03/01/2024 01:30 PM Senate LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB173 | |
| SB211 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 173 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 211 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
March 1, 2024
1:42 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Jesse Bjorkman, Chair
Senator Elvi Gray-Jackson
Senator Kelly Merrick (via teleconference)
Senator Forrest Dunbar
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Click Bishop, Vice Chair
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 173
"An Act requiring school districts to grant qualified persons an
assigned duty to carry a concealed handgun on school grounds
under certain conditions; relating to standards, training, and
continuing education in firearms training for qualified persons
granted an assigned duty to carry a concealed handgun on school
grounds; relating to communication of school districts with
state and local law enforcement; and relating to school crisis
response plans."
- MOVED CSSB 173(L&C) OUT OF COMMITTEE
SENATE BILL NO. 211
"An Act relating to the powers of the board of agriculture and
conservation; relating to loans and limitations under the Alaska
Agricultural Loan Act; relating to federal crop insurance
contributions; relating to municipal and state procurement
preferences for agricultural products harvested in the state and
fisheries products harvested or processed in the state; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 173
SHORT TITLE: AUTHORIZE HANDGUNS SCHOOL EMPLOYEE/VOLUNT
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) HUGHES
01/16/24 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/12/24
01/16/24 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/24 (S) L&C, JUD
01/24/24 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
01/24/24 (S) Heard & Held
01/24/24 (S) MINUTE(L&C)
03/01/24 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: SB 211
SHORT TITLE: AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS/LOANS/SALES
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
01/26/24 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/26/24 (S) L&C, FIN
03/01/24 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR HUGHES, District M
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 173.
JOHN CLOUGH, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
MIKE COONS, Representing self
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
ANA GIFFORD, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
TOM BOUTIN, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
FRANK BERGSTROM, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
DAVID HANNA, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
SALLY DONALDSON, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
CHARLIE FRANZ, Representing self
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
HEATHER BENNET, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
CHRISTINE EVERETT, Representing self
North Pole, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
PATTY OWEN, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
ROBERT MATTHEWS, Representing self
Delta Junction, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
ODETTE EDGAR, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
RYAN PETTY, Representing self
Parkland, Florida
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
JOHN SONIN, Representing self
Douglas, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
JIM IRVINE, Co-Director
FASTER Saves Lives
Cleveland, Ohio
POSITION STATEMENT: Available to answer questions on SB 173.
JOYANNE BLOOM, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
SHANNAN GREENE, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
JOEL SIGMAN, Representing self
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
DOUG WALRATH, Director
Northwestern Alaska Career & Technical Center
Nome, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
LIN DAVIS, Volunteer
Moms Demand Action
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
WILLIAM LUCE, Representing self
Retired Member of Alaska National Guard
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
MICHAEL GARHART, Representing self
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
ROCHELLE PARKER, Volunteer
Moms Demand Action
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
TAMARA KRUSE ROSELIUS, Representing self
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
JANEL DOCKENDORF, Representing self
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
CHERI RUIZ, Representing self
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
ALEX KOPLIN, Representing self
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
STEVEN RETTKE, Representing self
Eagle River, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
DR. MAUREEN LONGWORTH, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
GERALD VOSS, Representing self
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 173.
MICHELLE VASQUEZ, Representing self
Soldotna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to SB 173.
BRENT GOODRUM, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented SB 211 on behalf of the
administration.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:42:05 PM
CHAIR JESSE BJORKMAN called the Senate Labor and Commerce
Standing Committee meeting to order at 1:42 p.m. Present at the
call to order were Senators Gray-Jackson, Dunbar, Merrick (via
teleconference) and Chair Bjorkman.
SB 173-AUTHORIZE HANDGUNS SCHOOL EMPLOYEE/VOLUNT
1:43:10 PM
CHAIR BJORKMAN announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO.
173 "An Act requiring school districts to grant qualified
persons an assigned duty to carry a concealed handgun on school
grounds under certain conditions; relating to standards,
training, and continuing education in firearms training for
qualified persons granted an assigned duty to carry a concealed
handgun on school grounds; relating to communication of school
districts with state and local law enforcement; and relating to
school crisis response plans."
1:43:52 PM
SENATOR HUGHES, District M, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau,
Alaska, sponsor of SB 173, explained that the bill provides a
back-end stopgap in the event of an active school shooter
incident. While schools work hard to prevent these incidents
with a variety of front-end measures (e.g. providing mental
health support, locks on doors, etc.), this does not keep
shooters from entering schools. After a series of school
shooting incidents across the country, she was approached by a
retired teacher who suggested that arming teachers would deter
shooters from entering school grounds. She noted that this
teacher was working in Bethel in 1997, when a shooting occurred
at Bethel High School. She pointed out that several states
across the country have similar laws in place and said that more
school shooters are stopped by armed school personnel than by
law enforcement. This is because it takes law enforcement longer
to arrive at the school. She emphasized that in Alaska, where
many villages do not have armed law enforcement and/or are not
on the road system, it can take troopers anywhere from an hour
to five days to respond to an emergency call.
SENATOR HUGHES asserted that SB 173 is a precautionary measure
that will save the lives of students and teachers. She
acknowledged that there is opposition to arming school staff.
However, she has received more messages in support of than in
opposition to SB 173. She suggested that this is because of a
shared goal to protect children and school staff. She pointed
out that, while there is concern about having guns in schools,
there is little risk of a negligent discharge (ND) when staff
are highly trained. Additionally, the guns would be carried
rather than left in a desk drawer, which further reduces the
risk of ND. It is not feasible to have School Resource Officers
(SRO) at every school. She asserted that the only person who can
save a child in an active shooter situation is someone on-site
who is able to respond immediately. She added that this is not
about whether people are pro-gun or anti-gun; rather, it is
about keeping children safe. She said that she has asked both
anti-gun and pro-gun parents if they would want someone on-site
who could stop an active shooter from hurting their child. No
one has replied "no". Referring to an incident when a moose on a
playground could have harmed children, she added that biometric
lockers or keeping a rifle at school are additional measures
that can be taken. She opined that, if SB 173 is not passed and
there is a school shooting, the state will regret not having put
these added safeguards in place.
1:49:20 PM
SENATOR HUGHES briefly summarized the requirements for
individuals to fill the role put forth the by SB 173 which
include [firearm] training, passing the Alaska Police Standards
psychological assessment and medical screening, and ongoing
training that would be determined by individual school boards.
She stated that she is in support of the State of Alaska
covering the costs incurred as a result of implementing these
changes. Additionally, school districts would coordinate with
local law enforcement to ensure that law enforcement is aware of
which school personnel are armed.
1:50:13 PM
SENATOR GRAY-JACKSON referred to a petition provided to the
committee in support of SB 173 and pointed out that more than
half of the signees are not from Alaska. She asked how the
petition was generated.
1:50:44 PM
SENATOR HUGHES answered that the petition was posted online. She
stated that the majority of signatures are from Alaskans while
some are from other states. She surmised that the latter group
heard about [SB 173] and were interested in supporting this
legislation.
1:52:09 PM
CHAIR BJORKMAN opened public testimony on SB 173.
1:52:28 PM
JOHN CLOUGH, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 173. He said he has lived in Alaska for 50
years and has children and grandchildren who live in the state.
He stated that he owns multiple firearms and in 1983, he
apprehended two armed and dangerous felons using his personal
handgun. He received recognition from the Legislature and the
Alaska Peace Officers Association (APOA) for this act. He
asserted that SB 173 has many flaws. First, it is mandatory.
Local school districts, teachers, parents, etc. should have
input. What works for one district may not work for another.
Second, it is not funded. There is a crisis in education
funding; schools will not be able to hire full-time employees to
hold this position. He expressed concern that this will result
in volunteers filling these positions. Finally, the training
requirements are grossly inadequate. He emphasized that the
issue is not whether a person knows how to load, unload,
operate, and lock up a firearm; rather, the issue is whether
they are able to discern when the use of deadly force is
appropriate, especially when working around children. He pointed
out that police officers in Juneau, Alaska are required to
complete 17 weeks of training at the State Trooper Academy. This
training includes firing range, classroom work, computer
simulations, and live-action training exercises. He insisted
that this type of training is what is needed before allowing
someone with a concealed weapon in Auke Bay Elementary in
Juneau, Alaska where his grandchildren attend school. Referring
to his own experience apprehending dangerous individuals, he
explained that he can discern the difference between knowing
"how" to use a gun and knowing "when" to use a gun.
1:54:48 PM
MIKE COONS, Representing self, Palmer, Alaska, Testified in
support of SB 173. He said he is a member of the National Rifle
Association (NRA) and has taught hunter safety for several years
to help young people become safe firearm owners. He said SB 173
enables school employees to take personal responsibility for the
safety of their fellow staff and the students who are under
their care. He challenged those who oppose guns to only enter
buildings that do not allow firearms. He stated that, if he had
children in school, he would gladly enroll them in a school that
addresses immediate safety concerns. He invited those who oppose
SB 173 to enroll their children in gun-free schools. He opined
that in this case, [parents and school staff] are taking on the
responsibility for the harm caused by an active shooter while
waiting for law enforcement to arrive.
1:57:22 PM
ANN GIFFORD, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 173. She said she is a parent of three children
who went to Juneau schools, worked as a school volunteer, and is
a retired school attorney. She spent over 25 years working with
Alaska school districts. Drawing on this experience, she warned
that SB 173 would make schools more dangerous, not less. She
explained that school personnel do not have the extensive
training and experience required to successfully use a gun in an
active-shooter scenario. She pointed to the Parkland, Florida
and Uvalde, Texas shootings and commented that even the police
did not have the appropriate training to properly handle these
incidents. She said that assigning minimally trained school
personnel to carry guns is "a recipe for disaster." Possible
everyday scenarios include accidental weapon discharge and
curious students getting access to guns. Possible crisis
scenarios include school staff accidentally shooting the wrong
person and school staff being mistaken for the active shooter by
law enforcement. She pointed out that current statute allows
school districts to authorize staff members to conceal-carry;
therefore, SB 173 is not needed. She urged the committee to vote
no.
1:59:35 PM
TOM BOUTIN, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 173. He referred to a variety of statewide
economic and social issues, suggesting that these could
potentially drive some individuals to become school shooters. He
opined that SB 173 provides an "honest and constructive"
response to this concern. He contrasted the current laws
disallowing weapons in schools to the past, when weapons were
allowed. SB 173 addresses the changing educational/social
landscape. He said, "no one wants the task of telling the
families of murdered students that we looked at the risks and
saw that nothing could be done."
2:01:49 PM
FRANK BERGSTROM, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 173. He said this is not about arming teachers
with "scary guns" but "empowering defenders." He defined a
"defender" as "someone who is willing and able to defend
themselves and others - especially those that are in their
protection, i.e. children." He outlined the following three
aspects of a defender: a defender's attitude and the desire to
be a defender; the skills, training, and tools required to
perform the job of a defender; and to have a plan for all
situations in which a defender might find themselves. He opined
that SB 173 does all these things. He commented that SB 173
empowers individuals who have the desire to defend those in need
of protection.
2:03:14 PM
DAVID HANNA, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 173. He commented that SB 173 is well thought out
and addresses the concerns that have been raised. He asserted
that all measures to protect children must be embraced. He
surmised that an accidental weapon discharge is unlikely and
contrasted this with the increasing possibility of a school
shooting. He indicated that this is evidence that SB 173 is
needed. He added that, in the event of a school shooting, law
enforcement would likely arrive too late. He posited that [the
state] should enable responsible individuals who are willing to
take on the duty of protecting students.
2:04:24 PM
SALLY DONALDSON, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 173. She expressed concern that SB 173 creates
a mandate. She questioned whether the training included in SB
173 would be adequate and opined that it is too much of a
responsibility to charge school staff with confronting an active
shooter. She added that arming staff would increase the risk of
students and fellow staff being harmed. She suggested that there
are other ways to make communities safer. She clarified that she
is not denouncing guns; however, she believes that having guns
in school is not the right solution.
2:06:10 PM
CHARLIE FRANZ, Representing self, Homer, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 173. He said he supports SB 173. He emphasized the
importance of addressing the issue of school shootings, rather
than ignoring the problem in the hope that it will go away.
2:06:50 PM
HEATHER BENNET, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 173. She commented that gun-free schools leave
students unprotected and pointed out that children trust adults
to keep them safe. She reasoned that staff want to protect the
students but cannot and indicated the SB 173 enables school
staff to better protect students. She emphasized the importance
of training armed personnel who must be mentally prepared to
[take a life]. She surmised that, even with a concealed-carry
permit, most individuals do not want to [take a life]. She
suggested that the only reason someone would be willing to do so
is to protect those who are vulnerable.
2:08:42 PM
CHRISTINE EVERETT, Representing self, North Pole, Alaska,
testified in opposition to SB 173. She said she is a mother and
a grandmother who has lived in Alaska for 36 years. She
expressed concern that SB 173 creates a mandate rather than
allowing local districts to determine whether it is appropriate
for them. She pointed out that SB 173 is not funded, which would
add to the financial strain that schools in Alaska are
experiencing. She asserted that SB 173 does not contain adequate
training requirements. She drew attention to the language in SB
173 that provides immunity to program participants, unless the
standard of "gross negligence" has been met. She reasoned that
this would result in program participants not being held
accountable in the event of an accident that results in injury.
She opined that this lack of accountability will lead to
increased risk of accidents. She drew attention to HB 164
(Misconduct Involving Weapons) and HB 162 (Gun Violence
Protective Orders).
2:11:03 PM
PATTY OWEN, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 173. She is a lifelong Alaskan with children
and grandchildren in the state. She is also a school health and
safety advocate. She noted that she is not anti-gun; however,
she does not believe that arming teachers or volunteers will
increase school safety. Even if they receive training, these
individuals will not serve as an adequate replacement for
trained law enforcement. She said that, across the country, law
enforcement agencies oppose arming school personnel, as it
creates confusion for first responders as they try to
distinguish between the active shooter and armed school
personnel. She commented that there is no evidence to show that
arming school personnel would reduce school violence.
MS. OWEN pointed out that an estimated two out of three children
in Alaska have experienced trauma - and one quarter of high
school students consider suicide. She suggested that lawmakers
seek a more comprehensive approach to school safety. This would
include supporting and funding school health and safety
coordinators, additional school counselors, mental health
services in schools, school social workers, and school nurses.
It would also include training staff in trauma-engaged
practices, providing suicide prevention programs and mental
health education, as well as developing emergency operations
plans and providing funding for school security equipment. She
remarked that suicide by gun is common in Alaska and opined that
there are more "common sense" gun violence prevention strategies
available. Examples of these include safe-storage laws and the
Extreme Risk Protective Order (ERPO) law enacted in Florida
following the Parkland shooting.
2:13:12 PM
ROBERT MATTHEWS, Representing self, Delta Junction, Alaska,
testified in support of SB 173. He said he is a retired military
police officer who currently works with a police force to
develop response plans and procedures. With respect to school
response plans, he stated that the police will never be there
when the shooter starts. He surmised that an armed and trained
individual who is present in the school would be able to deal
with the shooter before the police arrive.
2:14:15 PM
ODETTE EDGAR, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 173. She stated that she has lived in Alaska
for 54 years and her parents were teachers. She currently
volunteers at community schools teaching folk dance. She
contrasted the training proposed in SB 173 to the training
received by law enforcement. Referring to Special Weapons and
Tactics (SWAT) team training, she stated that these individuals
are professionals who are intensively trained in tactics and
marksmanship. Additionally, SWAT teams depend on key leaders to
strategize and coordinate efforts. School staff are unlikely to
have this level of training or strategic support. She surmised
that they also lack the conditioning required to override the
body's natural response when confronting extreme danger. She
explained that these reactions can include heavy adrenaline
rushes; tunnel vision; impaired hearing and speech; shaky arms
and hands; and physical paralysis. She opined that SB 173
creates a scenario that is likely to fail and has the potential
for tragic consequences. She expressed agreement with the
sponsor's statement, "if we want to prevent the deaths of school
children in Alaska, we need to act." She urged the committee to
adopt "front-end" methods which are proven to protect children
in the place where they are most at-risk: in the home. She
recommended endorsing safe gun storage laws such as HB 164
(Misconduct Involving Weapons) and SB 229 (Gun Violence
Protective Orders), which address the most common sources of
child gun deaths in Alaska. She added that states where these
types of laws have been implemented have seen a decrease in the
number of child death and injury.
2:16:27 PM
RYAN PETTY, Representing self, Parkland, Florida, testified in
support of SB 173. He said he is the Vice Chair of the Florida
State Board of Education and a Commissioner on the Marjorie
Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission. The
latter has been tasked with investigating the shooting that
occurred at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland,
Florida (Parkland shooting). He explained that his path to
offering testimony on SB 173 is marked by the loss of his 14-
year-old daughter, Alaina, who was killed in the Parkland
shooting. He described the ways in which this loss has impacted
his life and directed his path toward a "relentless pursuit of
ensuring the safety and security of [children] in schools across
the nation."
MR. PETTY stated that his support of SB 173 is based on the
success of the [Coach Aaron Feis Guardian Program] (Florida
Guardian Program). He explained that he is familiar with this
program, having experienced its impact first-hand. He is an
honorary Florida school guardian and has completed the training
required by the program. He explained that the Florida Guardian
Program was created in response to the pressing need for
increased security in schools and to reduce response time during
active-shooter incidents. He pointed out that response times are
critical during active-shooter events and SB 173 addresses this.
He stated that, when faced with an active shooter, an immediate
response is crucial to minimize harm and save lives. He
acknowledged that, in Florida, there was concern that the
presence of firearms on school campuses would make students less
safe; however, these fears have not been borne out. He
emphasized that the Florida Guardian Program has been a success.
He reasoned that the program serves as both a deterrent to - and
a way to stop - an active shooter.
2:18:50 PM
JOHN SONIN, Representing self, Douglas, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 173. He cautioned against binary thinking with
respect to the issue of guns and gun violence. He reasoned that
one does not need to be "anti-gun" to be "anti-gun violence." He
suggested that SB 173 would lead to "Wild West" thinking. He
opined that everyone having guns does not create equality. He
asserted that more guns in schools would destroy the minds [of
youth], thereby making a peaceful and tranquil future impossible
and urged legislators to consider the consequences of SB 173.
2:21:10 PM
JIM IRVINE, Co-Director, FASTER Saves Lives, Cleveland, Ohio,
stated FASTER Saves Lives was mentioned in SB 173 and he is
available to answer questions.
2:21:40 PM
JOYANNE BLOOM, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 173. She stated that she is a gun owner and
offered additional facts to provide more context for the
discussion. She stated that according to advocacy research by
Save Our Schools a student has a 0.2 percent chance of being
involved in a school shooting during their entire K-12 career.
She outlined the various areas of study covered by the 17-week
Alaska law enforcement training and contrasted this with the 3-
day training offered by the FASTER program. She stated that SB
173 is unnecessary, adding that the state should be working
harder to keep guns away from children and those who exhibit
dangerous tendencies.
2:23:46 PM
SHANNAN GREENE, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 173. She is the mother of three children who have
attended K-12 in Juneau, Alaska and a retired 32-year military
first responder. She emphasized the importance of response time
in an emergency. She commented that the changes put forth in SB
173 are a "responsible offensive posture in today's
environment." Without these changes, students are "sitting
ducks." She pointed out that senior government officials and
celebrities are among those who rely on armed protection. She
stated that responsible school staff are the first stopgap
measure and defenders in an active shooter incident, adding that
there are active shooter training teams available. She shared
her belief that SB 173 is a better option than expecting
teachers to defend students with chairs and tables.
2:25:43 PM
JOEL SIGMAN, Representing self, Wasilla, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 173. He opined that more guns in schools would
increase school safety by deterring shooters from entering the
building. He pointed out that the rules related to guns in
schools have changed over time and reiterated that allowing
trained teachers to carry guns would deter any potential
threats.
2:26:51 PM
DOUG WALRATH, Director, Northwestern Alaska Career & Technical
Center, Nome, Alaska, testified in support of SB 173. He said
that he is the parent of two children in middle school and that
he has been a school administrator for 15 years. He stated that
he is also a combat veteran and a former teacher. He shared that
he was a teacher in Idaho in the 1990s when the shooting at
Columbine High School in Littleton, CO occurred. He expressed
concern that 25 years later, nothing has changed. He said he
walks school halls daily with a unique perspective due to his
military training. With respect to timing in an emergency, he
relayed a recent experience with a student who needed immediate
medical attention. He pointed out that it took 12 minutes for
emergency medical services (EMS) to arrive. He commented that
this was a relatively quick response. In contrast, he can access
all areas of the school within two minutes. He expressed his
willingness to be an armed staff member and pointed out that his
past training and current position as a school administrator
make him an ideal candidate.
2:29:04 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR noted that current statute allows schools to
employ armed staff, should they choose to do so. He asked if the
Nome School District currently has armed and trained school
personnel.
2:29:38 PM
MR. WALRATH clarified that he is employed by the Bering Straight
School District and is working in Nome. He answered that he is
not aware of either school district's position on the current
statute. He further clarified that, while he is in support of SB
173, he is not in support of creating a mandate. Rather, he
supports having the opportunity to create these positions within
schools. He added that, as a school administrator, he is
separated from the student population, which would alleviate
some of the concerns around students' access to guns.
2:31:05 PM
LIN DAVIS, Volunteer, Moms Demand Action, Juneau, Alaska,
testified in opposition to SB 173. She stated that she is a 30-
year Alaska resident and is retired from the Department of
Labor. She taught High School for ten years prior to moving to
Alaska. She asserted that SB 173 brings too many risks and
increases costs for schools that are already struggling to
maintain funding. She suggested that the focus shift to
strategies that have demonstrated strong safety records and
lower death rates, including HB 164 (Misconduct Involving
Weapons) and HB 162 (Gun Violence Protective Orders). She
commented that most law enforcement are strongly opposed to SB
173, as lay-people with weapons can be overcome in stressful
situations. She added that most parents strongly oppose arming
teachers. She pointed out that teachers and law enforcement
officers have different skillsets and suggested that training
teachers will not bridge the gap in their innate abilities.
2:33:19 PM
WILLIAM LUCE, Representing self, Retired Member of Alaska
National Guard, Palmer, Alaska, testified in support of SB 173.
He said he is a retired Alaska schoolteacher who came to Alaska
as a veteran. He shared that in 1997 he was a teacher at Bethel
High School and was present during the shooting that occurred.
In the shooting, principal Ron Edwards, a Vietnam veteran, and
student Josh Palacios were shot and killed by student Evan
Ramsey. He reasoned that, if Mr. Edwards had been armed, he
would have been able to protect both himself and the students.
He surmised that there are other teachers who are retired
veterans who would step forward to fill these positions, adding
that their experience in the armed forces makes them good
candidates.
2:35:52 PM
MICHAEL GARHART, Representing self, Wasilla, Alaska, testified
in support of SB 173. He emphasized the importance of a fast
response in life-threatening situations. He stated his belief
that having trained and armed school personnel would save time
and lives.
2:36:37 PM
ROCHELLE PARKER, Volunteer, Moms Demand Action, Anchorage,
Alaska, testified in opposition to SB 173. She said she is a
parent of elementary school children. She asserted that guns do
not belong in schools. She noted that school shootings have
become too common and expressed shock that lawmakers have not
enacted "common sense" gun reform to make schools safer. She
shared her belief that measures should be taken to fortify
schools and keep students and faculty safe; however, she argued
that arming teachers is not the answer. She expressed concern
that allowing guns in schools would increase the risk of
students accessing weapons and harming themselves or others. She
pointed out that firearms are the leading cause of death for
children and teens in Alaska and nationwide. Additionally,
Alaska has the highest rate of youth suicide in the nation. She
questioned how teachers can be expected to take on the role of
law enforcement in a chaotic active-shooter situation - even if
they are trained to use a firearm. She indicated that this would
be even more difficult if the shooter was a student or former
student. She said arming teachers increases the risk of students
getting caught in the crossfire. She acknowledged that teachers
are willing to protect their students; however, she opined that
adding more guns will not increase student safety. Instead, she
suggested focusing efforts on other measures that prevent gun
violence and gun suicides, such as HB 164 (Misconduct Involving
Weapons) and SB 229 (Gun Violence Protective Orders). She
emphasized the importance of secure gun storage and referred to
a study of targeted school violence by the United States Secret
Service which showed that most school shooters acquired their
weapons from the home.
2:39:13 PM
TAMARA KRUSE ROSELIUS, Representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska,
testified in opposition to SB 173. She stated that she is a
mother of four and expressed that she is not anti-gun. She
offered four reasons to oppose SB 173. First, it creates a
mandate, rather than allowing local schools to decide what is
best for their students. Second, there is no funding provided
for schools to implement the required changes. She stated that
schools are already facing a deficit crisis. Third, the mandate
is unnecessary, as Alaska law already provides that a school's
chief administrator may allow school personnel to carry a
firearm on school grounds. Finally, she stated that SB 173
creates a safety concern. She implied that the training
requirement included in SB 173 is inadequate, stating that the
17-week training required to become law enforcement in Alaska is
the necessary amount of training to appropriately respond in the
event of an active-shooter incident.
2:40:38 PM
JANEL DOCKENDORF, Representing self, Wasilla, Alaska, testified
in support of SB 173. She stated that, provided the individuals
receive extensive training and the firearms are safely locked
away, SB 173 is a necessary safeguard to protect students. She
recommended having security guards at each school entry point;
however, she acknowledged that there are not enough people
available to do this.
2:41:45 PM
CHERI RUIZ, Representing self, Palmer, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 173. She stated that SB 173 adds an extra layer of
protection for students. Pointing to the number of active-
shooter events that have occurred at schools in the United
States, she said gun-free zones do not keep children safe. She
argued that firearm storage is also ineffective and asserted
that most gun crimes are committed with stolen firearms. She
explained that her nephew was murdered with a stolen firearm.
She commented that firearm storage may be beneficial but
asserted that it would not stop someone who was intent on
entering a school as an active shooter. She expressed concern
that children are attending schools without the extra protection
SB 173 would provide.
2:43:47 PM
ALEX KOPLIN, Representing self, Homer, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 173. He stated that he has been a teacher for
over 45 years and has taught hunter safety courses. He said that
he has been in two lockdowns due to firearm threats in the area
and that he has two grandchildren. He expressed agreement with
the previous testimony that having security guards in schools
would be ideal. He opined that having teachers carry firearms is
"a recipe for disaster." He pointed out that teachers would need
a great deal of training to be able to adequately respond during
an active shooter incident, adding that even SWAT team personnel
- who receive tactical training for these kinds of events - can
develop tunnel vision. He noted that SB 173 would create an
additional expense for school districts that [already struggle
to maintain adequate funding].
MR. KOPLIN questioned what might happen if the individual
holding this position in a school was sick or absent. He
expressed concern that someone may be unwell and come to school
anyway. He indicated that SB 173 places unfair responsibility on
individuals who are not trained to deal with these scenarios. He
suggested that funding schools should be a priority so that
faculty are better resourced and can identify red-flag
behaviors. This would enable them to potentially stop shootings
before they occur.
2:46:12 PM
STEVEN RETTKE, Representing self, Eagle River, Alaska, testified
in support of SB 173. He stated that he is a retired maintenance
supervisor. He said that when there is an active shooter, there
needs to be an immediate response. Armed school personnel would
be faster to respond than law enforcement.
2:47:03 PM
DR. MAUREEN LONGWORTH, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska,
testified in opposition to SB 173. She said she has practiced
medicine in Alaska for 31 years. Prior to this, she worked in
inner-city emergency rooms, where she saw many gunshot-wound
victims. She commented that her work experience has taught her
to view evidence and identify what programs foster health and
safety within a community. She stated that evidence has shown
that arming school personnel has failed in other schools,
bringing more risks to those communities. She shared her belief
that that using limited school funding to pay for a program that
the evidence does not support would be devastating. In contrast,
the evidence supports changes like those included in HB 162 (Gun
Violence Protective Orders). She commented that more violence
and guns in schools are not needed.
2:49:23 PM
GERALD VOSS, Representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 173. He opined that the state should make changes
like those made by airlines after the terrorist attacks on
September 11, 2001 (9/11). He explained that, after 9/11, there
was a federal air marshal on every plane and pilots were allowed
to carry weapons in a locked, hard-sided case. He explained that
only airline crew were aware of who was armed on the aircraft.
In addition, airline staff were trained to identify mental
instability which helped to identify potential problems. He
proposed that schools could utilize a similar system which would
allow school personnel to know who was armed without sharing
this information with their students. He surmised that this
would help to avoid children getting ahold of the weapons.
2:51:07 PM
MICHELLE VASQUEZ, Representing self, Soldotna, Alaska, testified
in opposition to SB 173. She shared her understanding that
current statute authorizes schools to allow staff to carry
firearms and expressed concern that SB 173 creates a mandate.
She opined that this sends the wrong message. She expressed
concern about the limited amount of training required for
individuals who would take on this position. She said guns in
schools is not the answer and suggested that front-end measures
to prevent gun violence would be a better choice.
2:52:24 PM
CHAIR BJORKMAN closed public testimony on SB 173.
2:52:36 PM
CHAIR BJORKMAN solicited a motion.
2:52:44 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR moved to adopt Amendment 1, work order 33-
LS0781\H.1, for SB 173.
33-LS0781\H.1
Bergerud
2/23/24
A M E N D M E N T 1
OFFERED IN THE SENATE
TO: SB 173
Page 4, following line 15:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(g) Subject to appropriation, the department
shall reimburse a school district for training costs
incurred under (a)(3) and (4) of this section."
Reletter the following subsection accordingly.
2:53:14 PM
CHAIR BJORKMAN objected for purposes of discussion.
2:53:20 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR stated that this amendment was brought on behalf
of the sponsor of SB 173. He clarified that the fiscal note
refers to the Department of Education and Early Development
(DEED). He spoke in favor of the amendment and explained that he
had been working on a similar amendment that would provide
funding for the training required by SB 173. However, he was
unable to determine how much these costs would increase the base
student allocation (BSA) in time for the day's hearing. He
pointed out that the amendment before the committee achieves a
similar goal by creating a funded mandate.
2:54:13 PM
CHAIR BJORKMAN [removed his objection]; he found no further
objection and Amendment 1 was adopted.
2:54:45 PM
CHAIR BJORKMAN solicited the will of the committee.
2:54:53 PM
SENATOR GRAY-JACKSON moved to report SB 173, work order 33-
LS0781\H, as amended, from committee with individual
recommendations and attached fiscal note(s).
2:55:07 PM
CHAIR BJORKMAN found no objection and CSSB 173 (L&C), was
reported from the Senate Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.
2:55:38 PM
At ease
SB 211-AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS/LOANS/SALES
3:02:24 PM
CHAIR BJORKMAN reconvened the meeting and announced the
consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 211 "An Act relating to the
powers of the board of agriculture and conservation; relating to
loans and limitations under the Alaska Agricultural Loan Act;
relating to federal crop insurance contributions; relating to
municipal and state procurement preferences for agricultural
products harvested in the state and fisheries products harvested
or processed in the state; and providing for an effective date."
3:02:46 PM
BRENT GOODRUM, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Natural
Resources (DNR), Anchorage, Alaska, presented SB 211 on behalf
of the administration. He stated that SB 211 is intended to
incentivize food production in Alaska. SB 211 was introduced by
Governor Dunleavy and boosts state policies already in statute.
This will have an immediate impact and will work in tandem with
other short, medium, and long-term recommendations and actions.
With SB 211, Governor Dunleavy hopes to increase food security
and food independence for Alaskans and to expand Alaska's
agriculture economic sector.
3:03:40 PM
MR. GOODRUM spoke to points on slide 2:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Agriculture in Alaska: Status Report
• Robust Alaska agriculture is a long-held vision
• Hardy Alaskans are farming
o 2017 national census: Nearly 1,000 Alaska farms
and ranches produced about $29.6 M in crop value
and $40.8 M in animal production
• So much more potential
o with the right support
• Why grow agriculture?
o Greater food security and independence for
Alaskans
o Develop an economic sector (jobs, value chain
benefits)
MR. GOODRUM noted that, since creating this slide, more recent
national census data has been made available. According to the
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2022 National
Agricultural Statistic Service Census of Agriculture, there are
nearly 1,200 Alaska farms and ranches that have produced around
$39.7 million in crop value and $51.2 million in animal
production. He suggested that "a state as large and diverse as
Alaska" has an even greater potential for growth in this sector,
given adequate support. He stated that "greater food security
and independence for Alaskans" requires economic
diversification.
3:04:34 PM
MR. GOODRUM spoke to points on slide 3:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Agriculture in Alaska: Key Challenges
• High cost, high risk business
• Often starting from scratch
• Market access, supply/demand
• Lack of infrastructure
• Human challenges: more farmers, laborers
• Chicken and egg dynamic: Where can State be a
catalyst?
MR. GOODRUM discussed the many challenges to agriculture in
Alaska. For farmers, starting from scratch often means clearing
"raw" land. It can be difficult for new farmers to access
markets and to meet consumer demand - and the uncertainty of
markets often precludes farmers from scaling up. The lack of
infrastructure includes the following: transportation to
markets; access to state lands suitable for agriculture; access
to cheap power; and processing, manufacturing, and production
facilities. He added that there is a demand for a skilled
workforce, as many farmers are aging out of the profession. He
questioned where the next generation of agricultural laborers
will come from.
3:06:16 PM
MR. GOODRUM spoke to points on slide 4:
[Original punctuation provided.]
CROP Act
• SB 211: Capital access, Revenue protection and Open
Procurement (CROP) Act
• Based on recommendations by task forces, division
experts, stakeholders' policy priorities
• Selected for ability to get direct support to the
industry, quickly (minimal new staff, programs to
develop)
MR. GOODRUM reiterated that SB 211 draws from existing statute.
The three main components of the bill - capital access, revenue
protection, and open procurement (CROP) - are based on
recommendations of [those in the industry]. He clarified that
there will be no additional programs to develop.
3:07:06 PM
MR. GOODRUM spoke to points on slide 5:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Capital Access: The 'C' in CROP Act
• Board of Agriculture and Conservation responsible for
Agricultural Revolving Loan Fund
o Key source of capital for farmers/producers
• SB 211 responsive to evolving industry needs
o More efficient Board of Agriculture process
o Expand eligible activities, allow refinancing
o $2 Million capital infusion into loan fund
o Revising loan caps cumulatively and for specific
activities (last updated in 1980s)
MR. GOODRUM said the Board of Agriculture is currently comprised
of working citizens. While all seven seats are full, it can be
difficult to meet quorum requirements; this, in turn, can delay
the loan application and approval process. He suggested that
statutorily reducing the quorum requirement from five to four
would increase the efficiency of the board. He explained that SB
211 would also expand the list of activities eligible for
Agricultural Revolving Loan Fund (ARLF) funding to include
shipping and transportation. This change was recommended by
recent task forces and will potentially pave the way for
agriculture-focused transportation cooperatives. This would help
to reduce shipping costs into and throughout the state. SB 211
would also allow for refinancing of ARLF loans, provided that
both the applicant and activities are eligible according to ARLF
requirements. With respect to the proposed $2 million capital
infusion into ARLF, he stated that this is the first injection
into the fund since 1986 and would increase lending capital by
nearly 20 percent. This increase would enable ARLF to meet any
additional requests for funding that result from changes made by
SB 211. He explained that SB 211 also directs the Board of
Agriculture and Conservation (BAC) to increase loan caps that
are difficult to update over time to keep up with inflation. He
noted that, due to inflation, one hundred dollars over four
decades ago is roughly equivalent to three hundred dollars in
today's economy. He added that the current loan cap is one
million dollars to any one borrower. Provisions in Section 3
would direct the Board of Agriculture and Conservation to set
new loan limits and ceilings. He said a thorough, public process
would be required.
3:09:29 PM
MR. GOODRUM advanced to slide 6 displaying a bar chart depicting
Capital Access - Fund Data Points. He explained that there are
currently 52 active ARLF loans. The varied loan types reflect
the diversity of agriculture in Alaska. He noted that the total
principal balance of ARLF loans ($21.4 million) is equal to the
sum of the balance ($9.3 million) plus authorized ($12.1
million).
3:10:09 PM
MR. GOODRUM spoke to points on slide 7:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Revenue Protection: The 'R'
• Concept in statute (AS 03.13), never funded; bill
revises support formula
• Fiscal note includes capital to pay for State support
• Incentivizes production to boost feed supply, support
larger herds
• Helps offset risk and enables farmer to invest in farm
infrastructure, expansions
MR. GOODRUM elaborated on the above, noting that the fiscal note
includes $2 million that will support crop insurance for current
acres under production and allow for additional acres. He stated
that, at current production and 2022 premium levels, the
estimated 5-year cost of the program is approximately $900
thousand. He suggested that, should the program increase in
size, additional funding would be available for premium support.
Alaska Farm Bureau and task force reports have indicated that
state support for insurance would incentivize increased
production. Access to revenue protection policies will likewise
increase access to capital, thereby lowering farmers' risk while
improving equipment - such as irrigation systems - which, in
turn, boost production. He explained that SB 211 focuses on
three main crops: barley, wheat, and oats - foundational crops
that provide food for livestock. He said that securing access to
livestock feed is likely to enable larger herd sizes, which
would then improve throughput - and therefore the economic
status - of slaughterhouse operations. He explained that, in the
future, USDA Revenue Protection crop insurance may be required
for feed grain farmers to qualify for ARLF loans.
3:12:23 PM
MR. GOODRUM spoke to points on slide 8:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Revenue Protection: How it Works
• Eligible crops are those with revenue protection
policies available: currently barley, wheat, oats
• State covers:
o 100 percent of premium in years 1-2 sufficient to
obtain 85 percent revenue protection
o 100 percent of premium in year 3 sufficient to
obtain 80 percent revenue protection
o 100 percent of premium in year 4 sufficient to
obtain 75 percent revenue protection
o In year 5 and on the farmer needs to pay the
premium to obtain 55 percent revenue protection,
state covers additional premium to reach 70
percent revenue protection
MR. GOODRUM said that more details would be fleshed out in
regulations, adding that there would likely be no minimum
acreage requirement for coverage - [providing that farmers meet
the USDA Risk Management Agency (RMA) requirements]. He
explained that in years 3-5, the state's coverage obligations
are stepped down - and farmers would be able to purchase
additional coverage to reach 85 percent revenue protection. He
clarified that the USDA risk management agency subsidizes
approximately 62 percent of the revenue protection - the state
of Alaska would cover the remainder.
3:14:32 PM
MR. GOODRUM spoke to points on slide 9:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Revenue Protection: How it Works
• State role: accept applications, verify eligible
producers, submit verification to RMA, send funds to
RMA
• Producer role: selects coverage at desired level from
an approved provider, reports acreage, pays any
premium not covered by state
• State does not adjudicate loss claims or cover losses
through federal Risk Management Agency (RMA)
MR. GOODRUM explained that RMA has a list of "approved insurance
providers" (AIP). There are around 14 AIPs nationwide. RMA sets
the terms for AIP policies. He clarified that the state will not
be issuing insurance policies but will be acting in an
enrollment capacity and noted that the State is not getting into
the insurance business.
3:15:21 PM
MR. GOODRUM spoke to points on slide 10:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Open Procurement: The 'O' and 'P'
• Procurement preferences already in statute
o State agencies, school districts and
municipalities that receive state funds
• Alaska-grown agricultural and Alaska fisheries
products
• Includes responsible protections
• Incentivizes more production by providing access to
institutional markets
3:17:06 PM
MR. GOODRUM elaborated on the above, pointing out that Alaska
Grown and Alaska fisheries products will be given preference.
Protections will include providing a full sales and pricing list
when responding to solicitation; there will be penalties for
submitting inaccurate information. Additionally, an annual
report to the legislature will be required. He stated that,
excluding Alaska fisheries products, few producers are currently
able to provide the quantities that large, institutional buyers
require. Thus, a significant increase in spending is not
expected. He said that the DOA will continue to work on more
effective ways to connect growers and buyers, adding that SB 211
offers an immediate step in that direction. There is support for
encouraging retailers to sell more Alaska grown products. He
pointed out that greater access to local markets offers
producers the opportunity to scale up and increases food
security and independence in Alaska.
3:17:42 PM
CHAIR BJORKMAN opened public testimony on SB 211; finding none
he closed public testimony.
3:18:12 PM
CHAIR BJORKMAN held SB 211 in committee.
3:18:56 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Bjorkman adjourned the Senate Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee meeting at 3:18 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 211 Transmittal Letter 01.24.24.pdf |
SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM SL&C 4/12/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 211 |
| SB 211 Fiscal Note-DCCED-ASMI 01.12.24.pdf |
SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 211 |
| SB 211 Fiscal Note-DCCED-DCRA 01.12.24.pdf |
SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 211 |
| SB 211 Fiscal Note-DNR-AGR 01.24.24.pdf |
SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 211 |
| SB211 ver A.pdf |
SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM SL&C 4/12/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 211 |
| SB 211 Fiscal Note-DNR-ARLF 02.08.24.pdf |
SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 211 |
| SB 211 Sectional Analysis 02.01.24.pdf |
SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 211 |
| SB173 Public Testimony Received as of 02.29.24.pdf |
SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB173 Draft Proposed Amendment ver H.1.pdf |
SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB211 Presentation by DNR to SLAC 03.01.24.pdf |
SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 211 |
| SB173 Letter of Support-Email-Shannon Methe-01.13.24.pdf |
SL&C 1/24/2024 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB173 Letter of Support-Email-Andrew Ault-01.21.24.pdf |
SL&C 1/24/2024 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB173 Public Testimony-Email-Therese Lewandowski-01.21.24.pdf |
SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB173 Public Testimony-Received as of 1pm 01.23.24.pdf |
SL&C 1/24/2024 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB173 Sectional Analysis ver H.pdf |
SL&C 1/24/2024 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB173 Sponsor Statement ver H.pdf |
SL&C 1/24/2024 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB173 ver H.PDF |
SL&C 1/24/2024 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB173 Fiscal Note-LAW-CJL-01.19.24.pdf |
SL&C 1/24/2024 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB173 Fiscal Note-EED-SSA-01.19.24.pdf |
SL&C 1/24/2024 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB173 Sponsor Presentation to SLAC 01.24.24.pdf |
SL&C 1/24/2024 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |
| SB173 Public Testimony(2)-Received as of noon 01.24.24.pdf |
SL&C 1/24/2024 1:30:00 PM SL&C 3/1/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 173 |