Legislature(1999 - 2000)
02/29/2000 03:46 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL
SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
February 29, 2000
3:46 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Fred Dyson, Chairman
Representative Jim Whitaker
Representative Joe Green
Representative Carl Morgan
Representative Tom Brice
Representative Allen Kemplen
Representative John Coghill
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 98
"An Act relating to contracts for the provision of state public
assistance to certain recipients in the state; providing for
regional public assistance plans and programs in the state;
relating to grants for Alaska tribal family assistance programs;
and providing for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 98(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 392
"An Act relating to continuances for temporary placement hearings
that follow emergency custody of a minor; and amending Rule 10,
Alaska Child in Need of Aid Rules."
- MOVED CSHB 392(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 269
"An Act related to the videotaping of interviews with children
who are alleged to have been abused or neglected."
- HEARD AND HELD; ASSIGNED TO SUBCOMMITTEE
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 12
Relating to declaring March 2000 as Sobriety Awareness Month.
- MOVED SCR 12 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 256
"An Act relating to reports of suspected child abuse or neglect,
and requiring that, as part of the investigation of the reports
of suspected child abuse or neglect, all official interviews with
children who are alleged to have been abused or neglected be
recorded."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 98
SHORT TITLE: PUB.ASSISTANCE:PROGRAMS/GRANTS/CONTRACTS
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
2/19/99 253 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
2/19/99 253 (H) CRA, HES, FIN
2/19/99 254 (H) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DHSS)
2/19/99 254 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
3/09/99 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
3/09/99 (H) <BILL POSTPONED TO 3/16>
3/16/99 (H) CRA AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 124
3/16/99 (H) MOVED CSHB 98(CRA) OUT OF COMMITTEE
3/16/99 (H) MINUTE(CRA)
3/16/99 469 (H) CRA RPT CS(CRA) NT 6DP
3/16/99 470 (H) DP: JOULE, HALCRO, HARRIS, MORGAN,
3/16/99 470 (H) KOOKESH, DYSON
3/16/99 470 (H) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DHSS) 2/19/99
3/27/99 (H) HES AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 106
3/27/99 (H) <BILL CANCELED>
2/17/00 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
2/17/00 (H) Heard & Held
2/17/00 (H) MINUTE(HES)
2/29/00 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 392
SHORT TITLE: CONTINUANCES OF CINA HEARINGS
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
2/16/00 2216 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
2/16/00 2216 (H) HES, JUD
2/29/00 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 269
SHORT TITLE: VIDEOTAPING OF INTERVIEWS WITH CHILDREN
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
1/10/00 1890 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/7/00
1/10/00 1890 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
1/10/00 1890 (H) HES, JUD, FIN
1/10/00 1890 (H) REFERRED TO HES
2/25/00 2315 (H) COSPONSOR(S): JAMES
2/29/00 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: SCR 12
SHORT TITLE: SOBRIETY AWARENESS MONTH
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
1/28/00 2108 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
1/28/00 2109 (S) HES
1/31/00 2129 (S) COSPONSOR(S): TAYLOR
2/09/00 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
2/09/00 (S) Moved Out of Committee
2/09/00 (S) MINUTE(HES)
2/10/00 (S) RLS AT 11:45 AM FAHRENKAMP 203
2/10/00 (S) MINUTE(RLS)
2/10/00 2256 (S) HES RPT 4DP
2/10/00 2256 (S) DP: MILLER, WILKEN, PEARCE, PETE
KELLY
2/10/00 2256 (S) ZERO FISCAL NOTE (S.HES)
2/15/00 2302 (S) RLS TO CALENDAR 02/15/00
2/15/00 2306 (S) READ THE SECOND TIME
2/15/00 2306 (S) PASSED Y11 N- E7 A2 SCR12
2/15/00 2308 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
2/18/00 2232 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
2/18/00 2232 (H) HES
2/29/00 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
SCOTT CALDER
PO Box 75011
Fairbanks, Alaska 99707
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 98 and on HB 269.
DIANE WENDLANDT, Assistant Attorney General
Collections and Support
Civil Division (Anchorage)
Department of Law
1031 West Fourth Avenue, Suite 200
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified briefly on HB 98.
BARBARA MIKLOS, Director
Central Office
Child Support Enforcement Division
Department of Revenue
550 West Seventh Avenue, Suite 310
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 98 and answered
questions.
JIM NORDLUND, Director
Central Office
Division of Public Assistance
Department of Health & Social Services
PO Box 110640
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 98 and answered
questions.
KRISTEN BOMENGEN, Assistant Attorney General
Human Services Section
Civil Division (Juneau)
Department of Law
PO Box 110300
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 98.
JODI OLMSTEAD
PO Box 56853
North Pole, Alaska 99705
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 98 and HB 269.
LORI BACKES, Staff
for Representative Jim Whitaker
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 13
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Explained changes in CSHB 392.
GLADYS LANGDON, Children Services Manager
Southcentral Region
Family Services
Division of Family & Youth Services (DFYS)
Department of Health & Social Services (DHSS)
550 West 8th Avenue, Suite 304
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 392 and on HB
269.
ELMER LINDSTROM, Special Assistant
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Health & Social Services
PO Box 110601
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 392.
DOUG WOOLIVER, Administrative Attorney
Administrative Staff
Office of the Administrative Director
Alaska Court System
820 West Fourth Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 392.
MARCI SCHMIDT
2040 Fishhook
Wasilla, Alaska 99654
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 392 and on HB
269.
CLYDE LORENZ
PO Box 73114
Fairbanks, Alaska 99707
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 392 and on HB
269.
SARAH SHORT
5535 North Street
Anchorage, Alaska 99518
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 392 and HB 269.
BLAIR McCUNE, Deputy Director
Public Defender Agency
Department of Administration
900 West Fifth Avenue, Suite 200
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 392.
REPRESENTATIVE GENE THERRIAULT
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 511
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 269.
CHRIS STOCKARD, Captain
Division of Alaska State Troopers
Department of Public Safety
PO Box 111200
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions on HB 269.
SENATOR JERRY WARD
Alaska State Legislature
Capitol Building, Room 423
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented SCR 12.
PAM WATTS, Director
Governor's Advisory Board on Alcoholism & Drug Abuse
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Health & Social Services
PO Box 110608
Juneau, Alaska 99811
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SCR 12.
ACTION NARRATIVE
[The minutes for the portion of the hearing on the Association of
Alaska School Boards are found in the 3:06 p.m. cover sheet for
the same date.]
TAPE 00-24, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIRMAN FRED DYSON reconvened the House Health, Education and
Social Services Standing Committee at 3:46 p.m. Members present
were Representatives Dyson, Whitaker, Morgan, Brice, Kemplen and
Coghill. Representative Green arrived later.
HB 98 - PUB.ASSISTANCE:PROGRAMS/GRANTS/CONTRACTS
Number 0019
CHAIRMAN DYSON announced the next order of business as House Bill
No. 98, "An Act relating to contracts for the provision of state
public assistance to certain recipients in the state; providing
for regional public assistance plans and programs in the state;
relating to grants for Alaska tribal family assistance programs;
and providing for an effective date."
CHAIRMAN DYSON announced the committee would hear public
testimony on HB 98.
Number 0159
SCOTT CALDER testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. He
said this bill is a good idea because it increases the local and
regional control and administration of a program. He still isn't
clear on some questions from the last hearing on dual assistance
in rural/urban setting. He expressed support for HB 98.
Number 0254
DIANE WENDLANDT, Assistant Attorney General, Collections and
Support, Civil Division (Anchorage), Department of Law, testified
via teleconference from Anchorage. She represents the Child
Support Enforcement Division (CSED) and understands CSED supports
this bill. She was available for any questions on any legal
issues relating to child support.
Number 0300
BARBARA MIKLOS, Director, Central Office, Child Support
Enforcement Division, Department of Revenue, testified via
teleconference from Anchorage. She supports this bill and is
available for questions.
Number 0383
JIM NORDLUND, Director, Central Office, Division of Public
Assistance, Department of Health & Social Services (DHSS), came
forward to testify. He mentioned that there is a proposed
committee substitute (CS) that adopts the long child support
amendment into the bill.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if there was any objection to withdrawing
the amendments from the last hearing and adopting the proposed CS
for HB 98, version 1-GH1011\G, Lauterbach, 2/18/00, as a work
draft.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE objected for purposes of discussion. He
asked for a rundown of the differences between version G and the
last version.
Number 0383
MR. NORDLUND responded that basically version G incorporates the
lengthy child support amendment into the bill.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Ms. Miklos to explain what the amendments do
for HB 98.
MS. MIKLOS explained the CSED collects child support on behalf of
public assistance cases. Under the regional Native assistance
program, the regional corporations will be providing public
assistance services. The amendments explain what CSED will do
with the child support. Prior to the amendments, that was not
addressed in the legislation. The CSED has been working with the
Division of Public Assistance to get language that would make it
clear.
MS. MIKLOS explained that the CSED will collect the child support
on behalf of the Native corporations; while someone is on the
regional Native assistance program, the CSED will give that child
support money to the regional corporation. These changes are
addressed beginning on page 2, Section 2, lines 27-28, and
elsewhere through the proposed CS, where the words, "or an Alaska
Native family assistance program" were added. Adding that phrase
gives the CSED the ability to give the money to the Native family
assistance program. She pointed out each section where that
phrase occurs. She also noted come clarifying language on page
5, Section 13.
MR. NORDLUND noted additional language was changed in the
proposed CS not related to child support on page 13, line 21. He
asked Kristen Bomengen to speak to that change.
Number 0920
KRISTEN BOMENGEN, Assistant Attorney General, Human Services
Section, Civil Division (Juneau), Department of Law, came
forward. She said the language on page 13, line 21 of the
proposed CS, clarifies that the purpose of Sec. 47.27.072 is
strictly to apply to AS 47.27.005(b). The previous language that
introduced it may have been too broad, perhaps extending it to
other parts of the chapter that were not intended.
MR. NORDLUND pointed out the title was changed to reflect the
additions to the bill dealing with child support.
Number 1020
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN wondered which choice was made for use of
the phrase "fair and equitable," which was raised in a memorandum
from Terri Lauterbach [the bill drafter].
MR. NORDLUND answered that the choice was to leave the bill as it
came to the committee. The issue is that the entire assignment
of the child support will go to the Native corporation. When the
division makes grants to the Native corporations, it will reduce
the grant amount by what has been approximated as the state's
share of its collection. He still feels that the language "fair
and equitable" gives enough flexibility to address that. He
emphasized that they have every intention of recovering the
state's share of the child support collections by an appropriate
reduction in the grant amount.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Mr. Nordlund what he meant by the "state's
share."
Number 1127
MR. NORDLUND explained that the way child support collections
interplayed with public assistance payments in the past was that
half was paid by the federal government and half was paid by the
state. The person signing up for public assistance agreed to
assign any child support collections made on his/her behalf to
pay back the state and federal government for "advancing them a
public assistance payment." That payback is calculated based on
the share of the funding between the state and federal
government. The amount of money has changed over time, but
essentially 50 percent of the money would go to the state, and 50
percent would go to the federal government. In this case,
however, the federal government is not asking for its share of
the child support collections; the Native organizations are
allowed to retain the federal share. The state will recover its
share through a reduction in the grant amount.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked why the money should go to the Native
corporation and not the state.
MR. NORDLUND said he believes it was the intent of the federal
government to allow those child support collections to be
retained by the Native organization, and the state will accede to
that desire.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if the Native organization is going to make
money.
Number 1280
JODI OLMSTEAD testified via teleconference from North Pole and
said she had the answer to that question. She was looking at the
"Federal Incentives Earned on Collections from Child Support
Enforcement" and using the 1993 figure; the AFDC [Aid to Families
with Dependent Children] amount collected was $15 million. The
incentive earned was $1.18 million. The "non-AFDC," at 115
percent, times the AFDC incentive earned was $1.171 million,
which was a $2.190 million bonus or incentive for the collections
done - for some but not all.
Number 1335
MR. NORDLUND said the answer to Chairman Dyson's question was
there is a change in the approach that the federal government is
taking towards the administration of a Native-run TANF [Temporary
Assistance to Needy Families] in that the federal government does
not consider a participant in a Native-run program as a
participant in the TANF program. Therefore, all the attachments
regarding child support don't attach to the participants in that
program; therefore, the federal government doesn't really care
what happens to the child support collections. He further
explained that traditionally those funds have gone to the federal
government. One of the benefits of encouraging the Native
organizations to run this program would be for them to keep this
relatively small amount of money (compared to the overall cost of
the program) that is collected.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if he can infer that the state is not going
to get reimbursed from obligor parents for much of the state or
federal money given to the Native families.
MR. NORDLUND indicated that the state will be reimbursed by the
Native organization by reducing a fair and equitable grant
amount.
Number 1420
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if the state would only be reimbursed for
half of the CSED collection.
MR. NORDLUND said that is correct, which is essentially the
amount of money returned to the state presently by those clients,
which is not a great deal of money.
CHAIRMAN DYSON referred to previous discussion and asked about
the language in the new bill [Version G] that still has the
amount vary by region.
Number 1474
MR. NORDLUND agreed that Chairman Dyson did point out two
inconsistencies in the bill, and an amendment would be
appropriate. In Version G, the differences are found between
page 2, line 3, and page 7, line 12. He suggested an amendment:
Page 2, line 4, strike "social and economic" and insert
"varying," so it would read "accurately reflect the
varying conditions of that region;"
MR. NORDLUND explained that it would make the language consistent
between the two pages. One additional provision of this bill is
it allows the state to run slightly varying programs in different
regions. That is a good idea because it gives the state the
flexibility to do demonstration programs.
MR. NORDLUND explained another reason is if a Native program was
operating and then ceased to exist, the state might want to
retain certain parts of the Native-run program that are different
from the state program. He added that there are constraints in
statute as to how much variation there could be within the
region. It would allow the state to vary within the statute, but
through regulations to have a slightly different program from one
region to another. The programs couldn't be wildly different,
however.
CHAIRMAN DYSON indicated that is so the state couldn't
discriminate and treat one region far better than another.
MR. NORDLUND agreed that the state couldn't provide different
benefit levels because those levels are stated in statute.
Number 1673
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE withdrew his objection to adopting Version G
as the work draft; therefore, the proposed CS for HB 98, version
1-GH1011\G, Lauterbach, 2/18/00, was before the committee.
Number 1678
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked the committee if there was any objection to
striking the words "social and economic" and inserting "varying"
on page 2, line 4. There was no objection; therefore, Amendment
1 was adopted.
MR. NORDLUND suggested that the word "economic" on page 7, line
12, should be deleted. That would make it consistent with the
first amendment. It does allow for a bit broader interpretation
of regional conditions not particular to economic circumstances,
like cultural or social circumstances.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked: If the word "economic" was struck, would
there still be small allowances made for the cost of living from
one region or another?
MR. NORDLUND answered no, that was never part of the program.
Right now the benefit levels and the qualifying criteria are the
same across the state.
Number 1762
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked the committee if there was any objection to
striking the word "economic" on page 7, line 12. There was no
objection; therefore, Amendment 2 was adopted.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if CSED is going to contract its services to
the Native corporation to do the collections and those receipts
will all go to the Native nonprofit organization.
MR. NORDLUND agreed that is true.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked how CSED gets reimbursed for the cost of its
efforts.
Number 1818
MS. MIKLOS answered it would be the same if the CSED were
collecting on behalf of a private family. The CSED wouldn't be
reimbursed by the corporation. Sixty-six percent of CSED's
funding is federal funding, so it would continue to get that
level of reimbursement.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Mr. Nordlund why it should say "fair and
equitable".
MR. NORDLUND explained that in determining the grant amount, a
number of things that come into consideration. First of all,
there are constantly changing caseloads. In some regions of the
state the caseload might go up or down faster than in other
regions. That needs to be considered every year as the grant
amount is determined. In some regions there are more two-parent
families than in other parts of the state. Under state law, two-
parent families receive a benefit reduction of 50 percent in the
summer months. The region with more two-parent families will
receive less money. If that situation changed and more two-
parent families were able to go to work, the funding would be
greater. It is those kinds of situations that fluctuate size and
makeup of caseload that really have a dramatic effect on the
amount of funding necessary to run the program. It would be hard
to design a formula that would take all that into consideration.
MR. NORDLUND said the state might anticipate what the child
support collections will be and deduct them up-front and then
reconcile it at the end, or it might do a partial reduction up-
front and reconcile at the end of the year. It is in the state's
interest to make the reduction because the amount of money for
this program is a limited and static sum. Whatever funding the
state provides to the Native organization comes at the detriment,
in a sense, to the non-Native population in the state, so the
state has to make sure it is balanced and fair. The department
is not asking for additional funds for the Native-run program;
the money is coming out of what has already been appropriated.
Number 2029
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE said basically the reduction in grants to
the Native corporations is not some type of disincentive to work
with the child support collection; it is a refinancing of state
general fund dollars with money coming in from child support.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN asked: When the program is being
administered by the Native corporation, will it be the same as
the state is doing? For example, if there were two families in a
village, one Native and one non-Native, would the programs be the
same?
MR. NORDLUND answered this bill would allow the state to contract
services with the Native corporation to provide services to that
non-Native, who would have to come under the program rules of the
Native corporation. In larger villages or cities, there will be
non-Natives receiving services from the state and Natives
receiving services from the Native organization. The programs
are required under federal law to be comparable, but they can be
slightly different.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked: In a place where both the state
and the Native corporation are offering services, can an
individual choose which program to use? Can only Natives use the
Native-run program? Or can a Native use the state program?
MR. NORDLUND said the individual is not eligible for both
programs. Under the federal law that sets up for the
administration of the Native-run programs, the Native
organization defines its service area and population. Once that
service population is defined, then the federal money that used
to come to the state to serve that individual now goes to the
Native organization. The Native organization might decide to
redefine its service population, and that would affect the amount
of federal funding. The federal government wants to make sure
the federal funding follows the client, whether the client is
served by the state or the Native organization. Once that
decision is made and the federal funding is flowing to the Native
being served by the Native organization, then that person would
not have the choice of being served by the state.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked: If a Native didn't want to get
into that, could he/she sign up with the state?
MR. NORDLUND answered no. For the purposes of the temporary
assistance program, he/she would need to be served by the Native
organization.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Mr. Nordlund if the Native corporations
would be audited.
MR. NORDLUND answered yes, the Department of Health & Social
Services will be auditing the Native organizations for fiduciary
kinds of responsibilities, but the federal government will
continue to audit the programs for welfare reform requirements.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked: If a recipient of one of the programs
feels he/she is not being treated fairly, what is the appeal
process?
TAPE 00-24, SIDE B
Number 2353
MR. NORDLUND responded that the first level of appeal would be
with the Native-run program. If a satisfactory conclusion is not
reached there, an appeal can be made to the department, and
beyond that, the court.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if the legislators could act as ombudsmen on
behalf of a constituent.
MR. NORDLUND said he believes someone could appeal to the local
representative informally, and the representative could talk to
the department. He pointed out that the legislature still has
the "power of the purse" over this program. There is a separate
component for the program in the department's budget called
"Native Family Assistance Programs" where there is money to run
the program. Certainly the threat of changing that appropriation
through the normal process that the legislature uses is a hammer
that the legislature could have over the department, and that the
department, therefore, would have over the Native organization.
MS. BOMENGEN added that the individual being served by the Native
program is really in the same position as anyone who is being
served through a grantee of the state. In the circumstance of a
grantee of the DHSS, the DHSS would be contacted, and then the
department would have to deal with the grantee directly on the
issue. It would not necessarily be a matter of contacting the
grantee.
Number 2168
MS. OLMSTEAD asked if this bill will increase the CSED's
workload.
MS. MIKLOS answered that it will not affect the workload of the
CSED one way or another. She stated that there is no priority of
collecting one type of case over another.
CHAIRMAN DYSON announced that if there was no objection, the
committee would withdraw Version G and adopt Version H of HB 98
as the working document. There being no objection, the proposed
CS for HB 98, version 1-GH1011\H, Lauterbach, 2/24/00, was
adopted as a work draft. [Note: Version H incorporates the
amendments adopted in Version G.]
The committee took an at-ease from 4:45 p.m.-4:46 p.m.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE made a motion to move CSHB 98, version 1-
GH1011\H, Lauterbach, 2/24/00, out of committee with individual
recommendations and attached fiscal note.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL objected.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Whitaker, Green,
Morgan, Brice and Dyson voted in favor of moving the bill.
Representative Coghill voted against it. Representative Kemplen
was absent. Therefore, CSHB 98(HES) moved from the House Health,
Education and Social Services Standing Committee by a vote of 5-
1.
The committee took an at-ease from 4:47 p.m. to 4:49 p.m.
HB 392 - CONTINUANCES OF CINA HEARINGS
CHAIRMAN DYSON announced the next order of business as House Bill
No. 392, "An Act relating to continuances for temporary placement
hearings that follow emergency custody of a minor; and amending
Rule 10, Alaska Child in Need of Aid Rules."
Number 1937
REPRESENTATIVE JIM WHITAKER, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor,
came forward to present HB 392. He explained that this change in
the law is simple and yet meaningful. The genesis for this
legislation is concern, distress and probable near-panic in which
parents or guardians may find themselves. This minor law
accomplishes one thing: it requires that the judge presiding at
the CINA [Child in Need of Aid] hearing inform each parent or
each guardian that he/she has a right to request up to a seven-
day continuance - that he/she has a right to have time to think
and to defend himself/herself.
REPRESENTATIVE WHITAKER said hopefully, given time, the parent
will become introspective and contemplate what positive action
he/she can take to reunite the family, rather than having time to
only react angrily and negatively, which pits him/her against the
system, a reaction which only keeps the family apart. The bill
requires the judge to tell the parents/guardians that they have a
right to take enough time to think and "get their act together."
CHAIRMAN DYSON said he understands that judges can do this now
and perhaps should, and this only makes it clear in the law that
the judges are required to do it.
REPRESENTATIVE WHITAKER answered that is correct.
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN made a motion to adopt the proposed
committee substitute (CS) for HB 392, version 1-LS1224\D,
Lauterbach, 2/29/00, as a work draft. There being no objection,
Version D was before the committee.
CHAIRMAN DYSON invited the sponsor's staff to explain the
changes.
LORI BACKES, Staff for Representative Jim Whitaker, came forward
to explain the changes in the proposed CS. She explained that
all the changes came about as a result of comments received from
Blair McCune and Elmer Lindstrom. In the original bill, the
hearing was referred to as a temporary placement hearing. That
has been changed to refer to those hearings as temporary custody
hearings. The reference to "up to seven days" has been taken out
so there is not a limit, and it would be up to the presiding
judge's discretion whether it would be necessary to have a two-
day limit or an 11-day limit, so it would not be unnecessarily
restricted. On page 2, line 1 of the original bill, the
following was deleted: "the court may not grant more than one
continuance before a temporary placement hearing is held."
Number 1728
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE expressed concern that by removing that cap
of up to 7 days, it is possible that the judge could grant a
continuance up to 60 days and stop the clock on the 90-day
hearings for complete custody or for the process.
MS. BACKES indicated it is the intention that these proceedings
don't take longer than is absolutely necessary. She hasn't
received any response that it may be extended extraordinarily to
the degree suggested.
Number 1635
GLADYS LANGDON, Children Services Manager, Southcentral Region,
Family Services, Division of Family & Youth Services (DFYS),
Department of Health & Social Services (DHSS), came forward to
testify. She acknowledged support of the amended changes from
the committee. In addition to that, the department is asking
that there be one additional change to be consistent with recent
legislative and court rules, to make a distinction between
children in need of aid and delinquent minors. The department
recommends changing the word "minor" everywhere it appears in the
bill, including the title, to "child".
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if the title can be changed.
ELMER LINDSTROM, Special Assistant, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Health & Social Services, came forward to answer.
He stated that the title can be changed. He explained that a few
years ago, the juvenile and child-in-need-of-aid statutes were
one body of statutes. Subsequently, AS 47.10 became the CINA
statute and AS 47.12 became the juvenile statute, but there is
still some residual misuse of names. The department wants to
refer to "child" in AS 47.10 and to "minor" in AS 47.12.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if there was any objection to adopting a
conceptual amendment that would delete "minor" and replace it
with "child" wherever it appears in the CS. There was no
objection; therefore, the amendment was adopted.
Number 1432
MS. LANGDON stated that the department supports this bill. This
is already occurring in regions across the state.
DOUG WOOLIVER, Administrative Attorney, Administrative Staff,
Office of the Administrative Director, Alaska Court System,
responded to a question by Chairman Dyson, saying the court has
no objection to the bill.
CHAIRMAN DYSON stated that if this bill passes or not, the fact
that parents have a right to ask for a continuance ought to be
clearly stated in the brochure put out by DHSS.
MS. OLMSTEAD noted this is a wonderful change.
Number 1324
MARCI SCHMIDT testified via teleconference from the Matanuska-
Susitna Legislative Information Office. She expressed her
support for HB 392.
Number 1316
CLYDE LORENZ testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. He
expressed his satisfaction with HB 392.
Number 1309
MR. CALDER said he didn't have any objections. He suggested dual
or parallel sections to do the same for parents involved in
juvenile cases.
CHAIRMAN DYSON said Mr. Calder's point was well taken.
Number 1252
SARAH SHORT testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She
believes this is a good bill. She is concerned about protecting
the rights of parents to be able to have visitation during the
time the child is in limbo when the state has custody, but when
there hasn't been a court hearing to say whether the child is
really in need of aid.
Number 1197
BLAIR MCCUNE, Deputy Director, Public Defender Agency, Department
of Administration, testified via teleconference from Anchorage.
He expressed support for HB 392.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked if language should be added to suggest that
the judge make provision for the family to be able to visit the
child, or to direct the department to make the provision during
this continuance. Or is that a "given," and the department is
already supposed to do that?
MS. LANGDON answered that the department is already making those
arrangements.
CHAIRMAN DYSON noted that there is concern that it sometimes - or
perhaps even often - doesn't happen.
MS. LANGDON said it is already an expectation and part of the
policy that the department provides visitation for families. To
that extent, she doesn't see that there needs to be additional
orders from the court.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE made a motion to move CSHB 392, version 1-
LS1224\D, Lauterbach, 2/29/00, as amended, out of committee with
individual recommendations and the zero fiscal note. There being
no objection, CSHB 392(HES) moved from the House Health,
Education and Social Services Committee.
HB 269 - VIDEOTAPING OF INTERVIEWS WITH CHILDREN
Number 1040
CHAIRMAN DYSON announced the next order of business as House Bill
No. 269, "An Act related to the videotaping of interviews with
children who are alleged to have been abused or neglected."
Number 1021
REPRESENTATIVE GENE THERRIAULT, Alaska State Legislature,
sponsor, came forward to present HB 269. He explained that HB
269 was drafted to spark the discussion on videotaping
allegations of child abuse. He has worked on this in the past
and was not successful in advancing the idea at that time. He
said he thought it was time to try again. Shortly after making
his request, he learned that Representative Coghill was working
on a piece of legislation also. The two of them met and agreed
that these two ideas would be melded together sometime through
the committee process, and he would look forward to working on
that possibility. This bill asks for a pilot project for the
videotaping alleged abuse and would be located in Fairbanks. He
decided to go with a pilot project because a number of problems
have driven up the cost of implementing this. In order to
control the fiscal problems he had seen in the past, he thought a
pilot project was the way to go. He doesn't have any problem
with tightening up any broad language in the bill.
Number 0860
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN asked what happens to the videotapes after
the pilot project is finished.
REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT answered that the department would know
how that information is kept. That is part of the expense run
into in the past, how are the tapes kept, who has access to them
for viewing, and under what circumstances do people have access
to them. A lot of that needs to be fleshed out in the way the
pilot project would run before something is attempted statewide.
REPRESENTATIVE KEMPLEN commented that the pilot project is an
attractive concept.
Number 0793
REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT noted he is agreeable to any changes
about the timing of the pilot project.
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked if there are any other projects in the
state that come close to a videotaping effort like this.
REPRESENTATIVE THERRIAULT answered he has heard in some areas
there are setups where some videotaping is done. He is not sure
if it is on allegations of child abuse. That information may
come from the department.
Number 0673
CHRIS STOCKARD, Captain, Division of Alaska State Troopers,
Department of Public Safety (DPS), came forward to answer
questions.
CHAIRMAN DYSON said he was concerned that HB 269 might restrict
law enforcement officers. He referred to page 1, line 13, and
asked if that would restrict the troopers.
MR. STOCKARD noted that the DPS believes the potential exists. A
couple years ago there was a bill that mandated a memorandum of
agreement between the Departments of Law, Public Safety and
Health & Social Services; that established as standard operating
procedures the need to always audiotape or to videotape wherever
practical. That is done in urban locations, but rural locations
tend to be more problematic in terms of having a video set up
that is convenient to use and in a dedicated room. It is easier
in the more metropolitan areas to arrange for those facilities.
MR. STOCKARD noted that the bill appears to say that in every
case, DHSS and law enforcement both have a need to interview
kids. That is true in cases where there are allegations of in-
family abuse or neglect. It is not the case when it involves a
stranger or a babysitter or some person outside the home. In
many of those cases, although DFYS is notified of a report of
harm to a child, the troopers will do the only interviews of the
child and will proceed to the Department of Law, but there is no
reason for DFYS to be involved so long as there is no indication
that the family is any way involved. A lot of the restrictions
written around DFYS being involved in every case of abuse and
neglect of a child take DPS in at the same time. There is some
concern about some of the details on some things.
CHAIRMAN DYSON requested confirmation that if an officer is
investigating a reported crime against a child, this would not
affect DPS.
MR. STOCKARD said it says "a child alleged to have been abused or
neglected". Certainly, neglect wouldn't come in, but abuse isn't
specified by a family member. It could be another adult.
CHAIRMAN DYSON agrees it appears to be problematic.
Number 0251
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked Captain Stockard to explain an in-
town procedure.
MR. STOCKARD explained that if a report of harm comes into DPS or
DFYS, the agencies notify each other; 90 percent of the time they
are able to do a single, coordinated interview with both agencies
present. About 10 percent of the time one agency or the other
won't have anyone available to come when the interview is
scheduled. In Fairbanks, there is no permanently established
facility specifically set up for interviewing children, but
sometimes the interviews are videotaped. There is such a
facility in Palmer; a significant number of interviews are
videotaped there and this facility is available to the DFYS and
the troopers.
CHAIRMAN DYSON said they are trying to prevent the child from
having to go through repeated interviews with different people,
which can "re-victimize" the kids.
TAPE 00-25, SIDE A
Number 0010
CHAIRMAN DYSON suspended the hearing on HB 269 in order to take
up SCR 12.
SCR 12 - SOBRIETY AWARENESS MONTH
CHAIRMAN DYSON announced the next order of business as Senate
Concurrent Resolution No. 12, Relating to declaring March 2000 as
Sobriety Awareness Month.
Number 0069
SENATOR JERRY WARD, Alaska State Legislature, sponsor, came
forward to present SCR 12. He noted in the past the legislature
has honored the solution which is sobriety. The month of March
is sobriety month, and this has been done for several years. He
hopes this resolution will go forward with Mike Williams on the
Iditarod race. Mike Williams is one of the founders of the AFN
[Alaska Federation of Natives] sobriety movement.
Number 0116
REPRESENTATIVE BRICE thanked Senator Ward for his advocacy on
sobriety issues. He wondered if there would be any conflict
since there was an earlier resolution designating March as
developmental disabilities month.
CHAIRMAN DYSON answered that there is no limit on that.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL made a motion to move SCR 12 out of
committee with individual recommendations and attached fiscal
note. There being no objection, SCR 12 moved from the House
Health, Education and Social Services Committee. [The testimony
of Pam Watts was heard later this same meeting.]
HB 269 - VIDEOTAPING OF INTERVIEWS WITH CHILDREN
Number 0205
CHAIRMAN DYSON reopened the hearing on House Bill No. 269, "An
Act related to the videotaping of interviews with children who
are alleged to have been abused or neglected."
Number 0223
GLADYS LANGDON, Children Services Manager, Southcentral Region,
Family Services, Division of Family & Youth Services (DFYS),
Department of Health & Social Services (DHSS), came forward to
testify. She explained that the information obtained in the
pilot project will be used to assess whether videotaping should
be required statewide. If adequately funded, DFYS is not opposed
to the pilot as a means of ascertaining the efficacy as well as
the programmatic and fiscal costs of videotaping interviews with
children. The pilot is particularly useful because it allows for
exigent circumstance which can cause some interviews to be
necessary, because it recognizes that extraordinary circumstances
may cause equipment unavailability or failure. The pilot program
appropriately provides that failure to videotape should not
result in ability to proceed to act on information obtained.
MS. LANGDON continued that there will be a need to use two
persons in every investigation since fixed cameras and tripods
are not effective or accurate for videotaping children who
frequently move about during interview sessions. Additional
staff will need to be used for taping interviews as well as
managing, organizing, cataloging, storing, retrieving and
transcribing and copying the large number of videos that will
accumulate. To be effective, the pilot program must provide the
resources to maintain a valid control group. Sufficient
resources must be available to enable DFYS to commit a high
quality of effort to the evaluation and reporting components of
the pilot program. In order to determine the impact of the pilot
program it would need two groups for comparison. There is a
great cost in discovery for all the parties who want copies of
the videotapes.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked Ms. Langdon to explain the two
groups, for comparison.
Number 0447
MS. LANGDON explained that one group will be the children who
will be interviewed through the division and the other group will
be interviewed through the pilot program. The two groups will be
compared to see if there's really a difference between the
videotaped interviews and interviews not videotaped.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked if audio tapes are transcribed right
now or if the interview is just written by the social worker or
whoever conducted it.
MS. LANGDON replied that in situations where there is taping, it
is transcribed. In other situations, there is no transcription.
Number 0680
SARAH SHORT testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She
said everyone she works with in her community would benefit from
HB 269 and would support it. It will save costs in the long run
because more time is being spent investigating false reports of
harm where children have been coerced into making wrongful
statements. She referred to a situation in Wenatchee, Washington
where there were falsified reports of harm, coerced testimony and
children who were led in the interviews. She believes people are
going to want this program throughout the state. This will do
something to save the children, and she will help get support for
this bill.
Number 0846
SCOTT CALDER testified via teleconference from Fairbanks:
I agree with Sarah that this should be a full-time,
statewide requirement placed on the department, which
has abused its discretion repeatedly over the years,
and I think we need to look at this sensibly as a
correction of a problem with the way our government
operates to the detriment of its citizens, rather than
allowing ourselves to be lulled to sleep by the
argument that we don't really know whether its a good
idea and all we need is another three-year study to
find out whether the department's going to end up
liking it. ... I've been following this for years."
MR. CALDER mentioned the economic benefits of this bill.
Number 1049
CLYDE LORENZ testified via teleconference from Fairbanks. He
indicated he agrees that videotaping is needed immediately. He
believes the pilot project is a poor excuse to do away with it.
The parents have to be accountable, and he believes it is about
time for the DFYS and the Department of Law to be accountable.
There are so many false accusations that happen, and it is
tearing families apart.
Number 1109
MARCI SCHMIDT testified via teleconference from the Matanuska-
Susitna Legislative Information Office. She stated that she
would go with Representative Coghill's bill [HB 256] if she had
to choose. She agreed that more work needed to be done to either
combine the two bills or make the language clearer.
Number 1174
JODI OLMSTEAD testified via teleconference from North Pole. She
stated that people want accountability to families, parents,
agencies and children. By using videotaped interviews and the
transcription, everyone would be working off the same "sheet of
music" instead of having multiple interviews. She would like to
know what the checks and balances are right now for social
workers officers, children and parents to protect themselves.
She encouraged the committee to support Representative Coghill's
bill.
CHAIRMAN DYSON appointed a subcommittee of Representative
Whitaker, Coghill and Therriault to work on HB 269. [HB 269 was
heard and held.]
SCR 12 - SOBRIETY AWARENESS MONTH
CHAIRMAN DYSON returned to Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 12,
Relating to declaring March 2000 as Sobriety Awareness Month, to
add the testimony of Pam Watts.
Number 1532
PAM WATTS, Director, Governor's Advisory Board on Alcoholism &
Drug Abuse (ABADA), Office of the Commissioner, Department of
Health & Social Services, came forward to testify. She noted it
is gratifying to recognize the increased awareness on the part of
the legislature of the role that alcohol abuse and dependency
play in a wide range of tragic circumstances across the state.
Alcohol is implicated in 83 percent of child abuse and neglect
investigations; in 46 percent of all homicides in the state; and
in 60 percent in domestic violence cases. Alcohol-related
deaths in Alaska are at 11.2 percent compared to 5 percent
nationally. The Alaskan adult suicide rate is four times the
national average and a suicide rate nine times the national
average where alcohol is implicated in many of these cases.
Fifty percent of the emergency room hospital visits involve
alcohol; and 77 percent of the seriously mentally ill persons
incarcerated have co-occurring substance abuse disorders.
MS. WATTS reported in a recent Gallup Poll survey it was found
that approximately 58,000 Alaskans are alcohol-dependent or
abusers. Over 41 percent of the 58,000 are dependent. The
stretch between abuse and dependency is not a large one. That
makes 9.7 percent of Alaska's population alcohol-dependent,
compared with 4.38 percent nationally.
MS. WATTS further reported that a sober lifestyle is not
maintained in isolation for most alcohol-dependent people. It's
not just as easy as making a decision to quit. They need help.
The investments in children's programs are doomed to marginal
outcomes if the substance abuse issues of the parents aren't
addressed. Correctional facilities will continue to see high
rates of recidivism if alcohol and drug issues aren't addressed.
About 12.5 percent of the adults in Alaska are estimated to need
treatment for alcohol dependency or abuse - 0.5 percent for drug
dependency alone and another 1.2 percent for both alcohol and
drug abuse problems.
MS. WATTS noted that the ABADA appreciates the recognition that
supporting sobriety is hard work for everyone, especially the
person who is recovering, and particularly in an environment
where a lot of messages promote the opposite of a sober
lifestyle. The ABADA encourages the legislature not only to
support Sobriety Awareness Week, but to make sure that access to
treatment and aftercare services continue to be available for
people who seek help in dealing with this disease that has such
devastating effects on the residents of this state.
CHAIRMAN DYSON asked Ms. Watts if she knew the magnitude of fetal
alcohol poisoning in Alaska.
MS. WATTS indicated there are varying figures. At this point it
is extremely difficult to come up with an accurate figure because
the reporting and diagnosis of fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) is
minimal. With some recent federal dollars aimed at providing
diagnostic teams, there will a more accurate figure. [SCR 12 was
moved out of the Health, Education and Social Services Standing
Committee.]
ADJOURNMENT
Number 1734
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee meeting
was adjourned at 5:59 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|