Legislature(1993 - 1994)

03/22/1993 03:00 PM HES

Audio Topic
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
           HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES                         
                       STANDING COMMITTEE                                      
                         March 22, 1993                                        
                            3:00 p.m.                                          
  MEMBERS PRESENT                                                              
  Rep. Cynthia Toohey, Co-Chair                                                
  Rep. Con Bunde, Co-Chair                                                     
  Rep. Gary Davis, Vice Chair                                                  
  Rep. Al Vezey                                                                
  Rep. Pete Kott                                                               
  Rep. Harley Olberg                                                           
  Rep. Bettye Davis                                                            
  Rep. Tom Brice                                                               
  MEMBERS ABSENT                                                               
  Rep. Irene Nicholia                                                          
  COMMITTEE CALENDAR                                                           
  *HJR 30:  Relating to epidemiological and quarantine                         
            services in ports of entry in the state.                           
            PASSED WITH INDIVIDUAL RECOMMENDATIONS                             
  *HB 235:  "An Act relating to educational programs and                       
            services for children with disabilities and other                  
            exceptional children and to persons with a                         
            handicap; and providing for an effective date."                    
            PASSED WITH INDIVIDUAL RECOMMENDATIONS                             
  *HB 210:  "An Act relating to employment of chief school                     
            HEARD AND HELD TO TIME CERTAIN                                     
  *HB 174:  "An Act relating to organization of the public                     
            school system; and providing for an effective                      
            NOT HEARD, HELD TO TIME CERTAIN                                    
  (* First public hearing.)                                                    
  WITNESS REGISTER                                                             
  MEL KROGSENG                                                                 
  Special Assistant                                                            
  Rep. Ramona Barnes                                                           
  Alaska State Legislature                                                     
  State Capitol, Room 208                                                      
  Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182                                                    
  Phone:  (907) 465-3438                                                       
  Position Statement:  Testified for sponsor of HJR 30                         
  MYRA HOWE, Director                                                          
  Educational Program Support/                                                 
    Special Education Programs                                                 
  Department of Education                                                      
  801 W. 10th St. Suite 200                                                    
  Juneau, Alaska 99801-1894                                                    
  Phone:  (907) 465-2971                                                       
  Position Statement:  Testified in favor of HB 235                            
  STEPHEN T. MCPHETRES                                                         
  Executive Director                                                           
  Alaska Council of School Administrators                                      
  326 Fourth St. Suite 404                                                     
  Juneau, Alaska 99801-1101                                                    
  Phone:  (907) 586-9702                                                       
  Position Statement:  Testified in favor of HB 235                            
  DENNIS WETHERELL                                                             
  P.O. Box 876862                                                              
  Wasilla, Alaska 99687                                                        
  Phone:  (907) 745-2007                                                       
  Position Statement:  Testified in opposition to HB 235                       
  FRANK GARRITY                                                                
  P.O. Box 69                                                                  
  Barrow, Alaska 99723                                                         
  Phone:  (907) 852-5311                                                       
  Position Statement:  Testified in favor of HB 235                            
  LARRY WIGET                                                                  
  Legislative Liaison                                                          
  Anchorage School District                                                    
  4600 DeBarr Road                                                             
  Anchorage, Alaska 99508-3195                                                 
  Phone:  (907) 269-2255                                                       
  Position Statement:  Testified in favor of HB 235                            
  MARC GROBER                                                                  
  P.O. Box 467                                                                 
  Nenana, Alaska, 99760                                                        
  Phone:  (907) 832-5227                                                       
  Position Statement:  Testified in opposition to HB 235                       
  PAUL VERHAGEN                                                                
  P.O. Box 563                                                                 
  Nenana, Alaska 99760                                                         
  Phone:  (907) 832-5238                                                       
  Position Statement:  Testified in opposition to HB 235                       
  REP. TERRY MARTIN                                                            
  Alaska State Legislature                                                     
  State Capitol, Room 411                                                      
  Juneau, Alaska 99801                                                         
  Phone:  (907) 465-3783                                                       
  Position Statement:  Prime sponsor of HB 210                                 
  REP. JERRY MACKIE                                                            
  Alaska State Legislature                                                     
  Courthouse, Room 602                                                         
  Juneau, Alaska 99801                                                         
  Phone:  (907) 465-4925                                                       
  Position Statement:  Testified in opposition to HB 210                       
  BOB WEINSTEIN, Superintendent                                                
  Southeast Islands School District                                            
  P.O. Box 8340                                                                
  Ketchikan, Alaska 99901                                                      
  Position Statement:  Testified in opposition to HB 210                       
  JOHN HOLST, Superintendent                                                   
  Craig City School District                                                   
  P.O. Box 800                                                                 
  Craig, Alaska 99921                                                          
  Phone:  (907) 826-3274                                                       
  Position Statement:  Testified in opposition to HB 210                       
  ROGER STEPHAN, Research Analyst                                              
  Department of Education                                                      
  801 W. 10th St., Suite 200                                                   
  Juneau, Alaska 99801                                                         
  Phone:  (907) 465-8682                                                       
  Position Statement:  Testified in opposition to HB 210                       
  PREVIOUS ACTION                                                              
  BILL:  HJR 30                                                                
  BILL VERSION:                                                                
  SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) BARNES,Toohey                                  
  TITLE: Relating to epidemiological and quarantine services                   
  in ports of entry in the state.                                              
  JRN-DATE    JRN-PG                     ACTION                                
  02/22/93       409    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  02/22/93       410    (H)   HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL                     
  03/22/93              (H)   HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106                      
  BILL:  HB 235                                                                
  BILL VERSION:                                                                
  SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) BUNDE,Grussendorf                              
  TITLE: "An Act relating to educational programs and services                 
  for children with disabilities and other exceptional                         
  children and to persons with a handicap; and providing for                   
  an effective date."                                                          
  JRN-DATE    JRN-PG                     ACTION                                
  03/17/93       684    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  03/17/93       684    (H)   HES, FINANCE                                     
  03/22/93              (H)   HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106                      
  BILL:  HB 210                                                                
  BILL VERSION:                                                                
  SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) MARTIN,Kott                                    
  TITLE: "An Act relating to employment of chief school                        
  JRN-DATE    JRN-PG                     ACTION                                
  03/10/93       590    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  03/10/93       590    (H)   HES, FINANCE                                     
  03/12/93       629    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): KOTT                               
  03/22/93              (H)   HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106                      
  BILL:  HB 174                                                                
  BILL VERSION:                                                                
  SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) MARTIN,Kott                                    
  TITLE: "An Act relating to organization of the public school                 
  system; and providing for an effective date."                                
  JRN-DATE    JRN-PG                     ACTION                                
  02/24/93       434    (H)   READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)                  
  02/24/93       434    (H)   HES, FINANCE                                     
  03/12/93       628    (H)   COSPONSOR(S): KOTT                               
  03/22/93              (H)   HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106                      
  ACTION NARRATIVE                                                             
  TAPE 93-41, SIDE A                                                           
  Number 000                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m., noted                  
  members present, announced members present, and announced                    
  that the meeting would be teleconferenced to Anchorage,                      
  Dillingham, Naknek, Klawock, Mat-Su, Valdez, Barrow, Tok,                    
  Nenana and Craig.                                                            
  HJR 30 - QUARANTINE SERVICES AT PORTS OF ENTRY                               
  testified on behalf of the prime sponsor of HB 174.  She                     
  read a sponsor statement, which is on file in the committee                  
  room.   In summary, the statement said that the resolution,                  
  introduced at the request of the Department of Health and                    
  Social Services (DHSS), was a reaction to the                                
  discontinuation of epidemiological and quarantine services                   
  at Ports of Entry into Alaska.  The resolution asks the                      
  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to provide extra                  
  staff in Alaska to monitor potential outbreaks of                            
  communicable diseases carried into Alaska by travellers,                     
  especially those from Russia and the Far East.                               
  (Reps. Brice, Kott, Olberg and B. Davis arrived at                           
  approximately 3:15 p.m.)                                                     
  Number 065                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked why the resolution carried a zero fiscal                   
  MS. KROGSENG said that the federal government would pay for                  
  any health officers, and that there would therefore be no                    
  cost to the state.                                                           
  REP. VEZEY asked the location of Alaska's Ports of Entry.                    
  MS. KROGSENG answered that they were the international                       
  airports in Fairbanks and Anchorage.                                         
  Number 090                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY recommended that it might be better to place such                 
  health officers in port communities like Valdez and Dutch                    
  Number 095                                                                   
  REP. TOOHEY commented that more people from the Far East and                 
  Russia arrived in Alaska through the airports than through                   
  maritime shipping ports.                                                     
  Number 104                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY commented that he had contracted some of the                      
  hardest to cure diseases in his life in port cities.                         
  Number 106                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE quieted the resulting laughter with a reminder                   
  that the committee had much work to do and limited time.                     
  Number 110                                                                   
  REP. BRICE moved passage of HJR 30 with individual                           
  CHAIR BUNDE asked for objections, and, hearing none,                         
  announced HJR 30 PASSED WITH INDIVIDUAL RECOMMENDATIONS.  He                 
  brought HB 235 to the table.                                                 
  HB 235 - SPECIAL EDUCATION AND RELATED SERVICES                              
  Number 137                                                                   
  testified in Juneau in support of HB 235.  She said Alaska                   
  needed to amend its state statutes concerning special                        
  educational services to comply with federal requirements, or                 
  else it would lose its conditional approval for FY92-FY94,                   
  and likewise some federal funding.  She listed the sections                  
  that dealt with those conditions:                                            
       Section 8 would allow school districts to take to a due                 
       process hearing parents who deny consent for initial                    
       evaluation or placement of their child into special                     
       Sections 9 and 11 deal with consent, she said.  The                     
       federal Office of Education had asked the state to                      
       remodel its definition of consent and its stipulations                  
       concerning a parent's ability to withdraw consent to                    
       match federal definitions and stipulations.                             
       Section 21 would add rehabilitation services to the                     
       list of related services.  That change was due to                       
       reauthorization of federal law which included                           
       additional services to children with disabilities.                      
       Section 23 adds two new categories of disabilities:                     
       autism and traumatic brain injury; and conforms state                   
       definition of educational records to federal                            
  Number 171                                                                   
  REP. G. DAVIS asked Ms. Howe to explain the CINA (Children                   
  in Need of AID) statute (Alaska statute, AS 47.10.010, which                 
  allows the state to take action on behalf of a child when a                  
  parent has knowingly failed to take action to provide                        
  treatment for the child).                                                    
  MS. HOWE said she knew that the statute had to do with                       
  having a guardian ad litem for the child.  The Department of                 
  Education (DOE) did not use it in special education and,                     
  instead, appointed surrogate parents, she said.  The                         
  Department of Health and Social Services occasionally used                   
  it, for example, if a parent was deemed not to be acting in                  
  their child's best interests.  That was not within the                       
  special education process did not use it, but used surrogate                 
  parents, she said.                                                           
  Number 185                                                                   
  REP. G. DAVIS asked if the state could amend the statute to                  
  accommodate some of the inclusions in HB 235.                                
  MS. HOWE answered that she had not talked about that with                    
  the federal people.  She said the indication she had gotten                  
  when she spoke that morning with her department was that the                 
  DOE needed to use the due process hearing because state                      
  statutes required it.                                                        
  Number 192                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS asked what elements in HB 235 would affect the                 
  state's talented and gifted (TAG) educational program.                       
  MS. HOWE answered that the bill would have only one effect                   
  on the TAG program, that of ending the requirement that each                 
  gifted student be reevaluated at least every three years.                    
  The department felt it was not necessary, as it cost the                     
  state for psychologists and district time, even though                       
  gifted students seldom lose their eligibility for such                       
  programs.  She said there is no federal requirement for the                  
  three-year reevaluation, complete with IQ test.  The schools                 
  would continue to perform annual progress evaluations on an                  
  Individualized Education Plan (IEP), which would help                        
  determine goals and objectives for the year, she said.                       
  Number 225                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS asked if Ms. Howe had reviewed the changes in                  
  the TAG program with the Governor's Council on Education,                    
  and if so, what did they recommend.                                          
  MS. HOWE answered yes, the DOE had made a presentation on                    
  February 19, 1993, to the governor's council.  She said                      
  HB 235 had been redrafted since then, and a copy provided to                 
  the council along with a sectional analysis, but the DOE had                 
  not heard back from the council.                                             
  Number 234                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS said, "Did I not hear you say that you are                     
  covered for FY94-5 as far as the waiver that you might have                  
  had to, conditional waiver is what you said."                                
  MS. HOWE answered that the state's conditional approval was                  
  good until July 1993.                                                        
  REP. B. DAVIS asked, "And then what happens?"                                
  MS. HOWE answered that the DOE stands to lose its federal                    
  REP. B. DAVIS asked if the DOE could put in for an                           
  additional conditional waiver.                                               
  MS. HOWE said the department had received a hand-carried                     
  letter from the U.S. Department of Education that day                        
  indicating that the department could not get such an                         
  extension.  She also noted that the state of New York had                    
  recently lost its federal funding due to failure to bring                    
  its state service plan into compliance with federal laws.                    
  Number 250                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE noted for the record the presence of Rep. Martin                 
  and Rep. Mackie in the audience, and said they would be                      
  welcome to join the committee at the table if there was                      
  room.  Each declined.                                                        
  REP. VEZEY asked if $8.34 million represented the total                      
  amount of federal funds the state received for special                       
  MS. HOWE answered yes.                                                       
  Number 262                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY asked about the zero fiscal note for HB 235, and                  
  questioned whether it was realistic.                                         
  MS. HOWE addressed the issue of the bill's low cost, saying                  
  that cutting the three-year reevaluation requirement for TAG                 
  students would save school districts money and free                          
  psychologists for other duties.   The bill would add only a                  
  few new students under the autistic and brain injury                         
  categories who had been included under an "other health                      
  impaired" category.   The bill was only putting common                       
  current practice into statute.                                               
  Number 278                                                                   
  COUNCIL OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS, testified in Juneau in                     
  support of HB 235.  He said the due process provisions were                  
  good; it protects parents; it assures school districts of                    
  some process to follow if they need to provide special                       
  services to children over their parents' objections; and the                 
  elimination of the three-year evaluation requirement would                   
  allow the district to devote time spent testing to teaching                  
  REP. G. DAVIS asked who might be the impartial hearing                       
  officer referred to in section 8, page 3, of HB 235.                         
  Number 297                                                                   
  MS. HOWE answered that the hearing officer could be an                       
  attorney, a member of the community, or an external                          
  specialist in specialized children.                                          
  REP. G. DAVIS asked whether the parents and school district                  
  would both have to agree on the selection of the hearing                     
  officer, who would not be a district employee.                               
  MS. HOWE answered that was correct.                                          
  Number 306                                                                   
  DENNIS WETHERELL, PARENT OF A GIFTED CHILD, testified via                    
  teleconference from Wasilla in opposition to HB 235.  He                     
  said elimination of the three-year evaluation would have the                 
  hidden result of exempting the school district from                          
  consulting with gifted childrens' parents on the child's                     
  progress, appropriateness of placement, and effectiveness of                 
  the program of study developed by the district.  Such                        
  consultation is required in the bill only after                              
  reevaluation, or after a change in placement, he said.  In                   
  the absence of a mandatory three-year reevaluation, if the                   
  DOE fails to mandate annual Individualized Education Program                 
  (IEP) consultations, then parents will have no input into                    
  how their gifted children are treated by the districts.  He                  
  said HB 235 requires parents to prove that the districts'                    
  IEP is inappropriate, instead of requiring the district to                   
  prove to the parents that the plan is appropriate, as                        
  provided in current law.                                                     
  MR. WETHERELL said HB 235 excludes gifted students from                      
  provisions in section 17, guaranteeing that school districts                 
  must provide special education and related services to                       
  handicapped students schooled in private schools or at home.                 
  He said the bill leaves the definition of "gifted children"                  
  up to state regulations, but the current regulations are                     
  vague.  He protested that the DOE does not have plans to                     
  change the definition, and that a more comprehensive                         
  definition be included.  He also disputed that all of the                    
  bill's provisions were required to avert the loss of up to                   
  $7 million in federal grants.  He said the required                          
  revisions did not need to affect gifted education.                           
  Number 360                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS asked Ms. Howe to address Mr. Wetherell's                      
  points.  She asked if it was possible, as he had said, to                    
  exclude gifted children from mention in HB 235 and still                     
  retain the federal funds.                                                    
  MS. HOWE said the DOE could exclude from HB 235 all                          
  provisions affecting gifted students and retain federal                      
  funding.  She said the IEP planning meeting and the three-                   
  year evaluation were different processes, and there was                      
  little testing that overlapped.  She said the federal                        
  government has directed states not to require school                         
  districts to take parents to due process on some issues, but                 
  to allow such hearings if necessary.  She said she would be                  
  willing, at the committee's pleasure, to include gifted                      
  students in home-school services.  She said the DOE had                      
  received a formal complaint on the topic in this school                      
  year, and thereafter had required districts to provide such                  
  services to gifted students as a general practice.  She said                 
  she had explained to Mr. Wetherell that the DOE lacked funds                 
  to convene a task force to develop a tighter definition of                   
  "gifted children," and her primary responsibility was to                     
  deal with children with disabilities, and the DOE depends on                 
  local districts to define gifted students for themselves.                    
  Number 405                                                                   
  SLOPE BOROUGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, testified in favor of HB 235.                 
  He said he hoped that special education would get the same                   
  funding as the previous year, or more in FY94, as it was                     
  hard to provide related services to the Bush.                                
  Number 422                                                                   
  DISTRICT, testified via teleconference from Anchorage in                     
  support of HB 235, saying it would allow the state to comply                 
  with federal law and receive $8 million in federal funds, of                 
  which $1.19 million is earmarked for the Anchorage School                    
  District.  He said eliminating the requirement for three-                    
  year evaluations of gifted students would allow more                         
  efficient use of psychologists personnel.                                    
  Number 440                                                                   
  MARC GROBER testified via teleconference from Nenana in                      
  support of HB 82.  He said school districts select hearing                   
  officers from a limited list compiled by DOE, according to                   
  statute, which he said meant officers favorably disposed to                  
  the school districts.  He said Ms. Howe might be lying about                 
  DOE's use of the CINA statute.                                               
  According to MR. GROBER, "We raised the China act issues                     
  last year.  We also spoke to Barbara Rauch, who is the, a                    
  compliance officer who was with the state.  Ms. Rauch                        
  clearly stated that she had never heard from the state of                    
  Alaska regarding CINA.  In fact, there is no such process as                 
  Myra described in place now.  At present time that is the                    
  reason that the federal government wanted to make sure that                  
  there was something in place.  In point of fact, the CINA                    
  act specifically provides for recourse where there is                        
  neglect, including educational neglect.  There are ample                     
  protections, and it is a very well thought out procedure,                    
  that provides counsel to the parents and to the child."  He                  
  said the due process Ms. Howe discussed does not provide                     
  counsel to parents and was a "shadow process."                               
  MR. GROBER said he knew of several examples in which school                  
  districts have refused to provide services for gifted                        
  children.  He said the three-year evaluations were not just                  
  for eligibility, but also for maintaining an understanding                   
  of the child's needs.  He said IEP meetings included no                      
  assessment or evaluation.                                                    
  Number 472                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE interrupted to remind Mr. Grober that he had                     
  exceeded the testimony limit.                                                
  Number 475                                                                   
  PAUL VERHAGEN, PARENT OF GIFTED CHILDREN, testified via                      
  teleconference from Nenana in support of HB 82.  He                          
  expressed strong dissatisfaction with the amount of public                   
  notice of the hearing, and asked the committee not to pass                   
  HB 235.  He said he did not disagree that changes were                       
  necessary, but had hoped for more public notice of any                       
  Number 519                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE encouraged members of the public to send in                      
  written testimony to their representatives or to the next                    
  committee of referral, the House Finance Committee.  Hearing                 
  no further requests to testify, he closed public testimony                   
  on HB 235 and asked for questions from the committee.                        
  REP. KOTT asked if the committee had a copy of the faxed                     
  letter Mr. Verhagen said he had sent in.                                     
  CHAIR BUNDE told Mr. Verhagen the committee had not received                 
  the letter and encouraged him to resubmit it.                                
  MR. VERHAGEN said he would resend the letter.                                
  Number 538                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS asked about the letter to which Ms. Howe                       
  referred.  She also asked whether Ms. Howe would object to                   
  the recommended changes concerning the inclusion of talented                 
  and gifted (TAG) under home schooling, under section 17.                     
  MS. HOWE said the DOE would not object to making that                        
  CHAIR BUNDE clarified the amendment to section 17, saying                    
  HB 235 as amended "would require school districts to provide                 
  special education and related services and gifted services                   
  even if the child is not at home, at a private school or in                  
  a hospital."                                                                 
  Number 552                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS asked the reason for Chair Bunde's urgency in                  
  passing the bill from committee, and asked why the committee                 
  could not wait to hear from the Governor's Council on                        
  Education after the council reviewed the legislation.  She                   
  also said she had heard the council had drafts of                            
  recommended legislation.  She commented if the committee                     
  passed out HB 235, they would not have the chance to                         
  consider the council's input.                                                
  Number 559                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE acknowledged her concerns, but said, as it was                   
  the 71st day of the session, he felt the need to move the                    
  bill along.  He said it could be addressed in the House                      
  FInance Committee and on the House floor.                                    
  Number 563                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS asked whether, in light of the urgency, Chair                  
  Bunde would be willing to delete the sections of HB 235 that                 
  were not required to continue receiving federal special                      
  education funds.  She said some of the other elements could                  
  be dealt with through other bills.  She said some had                        
  already been introduced, and some were in HB 85.  She said                   
  she saw no need to deal with the bill so fast.                               
  CHAIR BUNDE said there was no assurance that HB 85, a very                   
  complex bill, would pass anytime soon.  He said he would not                 
  want elements of HB 235 contingent on HB 85.                                 
  Number 567                                                                   
  REP. G. DAVIS said he was involved in TAG programs, and knew                 
  that parents of such children were more involved than normal                 
  with education.  He said Rep. B. Davis's points were valid,                  
  and that he would look forward to the input from the                         
  governor's council, which would help address the concerns of                 
  parents, students and the administration.  He pointed out                    
  that HB 235 addressed points other than just those necessary                 
  to secure federal special education funding.  He expressed                   
  hope for an opportunity to address the other points later.                   
  CHAIR BUNDE noted that, due to technical problems, Klawock                   
  could not transmit testimony, but only listen in.                            
  Number 588                                                                   
  REP. TOOHEY asked whether the loss of the federal funds                      
  would be permanent if the state failed to make the necessary                 
  changes in its special education laws by a certain deadline.                 
  Number 600                                                                   
  MS. HOWE stated that conversations that day with a federal                   
  official indicated that the date was July 1, 1993.  "It is                   
  conceivable that a person could go beyond that, but the                      
  problem is that the federal money has a certain statute of                   
  limitations, so if we go beyond the date, then the money is                  
  gone.  So, and that's the situation New York is finding                      
  itself in right now.  We've had a conditional essentially                    
  for two years.  Under our state plan we have a new one                       
  that's due for FY95, and so we can't go beyond, you know, we                 
  had promised them actually last July that we would have this                 
  all signed and delivered for them."                                          
  TAPE 93-41, SIDE B                                                           
  Number 000                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE moved amending section 17, line 13, of HB 235,                   
  adding so that it would read, "requires a school district to                 
  provide special education, gifted, and related services                      
  available ..." etc.  He asked for objections.                                
  Number 024                                                                   
  MS. HOWE suggested an alternative wording, amending line 10                  
  by striking the words "of an exceptional child" and                          
  inserting "a child with exceptionalities" or "an exceptional                 
  child," both of which were commonly used terms that would                    
  encompass both gifted and disabled children.  She said the                   
  term special education in Alaska was already construed to                    
  mean both gifted and disabled students.                                      
  Number 030                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked whether she meant use the word                             
  "exceptionalities" instead of the word "disabilities" on                     
  line 11.                                                                     
  MS. HOWE answered yes.                                                       
  Number 035                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked whether the term was politically correct.                  
  Number 037                                                                   
  MS. HOWE answered yes, in Alaska.                                            
  Number 040                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked if the DOE would prefer such wording.                      
  MS. HOWE said it would be clearer usage and more consistent                  
  with the section.                                                            
  Number 044                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE withdrew his earlier motion, and moved instead                   
  an amendment to use the word "exceptionalities."                             
  Number 046                                                                   
  Grober) asked if the chair would entertain additional public                 
  Number 050                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said no, that public testimony had closed.  He                   
  then restated the motion and asked for discussion or                         
  objections to it.                                                            
  Number 061                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG asked Chair Bunde to repeat his motion.                          
  CHAIR BUNDE repeated his motion.                                             
  REP. OLBERG objected to the motion.                                          
  CHAIR BUNDE invited him to speak to the motion.                              
  REP. OLBERG declined.                                                        
  CHAIR BUNDE called for a voice vote on the motion, and heard                 
  no nays.                                                                     
  REP. OLBERG noted that a roll call vote was more usual.                      
  CHAIR BUNDE agreed to a roll call vote, but none was taken.                  
  Number 086                                                                   
  REP. B. DAVIS asked if the term "exceptionalities" were                      
  defined in statute, and said the objection might change if                   
  the term were defined.                                                       
  CHAIR BUNDE asked Ms. Howe for a definition of the term                      
  Number 097                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG asked if the motion meant that the legislature                   
  was mandating home instructional opportunities for any                       
  exceptional child, whether disabled, gifted or whatever.                     
  CHAIR BUNDE said he understood that was a proper reading; it                 
  currently applied to all special education children, and the                 
  motion would allow the inclusion of gifted children.  He                     
  said he understood Rep. Olberg's reservation.                                
  Number 111                                                                   
  MS. HOWE read a definition of the term "exceptional                          
  children" found on page 6, line 6, paragraph (3).  She                       
  suggested that the motion be amended to follow the wording                   
  in that paragraph.                                                           
  CHAIR BUNDE agreed that "exceptionalities" was an obtuse                     
  word.  He asked Rep. Olberg if the change clarified his                      
  REP. OLBERG stated, "It clarifies without satisfying,                        
  whatever that means."                                                        
  CHAIR BUNDE commented that it sounded like a new product.                    
  Number 137                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG said the committee was creating a new                            
  educational product that would stretch the education budget                  
  yet again.                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE disagreed, saying that the provision already                     
  existed in state statute.  He said the DOE wanted to take                    
  gifted education out of the special education program, an                    
  effort that would be dealt with in the discussion of HB 85,                  
  scheduled for the following week.                                            
  Number 145                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG asked whether the particular statute did or did                  
  not address gifted children at that time.                                    
  CHAIR BUNDE said that gifted student programs were, at that                  
  time, funded through special education programs.                             
  Number 150                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG asked whether HB 235 was an effort to limit home                 
  instruction to children with disabilities.                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE responded, "To exceptional children."                            
  REP. OLBERG clarified, "No, I mean, no, it reads                             
  CHAIR BUNDE said, "As it was originally worded it would not                  
  include gifted children.  My understanding of the statute,                   
  as it was being crafted, it was to include gifted children.                  
  As you may have noticed, there's a good bit of concern about                 
  separating gifted children out from special ed."                             
  Number 159                                                                   
  REP. OLBERG stated, "I think we've gone full circle here, so                 
  let me try one more time.  If this did not exist, would                      
  gifted children be entitled to home instruction?"                            
  CHAIR BUNDE replied, "Yes."                                                  
  REP. OLBERG said, "This then came along and eliminated the                   
  gifted children and limited it to disabled children."                        
  CHAIR BUNDE responded, "That's correct."                                     
  REP. OLBERG stated, "And we're going to go back to where we                  
  started from, even though that might not have been a good                    
  place to be."                                                                
  Number 165                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said, "Yes, we will discuss that issue in more                   
  detail in HB 85."                                                            
  REP. OLBERG stated, "Thank you."                                             
  Number 173                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY said the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)                    
  did not deal with gifted people, but with disabled people.                   
  He said he was having difficulty reconciling a bill that                     
  dealt with gifted students with the ADA.  He said the                        
  purpose of the statute, supposedly, was to remain in                         
  compliance with federal law, which he said it might do, but                  
  only after going through a lot of extraneous information.                    
  CHAIR BUNDE said he had asked that the bill be written to                    
  reflect current state policies, and later, when the                          
  committee got to HB 85, it could then separate funding for                   
  special education students and gifted students, which would                  
  then establish a new state policy to supercede the current                   
  state policy.                                                                
  Number 191                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY commented that the motivation behind HB 235 was                   
  the ADA.                                                                     
  CHAIR BUNDE disagreed, saying HB 235 dealt only with federal                 
  funding of special education, not with the ADA.                              
  Number 197                                                                   
  REP. VEZEY said he thought that the purpose behind HB 235                    
  was to have the state remain in compliance with the ADA.  He                 
  said it was possible they were talking about two different                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said that was correct; they were speaking of two                 
  different acts.                                                              
  REP. OLBERG said that the federal law with which the state                   
  was attempting to remain in compliance with through HB 235                   
  was the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.  He                     
  commented that, "We're trying to slice our interest groups                   
  into ever smaller pieces."                                                   
  Number 206                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said he wanted to try again to achieve the                       
  amendment to page 10, line 5, which would read:  "If a                       
  parent with an exceptional child enrolls the child ...";                     
  striking the words "with" and "disabilities."                                
  REP. TOOHEY contested the wording.                                           
  CHAIR BUNDE explained that she had forgotten an earlier                      
  REP. TOOHEY said she stood corrected.                                        
  REP. OLBERG objected to the motion.                                          
  CHAIR BUNDE invited him to speak to his objection.                           
  REP. OLBERG declined.                                                        
  CHAIR BUNDE called for a roll call vote on the amendment to                  
  amend line 10 to read, "If a parent of an exceptional child                  
  enrolls the child ... "  The amendment deleted the words                     
  "with disabilities," he said.  Those voting yea were Reps.                   
  G. Davis, Vezey, B. Davis, Toohey and Bunde.  Those voting                   
  nay were Reps. Kott and Olberg.  The MOTION PASSED 5-2.                      
  Number 243                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE moved passage of HB 235 with individual                          
  REP. B. DAVIS objected, saying she supported the changes                     
  necessary for the DOE to come into compliance with federal                   
  laws, but she believed the House Finance Committee would not                 
  have the time to address the issues that should have been                    
  addressed in the HESS Committee.  She said it was not a                      
  money issue.  She opposed passage from the committee, saying                 
  that the bill could have had at least one additional hearing                 
  before the HESS Committee to address some elements of the                    
  bill to make it even better and more acceptable to parents                   
  as well as administrators.                                                   
  Number 256                                                                   
  REP. KOTT objected, saying his reasons were similar to those                 
  of Rep. B. Davis.  He said much of the testimony represented                 
  disagreement on several issues, and it would be prudent to                   
  hold the bill over for a day or so to resolve some of the                    
  CHAIR BUNDE called for a brief at-ease before the vote, at                   
  4:09 p.m.  He called the meeting back to order at 4:11 p.m.                  
  and repeated the motion to pass HB 235 from the HESS                         
  Committee with individual recommendations.  Those voting yea                 
  were Reps. Vezey, Kott, Brice, Toohey, Bunde and G. Davis.                   
  Those voting nay were Reps. Olberg and B. Davis.  The MOTION                 
  PASSED 6-2.                                                                  
  CHAIR BUNDE then brought HB 210 to the table.                                
  HB 210 - HIRING OF SCHOOL CHIEF ADMINISTRATORS                               
  Number 282                                                                   
  REP. TERRY MARTIN spoke as PRIME SPONSOR of HB 210.  He said                 
  the major purpose of the bill was to allow school districts                  
  more flexibility in using their money, not to take it away.                  
  He noted that, at statehood, most of Alaska's laws                           
  concerning education were modeled after California laws, and                 
  at that time, the state had a few large school districts and                 
  many smaller Bureau of Indian Affairs and military schools.                  
  He noted the movement toward local autonomy and single-site                  
  school districts over the years, but said the state did not                  
  realize the high administrative cost of such districts.  He                  
  said the law requiring a superintendent at each school                       
  district was antiquated and expensive and needed to be                       
  REP. MARTIN noted the St. Mary's school district, which was                  
  attempting to contract out administrative services to get                    
  out from under the high cost of on-site administration.  He                  
  said districts in the Aleutian Islands got a special waiver                  
  allowing them to share a superintendent.  He stated his bill                 
  required school districts to have at least 500 students, or                  
  1,000 under an amendment he said he planned to offer, before                 
  they would be able to hire a superintendent.  He said                        
  smaller districts could hire one superintendent in common.                   
  He noted the Yupiit school district, consisting of three                     
  villages, which now spends 65 percent of its budget for                      
  administrative costs.  He said he receives many calls                        
  supporting individual superintendents, but single-site                       
  school districts are a problem because they cannot spread                    
  out their costs over many different schools.                                 
  Number 355                                                                   
  REP. MARTIN continued, referring to legislative efforts in                   
  1992 to make the Anchorage School District's superintendent                  
  reveal his contract to the public.  When the contract was                    
  made public, it astounded the public with its generous                       
  provisions for the superintendent and his family.  He                        
  encouraged the HESS Committee to use its powers of subpoena                  
  to make public the contracts for more school superintendents                 
  and demonstrate how their ability to negotiate high pay and                  
  benefits was impeding districts' ability to pay for                          
  REP. MARTIN noted one small district in Southeast Alaska                     
  that had among the lowest average teacher salaries in the                    
  state, but also the highest superintendent's salary.  He                     
  said the state had an interest in seeing that state                          
  education funds went to serve children, not administrators.                  
  He said 17 of the state's 54 school districts are in                         
  Southeast Alaska, which has 11 percent of state enrollment.                  
  He asked why a single island needed four different school                    
  districts.  He said Klawock was seven miles from Craig, and                  
  asked why the two districts could not share a                                
  superintendent.  He said HB 210 would eliminate mandatory                    
  single-site superintendents and allow more flexibility.  He                  
  stated the bill would cost the state no money.                               
  Number 386                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE referred to one superintendent whose contract                    
  included payment of expenses for an airplane.                                
  Number 394                                                                   
  REP. JERRY MACKIE testified against HB 210 as the                            
  representative of a district that includes many single-site                  
  school districts.  He said the bill was incredibly                           
  arbitrary.  He said the bill would apply to 40 of the                        
  state's 54 districts, and to all 12 of the school districts                  
  in his district.  He stated he wanted a thorough study of                    
  the bill's effects before passage.                                           
  Number 400                                                                   
  REP. MACKIE displayed maps of Southeast Alaska to                            
  demonstrate to committee members how school districts are                    
  scattered around a large area in communities that have                       
  little in common culturally.  Before any change in the                       
  educational delivery system, he recommended a thorough study                 
  taking into account each district's individual nature,                       
  geographical location, composition of students, and funding                  
  effects of any organizational plan.  He said the bill                        
  attacks non-urban school districts for only one factor,                      
  average daily membership.                                                    
  Number 420                                                                   
  REP. MACKIE said he did not want to see problems fixed                       
  without first identifying the problems.  He commented there                  
  might be some cases in which there might be a possibility of                 
  consolidation of some services to save money, but mandating                  
  the elimination of superintendents for single-site school                    
  districts was inconceivable.  He stated for the record that                  
  HB 210 was a bad bill.  He said school districts needed                      
  someone in charge and the current system was good, and it                    
  needed some improvements.  He said there was a need to cut                   
  spending, and some districts would have to do their part.                    
  Number 444                                                                   
  REP. TOOHEY disputed Rep. Mackie's assertion that Southeast                  
  Alaska communities were all unique enough to warrant their                   
  own different schools, saying that the Girdwood, Mountain                    
  View and Turnagain areas of Anchorage were different, but                    
  each was served adequately under a single Anchorage School                   
  District.  She said the state needed to control its                          
  education expenses, not by cutting teacher salaries.  She                    
  said that while no one liked change, it had to happen, and a                 
  school serving 200 children did not deserve its own                          
  superintendent at $82,000 per year.                                          
  Number 450                                                                   
  REP. MACKIE commented, "That may be fine if it doesn't                       
  affect your district, but lately we're dealing with a lot of                 
  things that affect my district, and I take exception to                      
  REP. TOOHEY said she understood, but she asked Rep. Mackie                   
  how he could justify having four different schools on Prince                 
  of Wales Island, each served by its own superintendent.                      
  Number 458                                                                   
  REP. MACKIE answered that there were four different school                   
  districts on the island, and each needed its own                             
  REP. BRICE asked Rep. Mackie how school districts would hire                 
  and fire superintendents if more than one community were                     
  served by a single school district.  He asked how school                     
  boards would function, and how community input would be                      
  Number 474                                                                   
  REP. MACKIE answered that numbers taken out of context can                   
  lie.  He said he wished he had more time to refute Rep.                      
  Martin's arguments.  He expressed for the record his                         
  personal feeling, on behalf of those he represented, that                    
  HB 210 was bad legislation, and arbitrary, and that there                    
  was life outside of other areas.                                             
  REP. MACKIE said, "These are real people, real children,                     
  real communities, with their own ideas, their own                            
  traditional history, and background in a lot of things.  And                 
  anytime you say, `Oh, yeah, well the numbers say these                       
  superintendents are making too much money, let's stick 'em                   
  all together and we can save 'em all a bunch of money,' I                    
  assure there's a lot of things that, you know, we could take                 
  a look at numbers throughout all the state government and                    
  make that kind of a case, without any regard whatsoever for                  
  how the background and history and how the people in these                   
  communities feel."                                                           
  Number 480                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said Rep. Mackie had a right, and indeed an                      
  obligation, to state his case.  He said that he viewed                       
  HB 210 as a major change in the educational system, and that                 
  the bill was not on a fast track and would be discussed in                   
  detail.  He said the committee would welcome Rep. Mackie's                   
  help in remaining at the meeting for a thorough discussion                   
  of the issues.                                                               
  REP. MACKIE thanked Chair Bunde and said he hoped that                       
  superintendents could testify on HB 210 to explain their                     
  sides of the issue.                                                          
  CHAIR BUNDE assured Rep. Bunde the bill would have a                         
  thorough investigation.                                                      
  REP. B. DAVIS asked if the committee planned to take action                  
  on HB 210.                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said the committee would continue to discuss the                 
  REP. B. DAVIS said HB 210 addressed important issues that                    
  should be dealt with by a different bill.  She said                          
  committees have studied the problems of single-site school                   
  districts.  She noted the $100,000 that had been                             
  appropriated to encourage such districts to find ways to                     
  cooperate voluntarily and said the committee should wait for                 
  the report.  She stated that the committee should take a                     
  long time during the interim to deal with the changes that                   
  everyone agreed needed to be made.                                           
  Number 524                                                                   
  SCHOOL DISTRICT, testified in Juneau in opposition to                        
  HB 210.  He said that since his district had been the                        
  subject of bills, debates, and Anchorage Times editorials,                   
  he decided to testify on HB 210.  He said he had been with                   
  the district 19 years, 12 of them as superintendent, during                  
  which time he had seen many changes in the district, of                      
  which he was not frightened.  He said he understood the need                 
  to reduce state spending.  He displayed a map showing the                    
  boundaries of his district, encompassing many islands, which                 
  included 17 schools, eight of them not on Prince of Wales                    
  Island.  He disputed facts asserted in the editorial                         
  concerning the district's use of an airplane.  He said the                   
  district was not laying off English teachers.  He asked                      
  committee members, if HB 210 passed, who would perform the                   
  duties that superintendents are trained and certified by the                 
  state to perform.  He urged the legislature to perform a                     
  comprehensive study before making a misinformed decision on                  
  school district consolidation.                                               
  Number 562                                                                   
  REP. TOOHEY asked if his district had 418 students.                          
  MR. WEINSTEIN said the district served 437 students, at 17                   
  schools, with 418 in 1992.  He said the student body                         
  population had reached 600 students in some years.                           
  REP. TOOHEY asked how many school buildings the district had                 
  and inquired as to their construction.                                       
  MR. WEINSTEIN answered that some of the buildings were old                   
  trailers or converted cook houses, and there were schools in                 
  17 separate communities.                                                     
  TAPE 93-42, SIDE A                                                           
  Number 000                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked how many districts would be on Prince of                   
  Wales Island if there were a 1,000 student minimum.                          
  Number 005                                                                   
  MR. WEINSTEIN said he did not know the exact enrollments of                  
  all the single-site school districts.  He said there were                    
  three regional school districts in Southeast Alaska.                         
  CHAIR BUNDE said it was conceivable that all of the island's                 
  districts could be folded into a single district, and all of                 
  southern Southeast Alaska would be folded into a single                      
  REP. VEZEY offered the information that Craig and Klawock                    
  had about 160 or 190 students each, and Hydaburg had about                   
  150 students, making a total of about 520 students.                          
  Number 030                                                                   
  REP. G. DAVIS asked Mr. Weinstein whether his district had a                 
  boarding program.                                                            
  MR. WEINSTEIN said there were several, including the Mt.                     
  Edgecumbe boarding high school in Sitka.  He said there were                 
  programs allowing students from smaller communities to                       
  attend school in Juneau, Sitka, Ketchikan, Petersburg and                    
  Wrangell, in which boarding families are paid a small fee to                 
  cover the student's living expenses.  He said his district                   
  participated on a limited basis in that program.                             
  Number 048                                                                   
  DISTRICT, testified via teleconference from Craig in                         
  opposition to HB 210.  He said he wanted to retain local                     
  accountability of school districts to their local boards of                  
  education and communities.  He said Craig had 356 students,                  
  not 190.  He stated his duties far exceed those of the                       
  superintendent of the Anchorage School District, but are                     
  typical of a small district superintendent's duties.  They                   
  include teaching senior English, and managing curriculum                     
  development, special education, staff development, finance,                  
  and program development.  He said cutting the                                
  superintendent's job in Craig would not necessarily save                     
  money, as the district would have to hire an additional site                 
  manager or principle.                                                        
  Number 093                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE asked a clarifying question about whether HB 210                 
  would require Craig schools to have two principals.  He                      
  asked the salary differential between a principal and a                      
  MR. HOLST said that a principle was paid about $12,000 per                   
  year less than a superintendent.                                             
  Number 110                                                                   
  SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS, testified in Juneau in opposition to                  
  HB 210.  He said that as long as there were separate school                  
  districts, there had to be chief administrators for those                    
  districts.  He remarked it was not a single-site district                    
  issue.  He listed the different responsibilities of rural                    
  school superintendents:  recruiter and supervisor of staff,                  
  budget officer, bus transportation director, special                         
  education director, vocational education administrator,                      
  mandated reporting for DOE, report cards, PL874, enrollment,                 
  reports, audit reports, mandated in-services, physical plant                 
  maintenance, federal programs director, implementation of                    
  strategic plan, conduct long-range plans, curriculum                         
  supervisor, community relations, implementation of school                    
  board policy, classroom teaching, supervision of student                     
  activity, coaching, supervising capitol projects,                            
  supervising summer programs, and meet with parent advisory                   
  committees.  He said it takes a well-trained professional                    
  educator to fulfill all these responsibilities.  He stated                   
  he wanted to discuss the issue further.                                      
  Number 145                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE commented that he might dispute whether it took                  
  a trained professional educator to fulfill those duties.  He                 
  noted that the North Slope Borough (NSBSD), with 2,000                       
  students, had a superintendent to fulfill those functions.                   
  MR. MCPHETRES interrupted to say that the NSBSD                              
  superintendent had supervisors, directors and assistant                      
  superintendents to help carry out those responsibilities.                    
  He said he knew, as he had been superintendent of the                        
  district for 10 years.                                                       
  CHAIR BUNDE asked at what point a district needed an                         
  assistant superintendent.  He said the Anchorage School                      
  District had lots of officials to help the superintendent.                   
  MR. MCPHETRES answered that it depended on the mandated                      
  duties for the superintendent, which made it quite a                         
  subjective question.                                                         
  CHAIR BUNDE said he assumed that each district had the                       
  functions that Mr. McPhetres had earlier listed.                             
  Number 168                                                                   
  MR. MCPHETRES said that a superintendent would need an                       
  assistant in a district with 1,000 students, and a lone                      
  superintendent would be working at his capacity in a                         
  district with 500 students.                                                  
  Number 176                                                                   
  EDUCATION, testified in Juneau in favor of HB 210.  He read                  
  a statement, which is on file in the committee room.  In                     
  summary, the statement said that the DOE believed each                       
  school district, regardless of size, needed a superintendent                 
  or equivalent either directly or in cooperation with another                 
  district, such as was being accomplished in the Aleutian                     
  Region and Unalaska.  He said HB 210 would affect 29 of                      
  Alaska's 54 school districts, and there would be no savings                  
  to the state because the foundation formula is based on                      
  students not employees.  There is no guarantee money saved                   
  on superintendent's salary would not be spent on other                       
  administrative costs.                                                        
  CHAIR BUNDE asked whether the DOE's official position was to                 
  oppose HB 210 and support single-site school districts.                      
  MR. STEPHAN stated, "As it stands, yes."                                     
  Number 200                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said he believed in the need for                                 
  superintendents, and while the bill supported the role of                    
  superintendents, the committee was deciding how many                         
  superintendents the state should support.  He announced the                  
  committee would not get to HB 174 during that day's meeting                  
  and apologized to those who had come to the meeting to                       
  testify on HB 174.  He said the committee would continue its                 
  discussion of HB 210, though it was likely not to finish                     
  discussing it, either.  He asked Rep. Martin to make a                       
  summary statement, addressing some of the questions raised                   
  about his bill.                                                              
  Number 219                                                                   
  REP. MARTIN said that HB 210 was not meant to save money,                    
  and would not.  But, he stated, it is clear more money is                    
  going for administrators, not children.  He said he wanted                   
  HB 210 and HB 174 considered separately, noting that if the                  
  committee dealt with the issue of the number of                              
  superintendents this year, it could maximize the money used.                 
  He said school boards would not be straddled with                            
  superintendents.  He noted that only two school districts                    
  had taken up the legislature's offer of $100,000 to try to                   
  learn to cooperate and consolidate with each other, and                      
  HB 210 would force districts to share superintendents.                       
  REP. MARTIN described the Yupiit school districts, which                     
  wanted to reduce its 65 percent administrative costs; and                    
  another district which he said was happy to have                             
  consolidated.  He said the high level of state funding even                  
  for school districts would encourage the growth of more                      
  smaller districts.  He noted that the legislature has made                   
  several efforts to address possible consolidation of school                  
  districts, but has been assailed with calls to go slowly.                    
  He said the issue deserved discussion but could not be                       
  delayed indefinitely.  He stated he could not blame any                      
  member of the legislature from crying foul when                              
  consolidation cost his district money.                                       
  REP. MARTIN again encouraged the committee to obtain copies                  
  of superintendent contracts around the state, which might                    
  reveal that the educational funding system was being                         
  misused.  He encouraged passage of HB 210.  He said DOE                      
  statistics showed the true enrollment in state districts,                    
  including the four school districts on Prince of Wales                       
  Island, handle 1,093 children.                                               
  Number 280                                                                   
  CHAIR BUNDE said he would like to hold HB 210 until                          
  Thursday, April 1, 1993, and consider HB 174 on Tuesday,                     
  March 30, 1993, for discussion.                                              
  REP. MARTIN offered information on how much revenue was                      
  available to small school districts, including information                   
  that showed that some small communities were very rich.                      
  CHAIR BUNDE said there was still much work to be done and                    
  noted that the session was in its 72nd day.  He ADJOURNED                    
  the meeting at 4:55 p.m.                                                     

Document Name Date/Time Subjects