HB 369-STUDENT PARTICIPATION IN SPORTS  8:06:49 AM CHAIR DICK announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 369, "An Act relating to student participation in sports." GARY MATHEWS, Executive Director, Alaska School Activities Association (ASAA), stated that ASAA is the governing body of interscholastic high school activities in the state. Its 200 high school members follow a standard set of rules, bylaws and policies for interscholastic competition, including fine arts, athletics, and academic activities. He explained that this bill combines the "concussion bill" and the "home school" bill. He read his comments, as follows [original punctuation provided]: Implementation of HB 369 will create a major change to student eligibility rules, which have been in effect for 56 years in Alaska. At this time it's not wise to adopt such a change when school districts across the state don't know the ramifications of this bill. Our main concern is how the bill can be fairly implemented across the districts across the district of the state - all 53 school districts - which are members of Alaska School Activities Association (ASAA) and how parity can be ensured when home school parents are providing the curriculum and assigning grades. Alaska education regulation 4 AAC 06.115, Interscholastic Activities was adopted by the state Board of Education (BOE) on June 26, 1994. The purpose of which - and this is an excerpt - is to provide a procedure that enables school districts to promote and govern interscholastic activities effectively, economically, and fairly, while keeping those activities in their proper perspective, educationally. 8:10:26 AM MR. MATHEWS read his comments, as follows [original punctuation provided]: Under the proposed legislation the legislature, rather than school districts, regional Associations or Alaska School Activities Association would be setting policies for interscholastic activity participation. Fifty-three member school districts in Alaska, represented through the the Alaska School Activities Association are opposed to the passage of HB 369 for the points specified above. If HB 369 is passed by the legislature, schools and ASAA will need some time to amend the rules and to adopt new procedures. ASAA Board of Directors and regional associations hold their final meetings of the year during March and April so some of the associations have already finished their meetings and the ASAA board will meet in two weeks in Bethel. Implementing such a change by August 1 of this school year when our activity season starts will be extremely difficult and once the school year begins we must have all changes in place so that all activities programs are treated fairly - so we're not treating some sport's seasons differently than others. It is my recommendation that changes to interscholastic eligibility rules resulting from legislative action have an effective date of July 1, 2013 if HB 369 is passed. Thank you. 8:12:00 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON explained one of the issues that the Kenai Borough School District (KBSD) has been reviewing the past few years has been the participation by students attending one school, but participating in another school that offers sports. He asked whether the ASAA would allow particpation in either football or hockey in a school separate from the closest school at which a student may participate in other sports, such as basketball or other small team sports. MR. MATHEWS responded that the question is difficult to answer. He said the schools in the area are all part of the Kenai Peninsula School District (KPSD) so smaller schools would have an opportunity to form cooperative teams with the larger schools. This currently happens with Homer High School and the small Old Believer schools just north of Homer. This bill would not affect that issue; however, HB 369 would affect students who attend private home schools and the statewide correspondence programs, such as IDEA, Raven, and Pace. School districts sponsor programs for students not only within their districts, but for correspondence students outside of their districts. He emphasized that would directly affect the aforementioned programs as well as private home schools. Private home schools currently may become members of ASAA and their kids can represent home schools in many sports and activities, but football or hockey are usually restricted since they are team sports. 8:14:40 AM REPRESENTATIVE DAN SADDLER, Alaska State Legislature, asked whether Mr. Mathews has reviewed the first section of the bill related to concussions. MR. MATHEWS pointed out the language in [section 1] of the bill is slightly different than what the ASAA had hoped for since the original request was to eliminate four words in the statute "and is currently certified." Last year, HB 115 was adopted to address treating sports concussions, but the bill included a provision requiring medical providers to obtain certification. He clarified that the state does not certify physicians or medical providers in concussion management, which was not clarified in the bill. He said the ASAA could live with the current revision, which removes "and is currently certified, as verified in writing or electronically by the qualified person" He emphasized the ASAA had hoped the language "as verified in writing or electronically by the qualified person" would stay in the bill since the language would tend to protect school districts and would place the liability on the medical provider to say whether he or she is qualified rather than to have the school district make that determination. Thus the organization can manage with the current language in HB 369, with respect to concussion management, although it is not their preferred wording. 8:16:15 AM CHAIR DICK noted general agreement and stated his observations seemed like good ones. 8:16:30 AM REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE recalled an earlier question on the preferred effective date of July 1, 2013. He suggested that if the bill were to pass it would likely go into effect on July 1, 2012. He asked whether a year would be enough time for ASAA to implement the changes. MR. MATHEWS related the ASAA's process for rulemaking, such that the ASAA has six regions, which have representatives on their Board of Directors, plus a representative of the school board association, the superintendents' association, and the student government association. He explained that proposed changes are brought forth from various entities, including regions to the board; a hearing process would occur and if it passes muster the board would implement the changes and any effective dates. He reported that the ASAA meets in two weeks, but will not meet again until October 2013 so any changes scheduled to go into effect for the 2013 school year must be approved by the board this month. Otherwise, some sports will begin under one set of rules and part way through the school year other sports - such as wresting or basketball - would fall under another set of rules. He favored the ASAA working under one set of rules. MR. MATHEWS explained that under the bill, student eligibility rules would need to undergo a complete review, which could prove cumbersome considering that the bill proposes a major policy change. An effective date would also need to be considered to allow for any adjustments. He spoke about the cumbersome aspects since graduation and grade point averages requirements could be affected. He recalled problems physicians had when the concussion bill passed and anticipated similar problems. He reiterated many processes would change if non-enrolled students are involved and the organization would need time to inform people who will be affected by the changes. Additionally, penalties could apply to schools if they allow athletes to participate who have not met eligibility rules. 8:19:55 AM REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE recalled most nonprofit organizations have provisions for special meetings of the board. He questioned whether that was possible with the ASAA. 8:20:09 AM MR. MATHEWS answered that it is possible although once the school lets out board members are not available since many are teachers or school district employees. He focused his concern on the procedures. It would be necessary to develop an implementation plan since there are literally thousands of home schooled children in Alaska who may wish to participate at their nearest public school. The ASAA would need to develop processes to accept students for athletics, but still ensure that home school students follow the same set of eligibility standards other students must follow. He suggested if East Anchorage High School receives a request for ten home school students to participate on its football team the school would need to notify the ASAA to ensure each student has met eligibility standards. He reiterated that although the organization works during the summer, contacting the schools prior to the football season beginning, which is usually about the third week of July, would be difficult. 8:22:19 AM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked whether an effective date for each section of the bill would be helpful. MR. MATHEWS answered yes. 8:23:01 AM REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT asked him to quantify the burden one home school student who wishes to participate in interscholastic activities at a high school might place on a school administrator. MR. MATHEWS answered that the school would determine whether the student has met eligibility requirements, including attendance, grades, and other considerations. The school would obtain some of the information from parents or the statewide correspondence school. The timeliness would depend on the responsiveness of the parents or the specific correspondence school. REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT acknowledged that currently home schooled students play on teams in Anchorage. He related his understanding the bill was introduced as the result of an issue that arose for a Chugiak High School homeschooled student. He asked for the basic changes between the current system and the interscholastic activities provisions under the bill. MR. MATHEWS explained that the status quo in the Anchorage School District (ASD) is that the school runs its own home school programs. Students can enroll in the home school program and select a school of eligibility at their nearest school. Under HB 369, students who are not part of the ASD home school program - private home schooled students not affiliated with any entity in the state - would have the same benefits and play sports at one of the public high schools in Anchorage. REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT asked whether he could foresee a student who cannot meet eligibility requirements in a public school could change to a private school status in order to regain eligibility to play on a team. He asked whether the bill would create a potential loophole in the eligibility process for interscholastic activities. MR. MATHEWS answered yes. He recalled this happening when a student had become disenchanted with a school or had been removed from school for a disciplinary matter. The parents subsequently began home schooling the student. Several weeks later the student decided to participate in interscholastic sports through the home school program. The ASAA's ruling deemed the home school student's participation unfair since it would have given the student an advantage over students who had met eligibility requirements. He concluded that allowing the student to participate would have been unfair. 8:26:58 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to section 2 of the bill. He expressed concern that this provision would create a major change in the state supervision of home schools. He noted that if anyone wished to participate in fine arts or sports the school district would need to supervise the curriculum, the attendance, and the progress towards graduation. He suggested that before section 2 could be implemented the state would need to have a detailed conversation with home school parents. He asked whether the school districts would be more involved in certification of grades, attendance, and progress towards graduation than under the current process. GARY MATHEWS agreed with the potential outcome since schools would be held accountable for reporting on the status of home schooled students. 8:28:54 AM DREMA FITZHUGH, Member, Chugiak Football Boosters Club, referred to a student, Craig Lowe, who was deemed ineligible in midseason last year. She expressed her appreciation to Representative Saddler for introducing the bill. 8:30:21 AM MARY VALLIERES stated her son is Craig Lowe. She offered her support for all parents of home schooled students who want their children to be able to participate in sports. She explained that her son was excluded from high school football since he was home schooled by a different school district and was later found ineligible. She recalled Mr. Mathew's earlier testimony that the effective date of the bill would be next year. She pointed out that her son is a senior and he will never have an opportunity to play high school football. This was his first sport, she said. She reiterated that the home schooled children who are seniors will never have a chance again to play high school sports. She did not understand the reason her son, who was enrolled [in the IDEA program, which is a statewide home school program,] was ineligible since he resides in Chugiak, but could not play football at Chugiak High School. CHAIR DICK appreciated her testimony and encouraged her to speak to her position on the bill. He related his understanding that the bill, if passed, may have an effective date beyond the timeframe that would help her son's eligibility issue. MS. VALLIERES responded that parents want their children to be able to have childhood opportunities and it is difficult to have their student excluded from programs. She emphasized the importance of music education. CHAIR DICK understood music education is an option for home schooled students, but noted these homeschooled students are not eligible to play football. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether she had any thoughts on how home school parents might verify a student's progress in a program like IDEA. MS. VALLIERES responded that she must provide samples of her son's progress quarterly. She related she typically has communicated by phone and e-mail with her son's teacher and she submits his grades. 8:36:36 AM PETE HOEPFNER, President, Cordova School Board, stated his opposition to HB 369. He related that this bill covers two diverse and divergent topics. The first topic relates to the medical diagnosis and treatment of concussions, which needs to be addressed. A requirement for certification needs to be deleted since a regulatory body to do so does not exist in Alaska. He related his understanding that physicians currently have expressed strong concern with signing any version of the medical release form. Thus this change is necessary. He pointed out that the second section of the bill relates to home schooled student participation in public school activities. He offered his belief that this section of HB 369 has multiple problems. He offered his belief that implementing these provisions would become a paper nightmare due to the need to continually monitor eligibility of home schooled students in order for them to participate in the public schools. He said that if parents want their children to participate in student activities they must enroll them in school. He pointed out that Cordova students can enroll in the Cordova School District's home school program and become eligible for any activity. Additionally, he cautioned that a home schooled student could displace a public school student. Further, he recalled that student activity fees were previously mentioned. In Cordova, student activity fees are a little lower, but none of the fees add up to the costs involved for a coach's salary, equipment, and travel. The costs for the home schooled student would not be funded, he said. Further, budget constraints currently exist. Last year Cordova funded $100,000 towards student travel, but this year only $75,000 is budgeted for travel. He reiterated that funding for home schooled students is not taken under consideration. He surmised that parents sometimes choose to home school their children when they think public schools are insufficient; however, the parents then want their homeschooled children to participate in sports programs. He stated support for HB 15, which passed last session, and needs to be amended to eliminate the certification provision of those treating concussions; however, he expressed his opposition to the home school provision in HB 369 since students can participate by enrolling in the local school's home school system and due to lack of funding. 8:40:39 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to section 1 of HB 369 to the addition of the four words, "and is currently certified" and asked about the effective date for that portion. He asked whether it would affect ASAA's ability to implement the change. MR. HOEPFNER answered that he is a board member of ASAA, but did not want to speak for the ASAA; however, the sooner the four words could be deleted from the existing language, the better, since a certification process does not exist. 8:41:57 AM REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA reviewed the fiscal note, which indicates no cost involvement to EED. She asked whether any costs arise for the department or if the costs would be carried by the parents themselves. CHAIR DICK stated his understanding that the fiscal note is to the EED. MR. HOEPFNER said that Cordova's travel budget for the team travel is $100,000. He indicated the money is derived from student allocations. He pointed out that numerous costs are associated with student activities. Students travel to rural districts and the funding within the budget would not allow for student activities such as coaches, buildings, energy for lights and heat. He stressed that student activities keep students engaged, which is why school boards fund them. Some costs are offset by fundraising; however, home schooled students do not contribute money to the effort so it becomes an unfunded mandate. He indicated that the student allocation for the student in Chugiak previously mentioned went to the Galena School District since Mr. Lowe was enrolled in the Galena program and not the ASD. He stated that the student could have enrolled in the ASD and his eligibility would not have been an issue. REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA referred to the comment that this represents an unfunded mandate. She asked whether the travel funding is state funding or if travel costs are raised in the community. MR. HOEPFNER said that the school provides a portion of the travel funding, but the teams raise the balance of the travel funding. He recalled that the high school volleyball team needed to raise approximately $21,000 for travel costs. He further recalled the school district funded $10,000 through the general fund monies, but the remainder was raised by the community. CHAIR DICK acknowledged that Cordova has been very effective and they have earned awards for superintendent of the year and teacher of the year. He said it would be difficult to imagine that home schooled students and their parents would not be involved in any of the community fund raising efforts. 8:47:00 AM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER clarified the aspect of the bill that Mr. Hoepfner supports. MR. HOEPFNER related his understanding the language "and is currently certified" needs to be deleted since there is not any state certification process available. He suggested that Mr. Mathews could speak to the specific language since he was not certain. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER referred to Mr. Hoepfner's opposition to section 2. He said it seemed that some of his concerns would also apply to the local school students and not just the home schooled students. He pointed out that home schooled students would be involved in fundraising and secondly, the burden of the eligibility proof exists for students enrolled in public schools. He did not think it would be much different for home schooled students. [HB 369 was set aside.] HB 369-STUDENT PARTICIPATION IN SPORTS  6:31:00 PM CHAIR DICK announced that the committee would return its attention to HOUSE BILL NO. 369, "An Act relating to student participation in sports." Discussion on the bill was begun during the 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. portion of the meeting. 6:31:20 PM REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 369, Version 27-LS1324\X, Mischel, 4/4/12. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON objected for the purpose of discussion. 6:31:39 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER reviewed the changes in the proposed CS Version X, beginning with a new title ["An Act relating to student participation in interscholastic activities; and providing for an effective date."], which reflects that the bill now covers all interscholastic activities, as opposed to simply sports. In section 1, as discussed earlier in committee, the language deleted from page 1, line 8 read: [AND IS CURRENTLY CERTIFIED, REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER directed attention to section 2 of Version X, explaining that this section now refers to interscholastic activities, not just sports, and he noted that the student is still the party responsible to provide all of the required eligibility documentation to the school. Additional requirements remain the same, with the exception of medical documents, which are only necessary for those activities that require them, such as sports. On page 2, line 23 of Version X, the word "external" was deleted from the previous version and replaced with the word "recognized" which is a term more commonly used in statute. 6:33:35 PM LYNN SMITH, Staff to Representative Dan Saddler, Alaska State Legislature, proceeded with the changes in the proposed CS identified as Version X. She explained the change from "external" to "recognized" was recommended by Legislative Legal and Research Services, Legislative Affairs Agency. On page 2, line 30 of Version X, the word "classes" replaced the word "credits" on page 2, line 28 of the previous version, in response to the concern that not all classes are considered a credit. Ms. Smith then directed attention to page 3, subparagraph (C) of the original bill that read: if a student in grade 12, has passed all parts of the secondary school competency examination required under AS 14.03.075 MS. SMITH said this subparagraph has been removed in Version X because the high school competency exam does not have to be completed until April, so there is the potential that a high school senior may not have passed all of the tests. Removal of this provision will allow a student to participate in activities as long as they are "on track to graduate." Another change under definitions is found on page 3, line 3 of Version X, which read: (4) "interscholastic activities" means preparation for and participation in events or competitions involving another school when the preparation or participation (A) is sanctioned or supported by the statewide interscholastic activities governing body; (B) is conducted outside of the regular school curriculum; and (C) does not involve participation in student government at a school. MS. SMITH explained this change excludes participation in student government and for activities for which a student is required to take a class, such as a choir class that is scheduled during the regular school day. In addition, Version X makes section 1 effective immediately and changes the effective date for section [2] to 7/1/13. 6:36:18 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER referred to a concern raised by Representative Pruitt that he called "school eligibility shopping." Version X retains language from the original bill that prohibits this practice beginning on page 2, line 7 that read: that the student would be eligible, based on the residence of the parent or legal guardian of the student, to attend were the student not enrolled in an alternative education program ... REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER advised this language ensures that a student cannot "jump out of his own home zone" school in order to participate. In addition, he addressed the financial implications on schools, and paraphrased from the following written statement [original punctuation provided]: There is no significant disparity in the financial support between the students covered by this bill, and regular public high school students: 1) Students from home schools or alternative schools would have to pay the same activity fees as students in local high schools. 2) Schools and athletic facilities are often funded by bonds, paid for by the state on a 90-10 match. The state has already paid most of the cost; the remainder is paid by local property taxes, which are also paid by parents of HS students. 3) Parents of HS kids must pay property taxes that go toward the 4 mil local contribution under state education foundation formula. In areas where there is no local required - like in [the] Bush - then no local parents pay property taxes. 4) Again, many of the costs of athletic programs are sunk costs - gyms, stadiums, uniforms, balls, equipment. It is not necessary to reequip an entire athletic department each year, based solely on contributions' of this year's team members. 6:38:37 PM REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA pointed out that many communities do not have property taxes, and it is unfair if schools have fewer resources because home school students are not included in the student count. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER pointed out the issue addressed by this bill is not fairness in the funding of schools. The issue is if the area does not have property taxes, there would not be disparity as neither the home school parent, nor the public school parent, pay local property taxes. REPRESENTATIVE CISSA stressed that a school is given funds based on its number of students on the day of the school count. Thus the cost of bringing in students who are not part of the count will not be made up through property taxes. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said students are required to pay student participation activity fees. Also, local schools have fund- raising activities, and home school students would participate as other team members would. 6:42:37 PM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON surmised the legislation applies to "home school students that are in a district-provided school, or a statewide accredited school, or that are all in public schools - that are public vocational schools, the military youth academy, and a public ... statewide correspondence school ... that provides less than three hours per week of face-to-face interaction with students." The legislation does not include "typical" home school students across the state. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said correct, and added that the definition in the bill does not include independent home schools. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked whether vaccinations would be required. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER expressed his belief vaccinations are required, and medical fitness standards for sports are the same for all students. In further response to Representative Seaton, he clarified that medical records would be provided "when required." REPRESENTATIVE SEATON indicated he was referring to a student going to a school for any activity. 6:44:44 PM REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE opined shot records are required for certain things. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked, "In this case students can go to school without those, unless there's a particular vaccination or physical exam or something that's required by that specific activity?" REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said correct. 6:45:21 PM MR. MATHEWS asked whether every reference to "interscholastic sports" in the original bill is now "interscholastic activities" in Version X. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said that is correct. MR. MATHEWS asked for clarification on whether a private home school that does have accreditation to a recognized body, such as the American Home School Association, would come under this legislation. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said yes, the legislation applies when a home school is accredited by a recognized accrediting body. 6:49:13 PM CHAIR DICK, after determining no one else wished to testify, closed public testimony. 6:49:36 PM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON removed his objection to the adoption of the proposed CS for HB 369, Version X, as the working document. There being no further objection, Version X was before the committee. 6:49:51 PM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved Conceptual Amendment 1, labeled 27- LS1324\D.2, Mischel, 4/4/12, and announced his intention to add another conceptual change to it. 6:50:54 PM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON objected for the purpose of discussion. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said the conceptual amendment as written removed section 2 of the bill, and he added another conceptual change that deleted section 4, which is the effective date for section 2. Representative Seaton observed that the bill has just been introduced and already has been drastically changed after hearing testimony from three people, but without testimony from school districts, or from home schools. Furthermore, the students affected have changed from those in all grades to those in grades nine through twelve, and from those in sports to those in all interscholastic activities, although there has been no testimony from participants in any activity; in fact, the public has not been heard. He opined section 2 is not ready to advance, and encouraged the committee to hear further testimony and discussion on liability and insurance issues, and on state funding. Representative Seaton said he was unsure of his opinion on the idea, but has a problem not knowing the bill's effect on his constituents and on school districts that are presently in a funding crisis which could be exacerbated by expanding enrollment in interscholastic activities. 6:54:39 PM REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI stated his support for the amendment and for section 1 of the bill, which is a "technical tweak" to a bill adopted last year. However, section 2 is a policy call before the committee that was just introduced today. Interscholastic activities need to be expanded beyond sports, but there are questions that are unanswered by the bill, such as the inclusion of show choirs and Model United Nations. Representative Kawasaki spoke of the need to talk with his constituents and school district regarding the possibility that home school students may displace public school students on a team, without meeting the same academic requirements. He acknowledged that home school students presently participate in his district, but wanted to finish researching the issues. 6:57:25 PM REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA stated her support for Amendment 1, and noted that many families in her district in Anchorage are home schooling their children. She recounted a personal experience to emphasize the importance of social activities for home school students, and said Amendment 1 will allow the bill to truly address the issue properly. 7:00:50 PM REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE said he would not support the amendment and stated his belief that all students should have the opportunity to participate in sports and other enriching activities at school. He said the financial burden is the same for everyone in a community, as property taxes and state funding for education are the same. Representative Feige said he was satisfied with the CS as written because alternative education programs as defined must be accredited programs with structure, curriculum, and a grading scheme. The bill also requires that the student provide whatever documentation that the school demands. He pointed out that most of the schools in his district already allow home school students to participate in a variety of activities and "... they don't seem to be complaining about the cost or the fairness, or anything like that now." 7:02:54 PM CHAIR DICK spoke of his experience as a home school teacher, and said most home school students are ready for college because they are disciplined about their schoolwork. Nationally, home school students are getting a better education than those in public school. In Alaska, the cost to the state for home school programs is less than one-half of that of public schools, and he stated his support of both sections of the bill. 7:03:55 PM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON maintained her objection. 7:04:01 PM A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Cissna, Kawasaki, and Seaton voted in favor of Conceptual Amendment 1. Representatives P. Wilson, Feige, Pruitt, and Dick voted against it. Therefore, Conceptual Amendment 1 failed by a vote of 3-4. 7:05:07 PM REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT moved to report CSHB 369, Version 27- LS1324\X, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. 7:05:16 PM REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA objected. 7:05:19 PM A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Pruitt, P. Wilson, Seaton, Feige, and Dick voted in favor of the proposed CS for HB 369, Version X. Representatives Cissna and Kawasaki voted against it. Therefore, CSHB 369(EDC) was reported out of the House Special Committee on Education by a vote of 5-2.