Legislature(1995 - 1996)
04/22/1995 10:05 AM 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 & SOCIAL SERVICES
STANDING COMMITTEE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HB 280
April 22, 1995
10:05 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Cynthia Toohey, Co-Chairman
Representative Caren Robinson
Representative Norman Rokeberg
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Con Bunde, Co-Chairman
Representative Tom Brice
Representative Gary Davis
Representative Al Vezey
WORK SESSION CALENDAR
HB 280: "An Act establishing the Alaska Human Resource Investment
Council and transferring certain functions of other
entities to the council; establishing planning mechanism
for employment training and other human resource
investment needs; and providing for an effective date."
HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 280
SHORT TITLE: HUMAN RESOURCE INVESTMENT COUNCIL
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
03/24/95 896 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRAL(S)
03/24/95 896 (H) HES, FINANCE
03/24/95 896 (H) FISCAL NOTE (GOV)
03/24/95 896 (H) 4 ZERO FNS (DCED, CRA, DOE, DHSS)
03/24/95 897 (H) 2 ZERO FNS (LABOR, UA)
03/24/95 897 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
03/24/95 899 (H) SECTIONAL ANALYSIS
04/20/95 (H) HES AT 02:00 PM CAPITOL 106
04/20/95 (H) MINUTE(HES)
04/22/95 (H) HES AT 10:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
Bob Rubadeau, Special Assistant
Lieutenant Governor's Office
P.O. Box 110015
Juneau, Alaska 99811-0015
Telephone: (907) 465-3520
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HB 280
Joseph McCormick, Executive Director
Post Secondary Education Commission
Department of Education
3030 Vintage Blvd.
Juneau, Alaska 99801-7109
Telephone: (907) 465-6740
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on HB 280
ACTION NARRATIVE
HB 280 - HUMAN RESOURCE INVESTMENT COUNCIL
TAPE 95-41, SIDE A
Number 000
CO-CHAIR CYNTHIA TOOHEY called the Health, Education and Social
Services subcommittee on HB 280 to order at 10:05 a.m. She
introduced the participants, including the representatives. Co-
chair Toohey and Representative Robinson agreed that it was
Representative Rokeberg who had initial concerns about the size and
command of HB 280. Although he was not initially present,
Representative Rokeberg was expected momentarily. There was some
general discussion about a new adopted amendment to the Senate
version of this bill and it was determined that the committee
needed to acquire the latest House version of this bill.
CO-CHAIR TOOHEY outlined what she believed to be Representative
Rokeberg's concerns more specifically. His initial concern was
unintelligible, something about an unwieldy committee, and the
second concern was that it (the Alaska Human Resource Investment
Council) was slated to be lead by the Lieutenant Governor.
CO-CHAIR TOOHEY then offered that the amendment before her was
practical. She was not specific as to what amendment she was
actually referencing. Generally, the amendment delegated shared
leadership of the council to a chairman and co-chairman. One seat
would be occupied by someone from the private sector and the other
from the public sector.
REPRESENTATIVE CAREN ROBINSON wondered what defined private sector.
From past experience she understood that private sector was defined
as someone who was a non-state employee and preferably from the
nonprofit sector. Representative Robinson pointed out that she
didn't necessarily feel strongly one way or another about this
criteria and that she didn't have a problem with the Lieutenant
Governor holding the position of main chair.
CO-CHAIR TOOHEY then asked what section of the original bill dealt
with who would be the leader of the group.
BOB RUBADEAU, Special Assistant, Lieutenant Governor's Office,
outlined for the committee that the Lieutenant Governor would
appoint the co-chairmen, one from the public sector and one from
the private sector. In summary, there were comments made about
what described groups would make up the committee. The comments by
Mr. Rubadeau regarding this subject matter were barely audible.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON asked why it was that Senators Leman and
Sharp found it necessary to draft an amendment regarding leadership
of the council She also referred to the attached memorandum.
Representative Robinson thought the title read well just the way it
was.
MR. RUBADEAU, responded that from past experience they did not have
consistent successes with a co-chairmen system when coupled with
councils of the same size. He explained further that the intent
was to seat someone of a high level personage to lead the council.
He stressed that the governmental and private sector partnership
embodied in the structure of the co-chairs was a very important
component. It would help facilitate the attendance of either
chairman to negotiations with business agencies or public speaking
engagement, etcetera. This co-chair leadership would also lend
itself to changes of administrations resulting from elections.
CO-CHAIR TOOHEY said she had no problem with this structure and
then stated for the record that Representative Rokeberg had just
joined the meeting. Representative Rokeberg also did not have a
problem with the proposed co-chair matrix.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON clarified that it seemed the consensus was
to adopt the Senate language which doesn't allow for co-chairmen.
What she understood Mr. Rubadeau to say was that by having co-
chairmen, private and public, a partnership is built. She wanted
to confirm that the committee recommends one of the chairmen be
recruited from the private sector.
CO-CHAIR TOOHEY pointed out that the Senate version of the bill had
already gone through appointed committees and that she foresaw this
version becoming the vehicle for both houses. She didn't have a
problem with a co-chairman's split between private and public
influences, but pointed out that it clearly doesn't define these
terms in enough detail. She suggested that the issue of private
and public chairmen be discussed in full committee proceedings.
REPRESENTATIVE NORMAN ROKEBERG offered that he preferred the Senate
version of this bill since it would expedite matters. He agreed
that the co-chair concept should be discussed in full committee
hearings.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON again stressed that she appreciates the
concept of public and private sector co-chairmen working together
on a council such as this one.
CO-CHAIR TOOHEY, along with Representatives Robinson and Rokeberg
agreed that the make-up of the council should be decided by a full
committee, as to whether or not the Lieutenant Governor would
occupy a seat, as well as whether or not the co-chair positions
would be filled by private or public sector individuals. There was
also some discussion regarding Fran Ulmer specifically as a
chairperson in the present capacity of Lieutenant Governor.
Everyone agreed that Ms. Ulmer possessed more than adequate
abilities to hold a position on the council, but the abilities
regarding unknown predecessors was called into question.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG reiterated that he preferred the Senate
version of the bill, as versus Representatives Robinson and Toohey
who preferred the House version. Representative Rokeberg added
that he felt both the seats of chairman should be occupied by the
private sector, but he didn't feel adamant about this. He also
added that the concept of private sector should be defined in more
specific terms. Technically, anyone who is not employed in a
public capacity could be considered a private entity.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON, suggested that in defining what determines
a private status, cautioned against precluding anyone. It was
decided that the existing language in the House bill concerning co-
chairs, one from the public and one from the private sector would
stand as outlined.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG voiced his concern about how unwieldy the
established size of the Investment Council seemed.
CO-CHAIR TOOHEY offered that there would be many subcommittees
appointed under this council, which would help reduce the amount of
council members in theory just by the tasks assigned to the various
subcommittees.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG cited the percentage rule as a means to
establish the balance. If they began deleting members from the
public sector, they would be required to delete from the private
sector too. He used this as an example of why he proposed cutting
the Lieutenant Governor and commissioner of the Department of
Community and Regional Affairs from holding a position on the
council.
CO-CHAIR TOOHEY directed the question of the council's percentage
break down to Mr. Rubadeau.
MR. RUBADEAU stated that the percentage rule for establishing such
a council is laid out specifically in federal law. If two of the
four commissioners were dropped from the council, they'd probably
be able to drop one of the private or education sectors from the
roster and still meet the minimum 15 percent requirements.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated in response to the size of the
council that literally there were limited amounts of rooms around
the state large enough to accommodate the council for meetings.
Co-chair Toohey pointed out that the meetings could be conducted by
teleconference. Representative Robinson asked if there were 26
members slated to be on the council. Everyone pointed out that 26
was the maximum amount. Representative Rokeberg finally asked how
a council of that size could be effectively managed.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON then asked if the government sector people
would be required to cover their own expenses for travel to
meetings, etcetera, or would those costs be included in the
council's budget.
MR. RUBADEAU stated that they anticipate the government sector will
pick up their own costs and he pointed out that most of the board
meetings will take place in Anchorage. He also added that it would
be more ideal to reduce the amount of members on the council, but
there are so many potential players around the state that could
benefit from this council as a tool. The decision to cut becomes
more difficult.
CO-CHAIR TOOHEY asked what happens if all members to the council
are not present. She understood that the meetings would still go
on. Again, it was pointed out that subcommittees would be
established to carry through with specific business and
teleconferencing could aid to consolidate the council's diverse
membership. These subcommittees could then come together as a
whole to adopt policy.
REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG asked about some additional 13 other
councils which could also be absorbed into this council.
MR. RUBADEAU answered that, yes, initially they looked at some
potential volunteer councils that could be absorbed into the
council, such as Americorp for example. There then followed a
lengthy discussion about what Americorp was and the types of
volunteer work they do.
JOSEPH MCCORMICK, Post Secondary Education Commission, Department
of Education, referred to language of HB 280 outlined on Page 2,
line 15 through 20 regarding "the purposes of the act," as a pre-
requisite to a discussion about the concept of outcome. Mr.
McCormick suggested language which would mandate program outcome
assessments managed by the council. Based on the dollars that are
spent in a training program, how many people were placed, how many
jobs were filled, how receptive was industry to absorb people into
the labor force of Alaska, etcetera. Over a period of time the
council should establish meaningful outcome assessment programs
based on similar criteria. The council could come back to the
legislature and report on what's working and what's not.
CO-CHAIR TOOHEY asked how this type of language could be
incorporated and under what section? There was some discussion
about just where to insert this language. Representative Robinson
suggested that a rough draft of the actual language should be
created and then they could rely on Mr. Rubadeau to edit this
language. There was some additional discussion about how presently
vocational rehab reported on the numbers of people it served, but
it was pointed out that there was no follow-up on how many of these
clients were absorbed in the work force or into other alternative
programs after rehab was completed.
MR. MCCORMICK cited that outcome measures should be divided in
three levels: who actually completed the program of vocational
rehab; of those who did complete the program, how many of them got
jobs; and if training was provided through loans or other types of
financing, how was the money paid back? He went on to stress that
it was important to look at the integration of curriculum
development. This does not currently exist. There are separate
vocational organized under the Department of Education, apart from
vocational training through the University of Alaska. In addition
to this, there are approximately 70 proprietary schools which train
people in specific fields. Mr. McCormick felt that there needed to
be a very strong coordination of these efforts, which could also be
a role of this council. He stated that it doesn't matter what
program a person chooses. It does matter that the curriculum is
consistent and strong.
MR. MCCORMICK offered the following language which would
encapsulate his concerns as previously outlined to read, "To
sponsor a meaningful program with outcome assessment that
effectively measures the success or failure of the efforts of this
council." The members decided to insert this language into Section
1, line 18 of the current bill version.
MR. MCCORMICK stated another concern of his which dealt with a
section of the bill about designating a member of the investment
council to be a member of the Post Secondary Commission. He
recommended flip-flopping this. Because the council is given the
responsibility to license or re-license some 70 voc-tech schools in
the state, there should be a member of the Post Secondary
Commission on the council to help advise with the policy of
vocational training in the state, as versus a member of the
vocational council on the commission advising on the issue of
student aid policy.
MR. RUBADEAU spoke to this specific language outlined in HB 280.
He pointed out that the appointment of an investment council member
is mandated in the state statute right now. The language is in the
process of repeal and revision, but it is already in the post
secondary education bylaws. It requires that someone from GECO
(Governor's Council on Vocational Education) be appointed a seat on
the Post Secondary Education Commission. Mr Rubadeau pointed out
that on page 4, line 7 there's mention of appointing someone from
a post secondary vocational education institution, which addresses
Mr. McCormick's concern about instating an appointee from the
business world. Mr. Rubadeau closed by stating that everybody in
the world wanted a seat on this commission and they tried to
accommodate everybody's needs.
MR. MCCORMICK appreciated Mr. Rubadeau's concern about everybody
requesting representation, but he pointed out that the fact
remains, the state licenses any school that wants to teach
vocational training outside the purview of the University of
Alaska. There was some additional discussion about deleting a
member from the Post Secondary Commission. Mr. McCormick said he'd
be pleased to have 13 members instead of 14 on this council, but
Mr. Rubadeau reminded him that this number is also in statute. Mr.
Rubadeau did say they were trying to amend the name of the two
members, which would involve deleting sub-section 5 on line 12
through 14. No one present had a problem with this suggestion.
REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON stated for the record that she appreciates
having a smaller board to work with because it facilitates getting
work done and meeting quorum requirements.
CO-CHAIR TOOHEY asked that the participants work together to make
the necessary changes to the bill as discussed. She also asked
that a cover letter be created to explain these changes to their
Senate counterparts. Co-chair Toohey adjourned the meeting.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|