HCR 2-AK SCHOOL CHOICE WEEK    8:06:20 AM CHAIR KELLER announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 2, Designating January 25 - 31, 2015, as Alaska School Choice Week. 8:07:09 AM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN GATTIS, Alaska State Legislature, deferred to staff to explain the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HCR 2. 8:07:23 AM DREW FORD, Staff, Representative Lynn Gattis, Alaska State Legislature, offered to review the changes in the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HCR 2. He detailed the changes in the proposed committee substitute: On page 1, line 1, delete "January 25 - 31, 2015" and insert "January 24 - 30, 2016" and on page 2, lines 6-7, delete "25-31, 2015" and insert "24 -30, 2016". He reported that these dates reflect Sunday through Saturday. 8:07:58 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HCR 2, labeled 29-LS0402\W, Glover, 2/5/15, as the working document. There being no objection, Version W was before the committee. 8:08:22 AM CHAIR KELLER opened public testimony on HCR 2. After first determining no one wished to testify, Chair Keller closed public testimony on HCR 2. 8:08:47 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said that he has received a number of communications from his district requesting clarification that HCR 2 would not commit any state funds to vouchers. He recalled discussions at the last committee hearing that confirmed this, and the sponsor also agreed. He further recalled the sponsor indicated the intent of HCR 2 is to recognize Alaska supports school choice and parents should have the choice to send their children to schools of their choice, as well as the choice to home school their children. The accountability for the schooling rests on parents and although the resolution doesn't negate the state's accountability, the choice for education is transferred from the home school to the parents themselves. Since this [resolution] does not in any way promote using state resources for anything except public education he is very comfortable with Version W, he said. 8:10:23 AM CHAIR KELLER remarked he is very certain anyone involved in education in Alaska would agree that it is in the best interest of the state that every child should receive a "super" education and have access to it. Public funds are fine-tuned and the subject of contention, but what is not in contention is that the [committee] supports every child in Alaska having access to a good education. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON acknowledged that he fully agreed that the demarcation point is making sure the accountability for that good and sufficient education rests with the parent stimulating, permitting, or choosing the specific educational system [for their child]; therefore accountability is key throughout the educational process. He did not think there was any disagreement on accountability. 8:11:47 AM CHAIR KELLER, recalling the last hearing on HCR 2, said that accountability on the education process ultimately rests with the parents. However, he suggested that Representative Seaton's point is related to the accountability that state has when it [appropriates] funds to various programs. He acknowledged tension exists, but that is not the point of the resolution. The intent of [Version W] is to recognize that parents have a choice, and it is the parents' responsibility - and they are accountable - for their children's education. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON responded that he fully agrees and that is his position, as well. 8:12:50 AM REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND said the Anchorage School District has numerous charter schools and a multitude of optional programs as well as alternative programs. All of the programs of choice encourage the public to an annual celebration of choice. She wondered if the committee is ignoring the optional and alternative programs by not including them, perhaps after "traditional public" and prior to "public charter schools." 8:13:48 AM CHAIR KELLER suggested that changes to the resolution would be "on the fly." He expressed concern that the resolution might be set aside again since listing all of the choices each district has would be an impossible task. He acknowledged that the Matanuska-Susitna Borough school district has excellent choices for children. For example, the Matanuska-Susitna Central School uses fiber optics to allow online courses to be used for students being home schooled. He did not see the purpose since most school districts [offer numerous choices]. He did not object to an amendment being offered, but he was hesitant that it would achieve the intended purpose. 8:14:47 AM REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND moved to adopt Amendment 1, as follows: [On page 1, line 9,] adding the word "optional," between "public schools" and "public charter schools." 8:15:57 AM REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND referred to page 1, line 9, the word "optional" followed by a "," before "public charter schools." REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND read, "Whereas the state has a multitude of high quality traditional public schools, optional ...." She interjected it should read "optional public schools", public charter schools, and nonpublic schools, as well as families who educate their children in the home; and". She asked whether she should amend or withdraw her motion. CHAIR KELLER asked her to proceed and to restate her motion. REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND restated Amendment 1, as follows: Whereas the state has a multitude of high quality traditional public schools, optional public schools, public charter schools, and nonpublic schools, as well as families who educate their children in the home; 8:16:13 AM CHAIR KELLER objected for the purpose of discussion. He asked the sponsor to comment on Amendment 1. 8:16:31 AM REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS explained that [HCR 2] recognizes parental choice so whether the schools are optional, charter, or lottery, it really goes back to the parental right to choose. Certainly, numerous categories of schools could be added, but the gist of the resolution is to recognize that parents have the right to choose. As sponsor, she does not have any issue with adding more schools, she said. 8:17:18 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON expressed concern with the consistency of the language of Amendment 1, stating he thinks it should be "optional public schools" since the rest of the list is "public schools, charter schools, and nonpublic schools" so "schools" is included in each phrase in the clause. He thought that "optional public" would need to be modified to "optional public schools" for the purpose of consistency. He acknowledged that Legislative Legal Services would likely reframe the language to maintain consistency in proposed [Amendment 1]. He suggested the language in Amendment 1 should be consistent. 8:18:13 AM CHAIR KELLER maintained his objection to Amendment 1 as he did not understand the need. He surmised that if the committee were to request a conceptual amendment that Legislative Legal Service would ask to identify the point of the conceptual amendment. He stated that public schools by definition are optional to all parents. Therefore, Amendment 1 seems confusing to him, he said. 8:18:21 AM REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND, speaking from her experience as a former three-term Anchorage School Board member, said the optional programs are indeed optional, are accessible by lottery to any parents, and have been in place for decades in the Anchorage School District (ASD). In fact, she thought the ASD offered the first options for schools of choice in the state. Since dozens of optional school choices are available in the district, she would find [Version W] objectionable if the ASD's optional programs are not recognized. 8:19:12 AM CHAIR KELLER asked whether the implication is that some programs are not optional. REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND answered no, but the optional programs are not "neighborhood schools" and are only accessible through the lottery program, as are the charter school programs that were instituted in the Anchorage School District in the 1990s. REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS offered her belief that many districts use different language to describe schools such as lottery school; however, the term "neighborhood school" is also not in statute but is commonly known. She was unsure whether the term "optional school" is in statute, but [the resolution] is ultimately about parents being able to choose the school. She did not object to the language "optional." 8:20:34 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON related that besides traditional public schools, the system includes alternative public schools, alternative high schools, and vocational technical schools, which may not be considered as traditional schools. He suggested that they might be considered alternative or optional schools. Thus, adding the language [in Amendment 1] would probably give a greater breadth of inclusion of schools instead of looking just at traditional public schools and charter schools. Since the sponsor doesn't object to the category being broader than traditional schools, he thinks would be helpful as the resolution moves forward. 8:22:21 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to amend Amendment 1, by adding "schools" after "optional public" for the purpose of consistency. 8:22:35 AM CHAIR KELLER responded that he didn't understand [the proposed amendment to Amendment 1]. He read Amendment 1, as he understood it as follows, "Whereas the state has a multitude of high quality traditional" and the amendment adds, the word "optional" then "public schools, public charter schools, nonpublic schools, as well as families who educate their children in the home;". He asked for further clarification on where he wanted to place "schools." 8:22:57 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON thought that "optional public" was inserted after the "," as another classification of schools. REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND thought she had included the word "schools." 8:23:15 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said he was uncertain about the language, whether it was written as, "traditional public" then adding a new "," followed by "optional public schools" or if it comes after the "," and reads, ", optional public" then it would need the word "schools" inserted. 8:23:40 AM CHAIR KELLER asked to have Amendment 1 clearly stated on the record since the committee will not pass a conceptual amendment. He asked to have Amendment 1 restated. 8:24:06 AM REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND offered to read the "whereas clause," including the language in Amendment 1, as follows: Whereas the state has a multitude of high quality traditional public schools, optional public schools, public charter schools, and nonpublic schools, as well as families who educate their children in the home [;] 8:24:27 AM CHAIR KELLER asked whether the sponsor agreed with Amendment 1. REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS answered yes. 8:24:40 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON withdrew the amendment to Amendment 1. 8:24:52 AM CHAIR KELLER restated that Amendment 1 makes changes on page 1, line 9, as follows: Whereas the state has a multitude of high quality traditional public schools, optional schools, public charter schools, and nonpublic schools, as well as families who educate their children in the home; and 8:25:32 AM REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND said that she believed that the word "public" was omitted between "optional" and "schools" so it should read "optional public schools". 8:25:58 AM CHAIR KELLER offered his belief that amendments are conceptual amendments since the Legislative Legal attorneys can revise the language. He asked to repeat the language, such that Amendment 1 makes changes on page 1, line 9, as follows: Whereas the state has a multitude of high quality traditional public schools, optional public schools, public charter schools, and nonpublic schools, as well as [families who educate their children in the home; and] REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND agreed that [the whereas clause was correct]. CHAIR KELLER removed his objection. There being no further objection, Amendment 1 was adopted. 8:26:45 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to report the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HCR 2, labeled 29-LS0402\W, Glover, 2/5/15, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note. There being no objection, CSHCR 2 (EDC) was reported from the House Education Standing Committee. 8:27:19 AM The committee took an at-ease from 8:27 a.m. to 8:28 a.m.