teacher, parent, and student.
CHAIR STOLTZE announced that he will remove his objection. He
asked if any committee member would like to reassert an
objection.
8:40:41 AM
CHAIR STOLTZE announced that hearing no objections, CSSB 89(STA)
moved out of the Senate State Affairs Standing Committee.