Legislature(1993 - 1994)
02/22/1994 03:00 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 22, 1994
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. Irene Nicholia
Rep. Tom Brice
MEMBERS ABSENT
Rep. Bettye Davis (excused)
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Rep. Terry Martin
Rep. Jeannette James
Rep. Eldon Mulder
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HB 417: "An Act relating to the possession of deadly
weapons within the grounds of or on the parking
lot of preschools, elementary, junior high, and
secondary schools; and relating to school lockers
and other containers provided in a public or
private school by the school or the school
district."
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
*HB 362: "An Act establishing the crime of aiding the
nonpayment of child support."
HEARD AND HELD
*HB 429: "An Act relating to the special education service
agency."
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
HB 359: "An Act making special appropriations to the
Department of Education for construction or
upgrade of schools on military installations: and
providing for an effective date."
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
HJR 47: Relating to schools on military installations."
PASSED OUT OF COMMITTEE
(* First public hearing.)
WITNESS REGISTER
JERRY LUCKHAUPT, Attorney
Legislative Legal Counsel
Legislative Affairs Agency
130 Seward St.
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: (907) 465-2450
Position Statement: Answered legal questions on CSHB 417
MARGOT KNUTH, Assistant Attorneys General
Department of Law
P.O. Box 110300
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0300
Phone: (907) 465-4049
Position Statement: Answered legal questions on CSHB 417
MARY GAY, Director
Child Support Enforcement Division
Department of Revenue
550 W. 7th, Ste 312
Anchorage, Alaska 99501-3556
Phone: (907) 269-6800
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 362
(spoke via offnet)
COMMISSIONER MARGARET LOWE
Department of Health and Social Services
P.O. Box 110601
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0601
Phone: (907) 465-3030
Position Statement: Answered questions on HB 429
SHEILA PETERSON, Special Assistant to
Commissioner Covey
Department of Education
801 10th St., Ste. 200
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: (907) 465-2803
Position Statement: Answered questions on HB 429
DAVID MALTMAN, Executive Director
Governor's Council on Disabilities and Special Education
P.O. Box 240249
Anchorage, Alaska 99524-0249
Phone: (907) 563-5355
Position Statement: Answered questions on HB 429
(spoke via offnet)
PATRICK MADROS, Chairperson
Yukon-Koyukuk School District
P.O. Box 80210
Fairbanks, Alaska 99708
Phone: (907) 662-2515
Position Statement: Testified in opposition to HB 359
DUANE GUILEY, Director
Division of Education Finance and Support Services
Department of Education
801 W. 10th St., Suite 200
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1894
Phone: (907) 465-2891
Position Statement: Answered questions on HB 359
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 417
SHORT TITLE: POSSESSION OF FIREARMS IN SCHOOL LOCKERS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) BUNDE
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/31/94 2205 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
01/31/94 2205 (H) HES, JUDICIARY
02/17/94 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
02/17/94 (H) MINUTE(HES)
BILL: HB 362
SHORT TITLE: AIDING NONPAYMENT OF CHILD SUPPORT
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) MARTIN,B.Davis
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/11/94 2033 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
01/11/94 2033 (H) HES, JUDICIARY
01/13/94 2056 (H) COSPONSOR(S): B. DAVIS
02/22/94 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 429
SHORT TITLE: SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICE AGENCY
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) JAMES
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/02/94 2220 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
02/02/94 2220 (H) HEALTH, EDUCATION & SOCIAL
SERVICES
02/22/94 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 359
SHORT TITLE: APPROP: CONSTRUCT/UPGRADE ON-BASE SCHOOLS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) MULDER BY REQUEST OF MILITARY
SCHOOLS TASK FORCE
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/11/94 2032 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
01/11/94 2032 (H) HES, FINANCE
02/08/94 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
02/08/94 (H) MINUTE(HES)
02/22/94 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HJR 47
SHORT TITLE: FUNDS TO UPGRADE MILITARY BASE SCHOOLS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) MULDER BY REQUEST OF MILITARY
SCHOOLS TASK FORCE
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/11/94 2031 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
01/11/94 2031 (H) HES, FINANCE
02/08/94 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
02/08/94 (H) MINUTE(HES)
02/22/94 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 94-25, SIDE A
Number 000
CHAIR BUNDE called the meeting to order at 3:04 p.m., noted
members present and announced the calendar. He brought HB
417 to the table.
CHAIR BUNDE indicated that Representatives Martin, James and
Mulder were present.
HB 417 - POSSESSION OF FIREARMS IN SCHOOL LOCKERS
CHAIR BUNDE stated that after much consideration, he had
Jerry Luckhaupt from Legislative Legal Counsel draft the new
committee substitute (CS) that prescribes punishment to be a
class A misdemeanor opposed to a Class C felony. It was his
intention that the Class A misdemeanor would send the
appropriate message.
Number 165
REP. TOOHEY made a motion to adopt the CS as a working
draft.
Number 169
CHAIR BUNDE, hearing no objections, declared that the CS was
so moved. He stated that Section 1 amends AS 11.61.220 by
providing that a person commits the crime of misconduct
involving weapons in the fourth degree if the person
possesses a deadly weapon on school grounds, a parking lot,
preschool, elementary, junior high, secondary, and in some
situations, post-secondary schools. He said the violation
is a Class B demeanor.
CHAIR BUNDE then said, "Mr. Luckhaupt, I thought we moved to
Class A."
Number 202
MR. LUCKHAUPT, Attorney, Legislative Legal Counsel,
Legislative Affairs Agency, stated that the section Chair
Bunde read from was used for the original CS. He further
stated that since he had been working all day, prior to the
meeting, on the CS he did not have time to prepare a
sectional.
Number 234
CHAIR BUNDE indicated that version 8-LS1589/O (version O) of
the CS was the proposal being addressed. He asked Mr.
Luckhaupt to address CS (version O).
MR. LUCKHAUPT said that Section 1 makes possession of deadly
weapons on school grounds and school sponsored events a
Class A misdemeanor. He said it was the same language used
in AS 11.61.220 of the previous CS (version J). He
continued and said Section 2 applies an exception to peace
officers that allows them, within the performance of duty,
to possess a deadly weapon on school grounds. Section 3
repeals the language that was taken out of AS 11.61.220
regarding the possession of a firearm on school grounds. He
stated it was a conforming change. He said Section 4 and
Section 5 remain the same. He indicated a change on page 1,
line 1, of the title, where the word deadly was deleted,
leaving the title to indicate the possession of weapons, not
deadly weapons.
Number 323
CHAIR BUNDE clarified by saying the term weapons would
include deadly and defensive weapons.
MR. LUCKHAUPT agreed. He said the changes required were
minimal in changing from a Class B misdemeanor to a Class A.
CHAIR BUNDE said last week the bill was amended to include
school sponsored events.
Number 353
REP. TOOHEY said she might be missing Section 5.
MR. LUCKHAUPT interjected that a mistake was made and that
Section 6 should be Section 5.
Number 387
After some discussion, REP. TOOHEY, made a motion to adopt
the technical amendment changing Section 6 to Section 5.
REP. BRICE asked if the word participating would include
being a person who purchases a ticket and sits in the
stands.
CHAIR BUNDE said that it was his understanding that a
prosecutor would be able to establish to the jury the
offenders' intentions under the definition of participating.
Number 403
MARGOT KNUTH, Assistant Attorneys General, Department of
Law, agreed with Chair Bunde.
REP. BRICE asked if the legislation was applicable to people
walking in and out of the gates of a football game in a
borough park.
MS. KNUTH replied yes.
Number 434
REP. OLBERG asked if there was a definition of defensive
weapon.
CHAIR BUNDE responded that defensive weapon is defined in
statute.
MR. LUCKHAUPT read from statute the definition of defensive
weapon: "an electric stun gun, or a devise to dispense mace
or a similar chemical agent that is not designed to cause
death or serious physical injury."
Number 455
REP. VEZEY asked if lines 1-10 on page 3 were being deleted.
MR. LUCKHAUPT said that AS 11.61.220 (a)(4)(a) was being
repealed.
REP. VEZEY stated that the line would read, "...knowingly
possesses a firearm within the grounds or on a parking lot."
MR. LUCKHAUPT agreed. He said that lines 12-15 on page 3
pertained to child care centers. He indicated that the
proposal was dealing with schools and weapons in school
lockers and child care centers could not be included.
Number 520
REP. VEZEY asked what the intent was under Section 2.
CHAIR BUNDE said it was not his intent to disallow peace
officers to have a deadly weapon when they are on school
grounds.
REP. VEZEY asked what Chair Bunde interpreted as being the
scope and authority of a peace officer's employment.
CHAIR BUNDE stated that they are following their sworn duty.
REP. VEZEY asked what the circumstances would be if the
peace officers were off duty.
CHAIR BUNDE maintained that they are still sworn officers.
He further stated if a person is a sworn officer and is off
duty, that officer is required to respond to crimes in
progress.
REP. VEZEY suggested that the sentence be terminated after
the words peace officer.
Number 565
MR. LUCKHAUPT stated that the section was drafted the same
way as existing statute. He further stated that from his
understanding peace officers are in reality on duty 24 hours
a day within a municipality, even though pay is for only
eight hours a day.
MS. KNUTH agreed with Mr. Luckhaupt. She said she did not
find the language troublesome.
REP. VEZEY asked the legal circumstance of an off duty
Fairbanks peace officer who attends a North Pole school
function. He stated that the officer would be clearly out
of his/her jurisdiction.
MS. KNUTH said that the language contained in the CS is the
same language used for concealed weapons, which holds
exception for peace officers. She also explained that if a
peace officer has the ability to carry a concealed weapon
anywhere, he/she is also able to go on to school grounds.
Number 636
CHAIR BUNDE asked if there would be legal implications to an
officer in uniform wearing a nonconcealed weapon.
MS. KNUTH she said what is trying to be avoided is the peace
officer who "goes bonkers" and goes to a school ground. She
said that peace officers have no special privileges because
of their specific employment.
CHAIR BUNDE stated, "Beyond the scope of their employment."
MS. KNUTH agreed.
CHAIR BUNDE understood Rep. Vezey's concern, but said he was
comfortable with the language.
Number 685
REP. NICHOLIA conveyed the rural perspective. She said some
students have a long distance to travel to school. She said
they carry guns with them, in a car or truck, or walking, in
case of bear encounters. She asked what kind of impact the
proposal would have on rural areas.
MS. KNUTH explained that there should be no impact because
the focus of the proposal is to change the offense from a
Class B misdemeanor to a Class A misdemeanor. She indicated
that there is already a provision to allow a student to
obtain special permission from a school administrator to
carry a weapon.
REP. NICHOLIA said that the legislation would allow a person
over 21 years of age to have a gun in the trunk of a car or
encased in a closed container in a motor vehicle. She
asserted that in rural areas there are more trucks than
cars. She explained that with trucks not having trunks,
most people have racks in their trucks. She felt that the
legislation would have a drastic effect on rural
communities, and asked if there could be a change made to
address the issue.
MS. KNUTH said the issue was addressed when the language was
adopted by the legislature two or three years ago. She said
that the law provides for these situations. She said if a
person in a rural community continually picks their child up
from school in a truck with a rack with a rifle on it,
special arrangements should be made with the school
administrator. She said the provision focuses mainly on
having knowledge of the weapons in a community and making
sure that people are acting responsibly.
REP. NICHOLIA said, "A state trooper or someone who might be
in the area could interpret it in a different way, and we'd
end up with a huge lawsuit or huge court case." She then
said that people in rural areas usually do not have the
funds to defend themselves with a good lawyer.
MS. KNUTH said the residents of rural areas should already
be making special arrangements to avoid those difficulties.
Number 786
CHAIR BUNDE observed that an intoxicated person with a
loaded weapon on a school ground would be just as much of a
danger in rural Alaska than in urban Alaska.
REP. KOTT, referring to page 2, line 20, asked if a security
guard contracted by the school for a special event would be
provided for within Section 2.
MS. KNUTH said no. She said that a police officer is a
person with law enforcement authority, and a security guard
does not have that authority.
CHAIR BUNDE indicated that security guards on school
properties are not armed.
MR. LUCKHAUPT said that the chief of administration could
approve the possession of weapons for security guards.
REP. KOTT asked about the implications if a security guard
were just contracted for a weekend sporting event.
MS. KNUTH, to her understanding, said that private security
guards are not permitted to carry concealed weapons.
Therefore, she said, the chief administrative officer of a
school could permit them to carry a weapon as long as it is
not concealed.
Number 850
REP. VEZEY asked what was being accomplished under the
proposal that is not under existing law.
CHAIR BUNDE asserted that the main thrust of the bill is the
ability to search lockers, which is not available at the
present time.
REP. VEZEY asked if that was not already allowed by statute.
MR. LUCKHAUPT explained that there is a certain amount of
authority allowed in common law to search lockers. Students
do not have an absolute right to privacy within a school.
He said the intent of the bill is to provide chief
administrators of schools with statute that offers
guidelines of when and how a locker can be searched. A
level of certainty would be provided for administrative
officers by decreasing the risk of potential law suits. He
further stated that the search provisions of the bill do not
decrease or eliminate any other rights the already exist.
Number 924
REP. BRICE made a motion to move CSHB 417 (version O) out of
committee with individual recommendations.
CHAIR BUNDE, hearing no objections, said CSHB 417 had moved
out of committee.
CHAIR BUNDE brought HB 362 to the table.
CSHB 362 - "An Act relating to the statute of limitations
for actions brought upon a child support judgment; and
establishing the crime of aiding the nonpayment of child
support."
Number 944
REP. TERRY MARTIN, Prime Sponsor of HB 362, shared a brief
analysis with the committee. He said the Child Support
Enforcement Division (the Division) does not have the tools
necessary to do an adequate job. He said federal funding
received during the interim provided for 42 new positions,
allowing for more efficient enforcement. He said the
important element of the bill is the "third-party barrier."
He related a scenario of a person who is working for an
employer who is not only aware of the employee's obligation
to child support, but also is helping the employee to evade
child support payments or is fraudulently paying the
employee under the table or is paying a relative or friend
the employee's wages in order to avoid garnishment. Rep.
Martin said under those circumstances it is difficult for
enforcement to tap the resources of the individual.
REP. MARTIN told the committee that there was a chart in
their bill packets that indicates that the total amount owed
by the top 100 nonpayors of child support is $16 million.
He said the factors range from delays in payments to people
actually moving to remote areas to avoid contact with
enforcement.
REP. MARTIN said the proposal is one of the most important
tools developed that is not only necessary for the Division
to collect revenues, but also is necessary to prohibit a
third party from interfering with enforcement of child
support. He then offered a committee substitute (CS) for HB
362 that provides an attachment for ten years as opposed to
every year.
REP. MARTIN stated that the federal government has completed
a report on the state of Alaska that shows the state has not
made "reasonable attempts" to try to catch "deadbeat"
parents. He asserted that the federal government would not
continue to support the state at the current level if the
enforcement system fails to make advances in the arrears.
He maintained that the Division now has the manpower and
technical equipment to carry out the task, but legislation
is needed to "knock down" the creative barriers that
nonpayors have erected.
Number 063
CHAIR BUNDE identified Mary Gay as being on offnet to
testify from Anchorage.
REP. MARTIN introduced Nancy Manley and indicated that she
would be the spokesperson for HB 362 for the remainder of
the meeting, as he had to attend another committee meeting,
posthaste.
CHAIR BUNDE asked if there were any questions for Rep.
Martin before he left.
Number 076
REP. VEZEY stated that he had considerable problems with the
proposal. He felt it was inappropriate to hold family,
friends, and employees responsible for a nonpayor's
financial obligations. He suggested that in a case where an
employee returns to a business five years later, the
employer would have been legally obligated to honor the
order from enforcement for the five previous years. He said
not only would the proposed legislation hold the employer
civilly responsible for the nonpayment of child support, it
would also make the employer guilty of a Class C felony. He
said that he too is an employer and is concerned with the
business climate of the state. He said he could not support
the legislation.
REP. MARTIN stated that he has gone to the defense of
friends who are employers that did not know the employee was
in arrear for child support. He said in that specific
incidence he felt the state went "way overboard trying to
make him be the guilty one" when his friend had no idea that
his employee was in arrears.
REP. MARTIN said the key words within the proposal are,
"...one who intentionally..." He also added that it is not
only employers but also relatives and friends. He said
currently there is no way of preventing this type of
evasion. He explained that some fathers are so upset by a
divorce that they would go to any lengths to avoid payment.
Number 146
REP. VEZEY said that being in receipt of a law enforcement
order that has not been obeyed by a subsequent court order
does put an employer, in a knowing position, in the position
of having to defend against an accusation of intentional
failure. He said it could cost at least $20,000 to go to
court to prove an employer is innocent, and because of the
economics the employer would likely plead guilty.
REP. MARTIN said it would allow the people in desperate need
of the support payment to defend their need of the owed
money.
Number 164
CHAIR BUNDE pointed out that Rep. Martin had referred to new
computer equipment and other technology that would be needed
and then inquired to the zero fiscal note.
REP. MARTIN said that within the last year the Division had
been upgraded with funds from last year's budget.
TAPE 94-25, SIDE B
Number 000
REP. TOOHEY said that obviously the chart of nonpayors
exhibits many years of nonpayment. She asked, if a person
owed $207,000 and was legally working, how would that amount
be "broken down?"
REP. MARTIN responded that most people don't know that they
can appeal for an adjustment that would be relative to that
person's financial ability. He said that most people do not
go through the appeal process because they are fearful. He
also acknowledged that some of the nonpayors on the chart
are indeed financially destitute, but the Division needs to
know they can be removed from the list. He then said the
next problem that must be addressed regarding the chart is
when to take people off the list.
Number 062
CHAIR BUNDE said he was relieved to find that it does not
matter where people live in Alaska, they still owe money.
He found it amazing that people can be that far in debt from
places where they claim to not have much employment.
REP. MARTIN said that the chart indicates how diverse the
problem is, and how it shows that the problem is not
centered in the large cities. He then related the large
expense involved in investigating a case in a distant rural
area.
Number 096
CHAIR BUNDE asked if Rep. Martin, upon passage of the
proposal, was anticipating a bigger budget for continuing
enforcement.
REP. MARTIN said that the department already knows who the
people are and where they live that are participating as a
third party in the evasion of payments.
Number 113
REP. VEZEY said he found it difficult to conceive of how a
person could run up $235,000 of debt. He said that at some
time that person, in the eyes of the court, must have had
considerable assets and income.
REP. MARTIN said that he could not give Rep. Vezey specific
case figures, but indicated that a lot of the debts shown on
the chart span many years.
REP. VEZEY said if some one owed him $245,000 and he had a
court order to enforce it, he would go to court to obtain
papers to attach the debt to the nonpayor's assets. He felt
the $50,000 in the legal fees would be an excellent
investment.
Number 194
REP. BRICE said he did not agree with the zero fiscal note.
He asserted that it would probably be a negative fiscal
note, considering the cost of finding a "deadbeat dad" and
making them come up with the payments.
CHAIR BUNDE interjected that there may be "deadbeat mothers"
also.
Number 217
REP. TOOHEY said, "Once a father, always a father." She
said laws for child support enforcement may have only been
written in 1980, and questioned if the debts are
retroactive, perhaps dating back to 1971.
REP. MARTIN said that in most cases the Division is looking
for the parent that has forced the spouse with custody on to
the welfare rolls. He said that when the debt starts being
repaid, the spouse can then be taken off public assistance.
He said the proposal would decrease the number of welfare
recipients by finding the deadbeat parent and enforcing
payments.
REP. TOOHEY said that in most instances, Rep. Martin is
assuming that the parent is working.
REP. MARTIN he said the Division knows that the nonpayor has
income but is fraudulently diverting income, either through
employers, friends, or relatives. He said that circumstance
is what HB 362 is specifically addressing.
Number 269
REP. NICHOLIA, relating to the rural perspective, said that
many people worked during the pipeline era where salaries
were considerable. She said now pipeline jobs are scarce,
people have moved back to their villages where there are no
jobs, and they are very financially stressed. She felt that
the bill would only add another burden, in that they do not
often come out from under that kind of debt. She also said
that people in the rural communities would have a difficult
time paying for attorneys in regards to adjusting child
support payments. She said Rep. Martin's intentions are
good, but the bill would have a negative impact on people in
rural communities.
REP. MARTIN said HB 362 focuses on the third-party barrier.
CHAIR BUNDE thanked Rep. Martin and said that Nancy Manley
would be available on Rep. Martin's behalf to answer further
questions. He then asked Mary Gay to testify via offnet.
Number 325
MARY GAY, Director, Child Support Enforcement Division,
Department of Revenue, testified via offnet from Alaska.
She said that the legislation would assist in the
enforcement of payments by deterring individuals from
knowingly assisting nonpayors for the purpose of defrauding
the state. She said it would also deter the nonpayor from
concealing or transferring assets for the purpose of
defrauding the state or the child for whom the support is
owed. She said the proposed legislation provides penalties
for the person who is involved in a third-party situation
and also the stipulation that the third-party would assist
in the prosecution of the nonpayor. She felt the proposal
would prevent these practices in the future, as the
individuals would be aware of the penalties for making such
arrangements.
Number 374
REP. KOTT referred to page 1, lines 9-11, and said that
under constitution a family member cannot be forced to
testify against another member of the family. He asked if
the proposed legislation would go against that current
statute.
MS. GAY said no.
Number 400
REP. TOOHEY said that the person everyone is forgetting is
the child that the state is having to feed and clothe. She
said all the proposal is doing is asking "these guys to make
some restitution, whether they're in a village or they live
in downtown Anchorage." She said the parent is being asked
to pay their fair share for the child, regardless of their
race or gender. She stated they are responsible for the
children's well being.
REP. G. DAVIS said he was sure everyone felt as Rep. Toohey
did, but he felt the bill was extending the long arm of the
law, which he thinks is already aware of who these people
are and where they reside. He pointed out the subpoena
powers of the Child Support Enforcement Division and said he
did not see how the legislation would help. He felt HB 362
would not have an impact on those deadbeat parents who
already know how to beat the system. He felt if he could be
convinced that the legislation would have an impact, he
could support it.
Number 467
CHAIR BUNDE said HB 362 would be held over for further
consideration.
REP. VEZEY said that he did not feel the bill had any
relation to the top 100 chart provided by Rep. Martin. He
said he would like to ask the Child Support Enforcement
Division if it is known how many assets are behind the debts
on the chart.
MS. GAY replied that she could only speculate. She said
perhaps some of the nonpayors had considerable earning power
at one time. She related situations where an obligor and
current spouse have a business, but the obligor would not
receive a paycheck, and also is eating, driving a car, and
entertaining on the spouse's business expense account. She
indicated that friends of obligors also participate in this
type of fraud, and these practices are more common than
people would like to believe.
Number 539
REP. VEZEY maintained that if $245,450 was owed him, he
would go to any length to obtain any of the assets. He felt
the chart, with such substantial amounts, indicated
incompetence somewhere in the system. He asked what good
comes from the bill if the nonpayor doesn't have any assets.
He also felt that the legislation would make criminals out
of civic minded, productive citizens, and questioned the
classification of a felony.
Number 567
MS. GAY asserted that it is a federal felony to owe more
than $5000 in child support payments.
REP. VEZEY inquired as to how many people fill that
category. He said, "I don't see the federal government
running out there to incarcerate these people."
MS. GAY said, "...with the federal government ...they didn't
fund the legislation."
REP. VEZEY said he understood that. He reiterated again his
being uncomfortable with the legislation.
Number 602
CHAIR BUNDE stated that the bill was not ready to move out
of committee and asked Rep. Vezey to chair a subcommittee
with Rep. Gary Davis to work with Rep. Martin. He directed
them to come back with answers one week from the day the
meeting was held, and at that time a decision would be made
as to whether the bill would be heard again.
Number 627
REP. G. DAVIS asked if it was becoming easier to prove
intent to defraud.
MS. GAY responded no.
Number 637
CHAIR BUNDE closed testimony on HB 362 and brought HB 429 to
the table.
HB 429 - SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICE AGENCY
CHAIR BUNDE, awaiting the arrival of Rep. Jeannette James,
took a brief at ease at 4:06 and reconvened at 4:09. He
announced the calendar for the remainder of the week.
Number 689
REP. JEANNETTE JAMES, Prime Sponsor of HB 429, said, "I
think this is probably the shortest bill in history." She
stated that HB 429 was intended to enhance the operation of
the state's Special Education Service Agency (SESA). She
said the agency makes special education services accessible
to children with severe or unusual disabilities who need
specialized services not normally found in their district.
She said SESA assures that qualified specialists are
available to assist remote districts to increase their
ability to deliver required services. She asserted that the
bill would repeal the requirement for the Governor's Council
on Disabilities and Special Education to govern the
organization. She explained that the mission of the
Governor's Council is to plan, evaluate, and promote
services to people with disabilities. It should not govern
part of the service system that is designed to evaluate and
critique. She said SESA will create a consumer driven
governing board. The new board will consist of people from
rural areas and representatives of organizations that use
the agency services. She said there is no cost to the
program, and the Governor's Council on Disabilities and
Special Education is an advocacy group not a services group.
She said the Governor's Council on Disabilities and Special
Education has been providing services.
Number 723
CHAIR BUNDE said, "This replaces an existing group, that's
why it's a zero fiscal note... or the existing group had a
zero fiscal note."
REP. JAMES said that a board within the Governor's Council
on Disabilities and Special Education will be made a
separate board and stand alone. She said that federal
funding is already in place.
CHAIR BUNDE asked if it is 100% federal funding.
REP. JAMES deferred the question to Commissioner Margaret
Lowe.
COMMISSIONER MARGARET LOWE, Department of Health and Social
Services, stated that the board is state funded, under the
same funds that provide foundation funding. She said there
is no fiscal note because only the oversight of the
Governor's Council on Disabilities and Special Education is
being taken away. She said that there is no need for
additional funding.
Number 754
CHAIR BUNDE reiterated that the legislation was changing the
name of the program.
REP. VEZEY asked what the relationship was between SESA and
the Governor's Council on Disabilities and Special
Education.
Number 800
COMMISSIONER LOWE explained that the state felt services
need to be accessible to rural areas around the state to
"low incidence impairments." She said low incidence
impairments relate to circumstances where perhaps there is a
blind child in a rural community and the school district
cannot afford to hire a teacher for the blind for that one
child. She said the Governor's Council on Disabilities and
Special Education saw the need for a program to address
those issues and that is how the board was formed.
COMMISSIONER LOWE said they have had a subcommittee of the
Governor's Council on Disabilities and SESA has had
oversight over the special education services with its own
special board. She further stated that the board has always
been subject to the approval of the Governor's Council on
Disabilities and Special Education.
Number 798
REP. VEZEY said there would be redundant board review.
COMMISSIONER LOWE said there was not only redundancy, but
also a main problem with the board is that presently the
advocacy agency is also being the oversight. She said it
seems to indicate a conflict of interest.
REP. TOOHEY asked where the committee would go, or would it
stand alone.
COMMISSIONER LOWE said it would stand alone, and then other
legislation would be proposed to give it its own statutory
authority.
REP. TOOHEY asked where the funds would be funnelled from.
COMMISSIONER LOWE said that it is fully funded by the
Department of Education (DOE).
Number 837
REP. KOTT questioned the zero fiscal note and felt there
would still be costs to the transition that should be
reflected in the fiscal note.
REP. TOOHEY said, if that were the case, the bill would not
be supported. She said it was a funding shift.
Number 850
REP. JAMES reiterated that there was no cost involved in the
removal of the board from the Governor's Council on
Disabilities and Special Education.
CHAIR BUNDE clarified by saying, "This is a name change.
There is still a cost to what this group does, but it is
funded by the Department of Education." He questioned if
Rep. Kott was inquiring as to the how much it costs to fund
that particular board.
REP. KOTT said that was a fair assessment.
Number 881
SHEILA PETERSON, Special Assistant to Commissioner Covey,
Department of Education, said that she could ask Duane
Guiley, Director of the Division of Education Finance and
Support Services for the Department of Education, exactly
how much funding SESA receives.
CHAIR BUNDE said it would answer a question that does not
affect the bill one way or the other. He then asked for
further testimony.
Number 902
DAVID MALTMAN, Executive Director, Governor's Council on
Disabilities and Special Education, testified via offnet.
He said that HB 429 would repeal the requirement of the
Governor's Council on Disabilities and Special Education to
govern the State Special Education Service Agency. He said
the council had felt it was inappropriate to have an
advocacy program also evaluating and critiquing service
programs.
Number 916
CHAIR BUNDE asked what relationship Mr. Maltman was to the
council.
MR. MALTMAN said he was the executive director.
CHAIR BUNDE asked for further questions. There being none,
Chair Bunde asked the pleasure of the committee.
REP. VEZEY made a motion to pass HB 429 out of committee
with individual recommendations with the attached fiscal
note.
Hearing no objections, CHAIR BUNDE stated that HB 429 was so
moved.
Number 935
CHAIR BUNDE brought HB 359 to the table.
HB 359 - APPROP: CONSTRUCT/UPGRADE ON-BASE SCHOOLS
TAPE 94-26, SIDE A
Number 000
CHAIR BUNDE asked if there were any questions for Rep. Eldon
Mulder.
REP. TOOHEY asked if there was forthcoming information from
the DOE regarding HB 359.
Number 020
REP. ELDON MULDER, Prime Sponsor of HB 359, said that the
DOE does not categorize military bases within their process,
although the DOE would like military base schools to be
within their process.
Number 280
PATRICK MADROS, Chairperson, Yukon-Koyukuk School District,
testified in opposition to HB 359. He stated that the
proposal would provide $26,099,300 of state money for the
construction of a new elementary school at Eielson Air Force
Base (AFB) and upgrades to the remaining on base schools in
Fairbanks and Anchorage, virtually ignoring the statewide
school construction priority process. He maintained that
Yukon Koyukuk and other school districts have followed the
current CPI process and have also appealed the position of
one of the district's projects. He felt to pass HB 359
would be to ignore the current process and statewide
prioritized need. He stated that the military base schools
should apply in the same manner that all other districts are
required to.
MR. MADROS further explained various states of disrepair in
several schools within the Yukon-Koyukuk School District.
He asserted that there must be equality in the process of
prioritization with both military and state run schools. He
also indicated that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
upgraded all their facilities before they were given over to
the state. He felt that military base schools should also
upgrade their facilities before turning them over to the
state.
Number 394
CHAIR BUNDE agreed that the children of Yukon-Koyukuk are
just as important as children anywhere else in the state.
REP. TOOHEY said the military would like to give the schools
over to the state, but the state cannot accept them because
of the conditions of most of the schools. She said it is a
catch 22 situation and indicated that Rep. Mulder was
proposing that the military pay half and the state pay half
to upgrade these schools. She questioned Mr. Madros as to
how the problem should be solved.
MR. MADROS indicated that Adak School was upgraded and was
eventually shut down.
REP. MULDER explained that the U.S. Department of Defense
(U.S. DOD) built the Adak school.
REP. TOOHEY clarified and said there was not state money
involved in the upgrade.
Number 479
REP. MULDER maintained that BIA schools were funded by the
federal government. He said that he would welcome federal
funds to accomplish the needed upgrades. He said the
problem is that the military would never receive $52 million
in one lump sum from the government. He also said that if
the base schools are not upgraded, their chances for closure
are greater. He said if the state leverages half of the
needed funds to make the upgrades, it would show the federal
government that the state is willing to cooperate and solve
its own problems.
MR. MADROS said that the Adak schools did not go through the
due process that his district has. He felt that Alaska is
in a strategically key position and that most of the state's
bases will not be closed. He said HB 359 would allow base
schools "through the back door" for upgrades.
Number 600
REP. NICHOLIA stated that funding the schools and making the
upgrades would not safeguard them from closure. She felt
that perhaps only one base would be closed, seeing as the
state is so close to Europe.
REP. KOTT asked Rep. Mulder what would happen if upgrades
were made to the schools on Fort Richardson Army
Installation and then the base was closed in 1996.
REP. MULDER said that it was his understanding that "dime
one" would not be spent on Fort Richardson until there is
assurance that the base will not be closed. He said the
potential for closure is very possible. He asserted that
the economic impact on Alaska would be a loss of
approximately $200 million annually.
Number 666
REP. TOOHEY asked how many public students are enrolled in
the base schools.
REP. MULDER said he did not know, but indicated there were
more public students attending base schools in Fairbanks
than in Anchorage.
REP. VEZEY asked which school in Fairbanks he was referring
to.
REP. MULDER said he was not sure which school on Eielson Air
Force Base was attended by public students.
Number 714
CHAIR BUNDE stated that the majority of the base schools on
Eielson are attended by public students.
MR. MADROS noted that the Air Force guaranteed Galena that
they would not close the military base there for an
"umpteen" number of years if they upgraded their power plant
facility. He said a few years later the air force base was
shut down.
Number 759
CHAIR BUNDE indicated that Mr. Madros brought up a good
point when he mentioned due process.
REP. VEZEY asked Mr. Madros if Galena still has a 20 year
contract with the U.S. Air Force regardless of the base
closure.
MR. MADROS said he was unsure.
REP. VEZEY said that the U.S. Air Force did enter into a 20
year contract with Galena, and it was his understanding that
the city will be paid regardless of the fact that no power
is being generated by the new power plant.
MR. MADROS asked how one goes about suing the federal
government.
REP. VEZEY clarified by saying that he thought Mr. Madros
might have updated information on that issue.
Number 796
REP. TOOHEY explained that if the state produces $26
million, the federal government would match that amount.
MR. MADROS reiterated that Yukon-Koyukuk School District is
in need much like other schools and stressed due process.
Number 822
CHAIR BUNDE asked for further questions.
REP. KOTT asked Rep. Mulder if there was a companion bill to
HB 359.
Number 830
REP. MULDER said no. He also said that the military base
situation is an "odd duck" because of the problem of
financial responsibility and taxing authority and because of
the political dimension. He said if it weren't for those
specific factors, the military would go by the state
priority procedures.
CHAIR BUNDE said that he did not have any answers to the
concerns of committee.
Number 874
REP. KOTT said the question is whether or not the base
schools should be funded. He said he would support moving
HB 359 to the Finance committee to make that decision.
REP. TOOHEY agreed with Rep. Kott. She asked Rep. Mulder
who would be financially responsible if the ceiling was to
collapse at Ursa Minor School.
REP. MULDER said he was uncertain.
REP. TOOHEY stated it was assumed that the roof of that
school was in a worse state of disrepair than the schools in
the Yukon-Koyukuk School District.
REP. MULDER said technically Ursa Minor is the
responsibility of the U.S. Department of Education (U.S.
DOE).
Number 918
CHAIR BUNDE speculated that the U.S. DOE would close the
school if the roof was to collapse.
Number 930
DUANE GUILEY, Director, Division of Education Finance and
Support Services, Department of Education, answered
questions on HB 359. He stated that it was the joint
responsibility of the U.S. DOE and state DOE for major
maintenance and school construction. He said the
legislature has previously provided funding for major
maintenance and construction to districts for life/health
safety issues. He maintained that $7 million was granted to
the Anchorage School District for the seven military base
schools. He said approximately $145,000 was spent per
facility to address electrical upgrades and fire marshall
code violations. He mentioned several other base schools
that received state funding. Mr. Guiley stated that
Fairbanks has a six year plan that is a phased approach
whereby they ask for planning design money and then the
funds for school construction. He said those projects have
been applied for by the Fairbanks School District. He also
said the Anchorage School District indicated that they would
complete applications for all military base schools on
Anchorage military bases to be evaluated and ranked in the
priority process.
Number 017
REP. TOOHEY asked if the base schools would then be on the
statewide priority list or if they would be on their "own
priority."
Number 020
MR. GUILEY said the DOE would envision putting the base
schools on the statewide priority list. He stated that the
Eielson AFB school construction grant is 14th on the
statewide priority list and that it was number one on the
military task force list.
Number 035
CHAIR BUNDE appreciated the concerns of all who testified.
He asked the pleasure of the committee.
REP. VEZEY made a motion to pass HB 359 out of committee
with individual recommendations.
Hearing no objections, CHAIR BUNDE said HB 359 was so moved.
He then brought HJR 47 to the table.
HJR 47 - FUNDS TO UPGRADE MILITARY ON BASE SCHOOLS
REP. MULDER stated that HJR 47 was a proposal expressing the
legislature's encouragement to resolve the military school
base problem expeditiously and transfer the schools to the
state's charge as soon as possible. He said the federal
government does have funds available to match the state's
share. He also mentioned that the Chairperson for the State
Board of Education, Patty Norheim, was on the task force.
Number 114
CHAIR BUNDE asked if there were any questions or further
discussion. There being none, he asked the pleasure of the
committee.
REP. TOOHEY made a motion to pass HJR 47 out of committee
with individual recommendations.
CHAIR BUNDE, hearing no objections, said HJR 47 was so
moved.
Seeing no further business before the committee, CHAIR BUNDE
ADJOURNED the meeting at 4:48 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|