HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE April 17, 2000 2:05 P.M. TAPE HFC 00 - 123, Side 1 TAPE HFC 00 - 123, Side 2 TAPE HFC 00 - 124, Side 1 TAPE HFC 00 - 124, Side 2 CALL TO ORDER Co-Chair Therriault called the House Finance Committee meeting to order at 2:05 p.m. PRESENT Co-Chair Mulder Co-Chair Therriault Representative Foster Vice Chair Bunde Representative Grussendorf Representative Austerman Representative Moses Representative J. Davies Representative Phillips Representative G. Davis Representative Williams ALSO PRESENT Senator, Dave Donley; Elmer Lindstrom, Special Assistant, Department of Health and Social Services; Bob Loeffler, Director, Division of Mining, Land and Water, Department of Natural Resources; Al Dwyer, Director, Division of Labor Standards and Safety, Department of Labor and Workforce Development; Alison Elgee, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Administration; Shari Paul, Alaska Children's Trust; Janice Adair, Director, Division of Environmental Health, Department of Environmental Conservation; Diana Rhoades, Staff, Senator Ellis; Jane Deminert, Executive Director, Alaska Commission on Aging, Department of Administration; Angie Schmitz, Staff, Senator Elton; Sharon Clark, Staff, Senator Miller; Jerry Burnett, Staff, Senator Green; Michael Pauley, Staff, Senator Leman; Anne Carpeneti, Assistant Attorney General, Legal Services Section, Criminal Division, Department of Law; Al Dwyer, Director, Division of Labor Standards and Safety, Department of Labor and Workforce Development; Al Zangri, State Registrar, Chief, Bureau Vital Statistics, Department of Administration; Marie Darlin, Juneau. TESTIFIED VIA TELECONFERENCE Kendall Thomas, Alaska Hepatitis C Coalition, Anchorage; Chris Kennedy, Anchorage, Dale Bondurant, Kenai; Sandy Umlauf, President, Ugashik Set Netter Association; Karl Kircher, Executive Director, Kenai Peninsula Fisherman's Association, Kenai; Paul Shadura, Kenai; Roger Kuchenbecker, MatSu; Dan Challup, Kachemak Bay Salmon Producers Cooperative Homer; Dwight Becker, Program Coordinator, Division of Senior Services, Department of Administration, Anchorage; Kay Burrows, Director, Division of Senior Services, Department of Administration Anchorage. SUMMARY CSSB 26(FIN) "An Act relating to hindering prosecution and to providing false information or reports to a peace officer." CSSB 26(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with "no recommendation" and a fiscal impact note by the Department of Public Safety; a fiscal impact note by the Department of Corrections; a zero fiscal note by the Department of Public Safety; and a zero fiscal note by the Department of Law. CSSB 34(FIN) "An Act relating to tattooing, body piercing, and ear piercing; relating to other occupations regulated by the Board of Barbers and Hairdressers; relating to fees charged by the Board of Barbers and Hairdressers; and providing for an effective date." SB 34(FIN) was heard and HELD in Committee for further consideration. CSSB 73(FIN) "An Act relating to assisted living homes; and providing for an effective date." CSSB 73(FIN) was heard and HELD in Committee for further consideration. SB 204 "An Act extending the termination date of the Alaska Commission on Aging; and providing for an effective date." HSB 204 was heard and HELD in Committee for further consideration. CSSB 254(HES) "An Act relating to heirloom certificates of marriage." CSSB 254(HES) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a fiscal impact note by the Department of Health and Social Services, published 4/13/00. SB 257 "An Act relating to notice requirements for certain final findings concerning the disposal of an interest in state land or resources for oil and gas; relating to administrative appeals and petitions for reconsideration of decisions of the Department of Natural Resources; and providing for an effective date." SB 257 was REPORTED out of Committee with "no recommendation" and a zero fiscal note by the Department of Natural Resources, published 2/9/00. CSSB 261(FIN) "An Act relating to needle stick and sharps injury protections and the use of safe needles by health care facilities and health care professionals; relating to the vaccination of health care workers against diseases transmitted by bloodborne pathogens; and providing for an effective date." CSSB 261(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with three zero fiscal notes: Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Department of Corrections and Department of Health and Social Services. CSSB 283(RES) "An Act establishing the shore fisheries development lease program account and the timber receipts account; relating to the accounting for and appropriation of revenue from the state land disposal program, the shore fisheries development lease program, and the state timber disposal program; and providing for an effective date." CSSB 283(RES) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with two fiscal impact note by the Department of Natural Resources, published 3/31/00. SJR 27 am Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska relating to revisions of the state constitution and providing that a court may not change language of a proposed constitutional amendment or revision. SJR 27 am was REPORTED out of Committee with "no recommendation" and with a fiscal impact note by the Office of the Governor, published 1/24/00. HCR 23 Suspending Rules 24©, 35, 41(b), and 42(e), Uniform Rules of the Alaska State Legislature, concerning Senate Joint Resolution No. 27, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Alaska concerning revisions of the state constitution and a court's power with respect to constitutional amendments and revisions. HCR 23 was heard and HELD in Committee for further consideration. HCR 25 Suspending Rules 24©, 35, 41(b), and 42(e), Uniform Rules of the Alaska State Legislature, concerning Senate Bill No. 204, relating to the Alaska Commission on Aging. SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 27 am Proposing amendments to the Constitution of the State of Alaska relating to revisions of the state constitution and providing that a court may not change language of a proposed constitutional amendment or revision. Co-Chair Therriault provided members with proposed committee substitute, work draft 1-LS0078\N, 4/11/00 (copy on file). SENATOR DAVE DONLEY, SPONSOR spoke in support of the legislation. He noted that SJR 27 amends Article XIII, sec. 1 of the Alaska State Constitution by making it possible for the legislature to place constitutional revisions as well as amendments before Alaskans for a vote. SJR 27 also adds a new section to Article XIII, which would prohibit a court from changing the wording of constitutional amendments or revisions proposed by the legislature or constitutional convention. Senator Donley maintained that the legislation corrects the problem created by Bess v. Ulmer. The Bess case was a challenge to the proposed constitutional amendment on the definition of marriage, approved in 1998. On appeal the Supreme Court ruled that the legislature is not able to do revisions to the Constitution and adopted a test for revisions. He maintained that the test of "revision" is onerous. He observed that the state constitutional convention debated the definition of revision to no avail. Senator Donley noted that the Court based its decision in part on a initiative to the state of California's Constitution. He argued that the California initiative was more substantial. The Court removed a legislatively proposed constitutional amendment from the ballot on the Amendment to Limit Prisoners' Rights and changed the wording of the Definition of Marriage Amendment. He maintained that there is no legal precedent for a court to modify language of a constitutional amendment proposed by elected legislators before it was placed on the ballot for a vote of the people. He maintained that the court should not propose constitutional amendments. The proposed committee substitute would allow the legislature to do revisions, but revisions would have to be on a single subject. This would be consistent with the existing constitutional provision for legislation. Senator Donley provided members with a memorandum, Analysis of Bess v. Ulmer - Revisions vs. Amendments dated 4/11/00 from legislative counsel (copy on file). He quoted page 7. Senator Donley observed that there have been other constitutional amendments, which would not have met the Bess test. He maintained that the right to privacy and limited entry amendments would have failed the Bess test. He added that the question of subsistence would also fail under the Bess test because of the number of provisions affected under the Constitution, even though it is a single subject. He concluded that without the legislation everything done on the constitutional realm comes into question. Vice Chair Bunde MOVED to ADOPT work draft 1-LS0078\N, 4/11/00. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. DALE BONDURANT, KENAI testified via teleconference in opposition to the legislation. He maintained that constitutional amendments are affected by politics. He maintained that court are not as subject to political pressures. There are laws that are not judicially valid. He suggested that judicial comments on the constitutionality be open. Citizens want to know how the judicial branch views constitutional amendments. He maintained that no one is above the law, not even the legislature. Representative Phillips questioned if it is appropriate for the courts to decide what question goes on the ballot. Mr. Bondurant responded that the public would have to suffer unconstitutional amendments if the courts are not allowed to comment. Representative Grussendorf observed that the court is concerned with the curtailing of rights not the expansion of rights. The prisoners' rights were being curtailed by the amendment. Co-Chair Therriault questioned if an expansion that touches on many aspects of the Constitution would be allowed. Representative Grussendorf observed that there would not be a challenge unless rights were reduced. Senator Donley maintained that the legislation does not take away the court's right to address the issue. The court would not have the right to modify the language, but they could take the amendment off the ballot. He observed that limited entry amendment took rights away from the general population and gave them to a limited number of Alaskans. Subsistence also takes rights away from the general population and gives a higher priority to other Alaskans. These would be called into questioned by the criteria under Bess. Vice Chair Bunde summarized that the legislation creates an all or nothing situation. The court could not chose bits and pieces of a constitutional question to put on the ballot. He maintained that the expansion of rights for one group often results in the loss of rights by others. Senator Donley responded that the legislation would allow the Court to chose items that would be allowed on a ballot. He added that single subject criteria is easier to understand than a qualitative or quantitative standard. A single subject standard is a logical expansion to narrow the problem of amendment versus revision. Representative Grussendorf referred to limited entry. He observed that sustained yield and protection of the resource were also involved. Representative Austerman MOVED to report HCS SJR 27 (FIN) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. SJR 27 am was REPORTED out of Committee with "no recommendation" and with a fiscal impact note by the Office of the Governor, published 1/24/00. HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 23 Suspending Rules 24©, 35, 41(b), and 42(e), Uniform Rules of the Alaska State Legislature, concerning Senate Joint Resolution No. 27, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Alaska concerning revisions of the state constitution and a court's power with respect to constitutional amendments and revisions. Co-Chair Therriault explained that the resolution would not be needed since the title of SJR 27 would not be changed by the committee substitute. HCR 23 was heard and HELD in Committee for further consideration. CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 283(RES) "An Act establishing the shore fisheries development lease program account and the timber receipts account; relating to the accounting for and appropriation of revenue from the state land disposal program, the shore fisheries development lease program, and the state timber disposal program; and providing for an effective date." BOB LOEFFLER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF MINING, LAND AND WATER, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES testified in support of the legislation. The legislation creates a land disposal income fund, which would be a statutory designated program receipt fund for the purpose of land disposal. The legislation also creates separate funds for shore fisheries and timber harvest receipts. The income fund would allow income generated from the 1,200 leases to supply a level of services that the fisherman and department believe are deserved, to run the program. A moderate land disposal program would be funded from revenues generated by land disposals. The income would pay for the cost and allow programs to be stabilized. The same would apply to the timber harvest program. In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr. Loeffler observed that the shore fisheries program was cut from $300 to $100 thousand dollars. This was not enough to run the program. Income from the leases would provide $300 thousand dollars to run the program. In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr. Loeffler observed that the department recommended a self- executing registration process to deal with budget reductions. The fisherman objected to the self-executing registration process and pointed out that it was a reductions of services below the revenues from the leases. SANDY UMLAUF, PRESIDENT, UGASHIK SET NETTER ASSOCIATION, Kenai testified via teleconference in support of the legislation. She observed the Association represents approximately 65 set net permits. The legislation reinstates a self-sustaining, income producing program that offers organization and stability for statewide shore fish leases and provides a means for conflict resolution. The program has an income of $350 thousand dollars from leases and a cost of $300 thousand dollars. She observed that set net sites are frequently hotly contested. KARL KIRCHER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, KENAI PENINSULA FISHERMAN'S ASSOCIATION, KENAI testified via teleconference in support of SB 283. He observed that AS 38.05 stipulates that the director shall establish a reasonable rent structure for shore fishing development leases equal to the administrative cost for processing the leasehold application. He observed that the program has generated more revenue than it has cost to operate the program since 1993. He stressed that fees should be reduced if the level of service is reduced. He spoke against the self-executing registration. PAUL SHADURA, KENAI testified via teleconference in support of section 3 of SB 283. His family has set netted for over 60 years. ROGER KUCHENBECKER, MATSU testified via teleconference in support of the legislation. He has set-netted for 13 years. He spoke in support of full funding of the shore fisheries lease program. He stressed that the program more than pays for itself. DAN CHALLUP, KACHEMAK BAY SALMON PRODUCERS COOPERATIVE, HOMER testified via teleconference in support of the legislation. He hoped that the legislation would protect the program from future budget reductions. In response to a question by Vice Chair Bunde, Mr. Loeffler stated that the program is limited to anyone who owns a valid limited entry permit. In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr. Loeffler explained that there is no timber program fiscal note. He noted that the timber program has an erratic history and is difficult to predict. Representative Foster MOVED to report CSSB 283(RES) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. CSSB 283(RES) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with two fiscal impact note by the Department of Natural Resources, published 3/31/00. SENATE BILL NO. 257 "An Act relating to notice requirements for certain final findings concerning the disposal of an interest in state land or resources for oil and gas; relating to administrative appeals and petitions for reconsideration of decisions of the Department of Natural Resources; and providing for an effective date." BOB LOEFFLER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF MINING, LAND AND WATER, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES testified in support of the legislation. The legislation creates a uniform appeals process for the Department of Natural Resources and solves a technical problem that is unique to public notice of oil and gas sales. He explained that different laws passed at different times have created a variety of appeal schedules. He gave examples of appeal timelines, which vary from 15 to 30 days. The appeal process would be uniform with a 20-day deadline. The legislation would also delete the requirement to send a second notice to notify that a third notice is close at hand. Representative Grussendorf clarified that only one appeal can be made to the commissioner or the department. Mr. Loeffler noted that disposals would retain the status quo. Other permits can be appealed up to three times under the present system. Appeals are allowed to the director, then the commissioner and then to the commissioner again. Representative Grussendorf questioned if one appeal is sufficient. Mr. Loeffler responded that multiple appeals do not add value. He maintained that multiple appeals frustrate the applicant. Representative Phillips spoke in support of the legislation and maintained that it would make government more efficient. Mr. Loeffler explained that the division director makes the decision. All decisions are appealed to the commissioner. The commissioner's decision can be reconsidered under the same schedule. Further disputes go to court. (TAPE CHANGE, HFC 00 - 123, SIDE 2)  Representative Foster MOVED to report SB 257 out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. SB 257 was REPORTED out of Committee with "no recommendation" and a zero fiscal note by the Department of Natural Resources, published 2/9/00. CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 26 (FIN) "An Act relating to hindering prosecution and to providing false information or reports to a peace officer." MICHAEL PAULEY, STAFF, SENATOR LEMAN testified in support of the legislation. A detective in the Anchorage Police Department suggested the legislation as a useful tool for law enforcement and prosecutors to counteract those who use deception to thwart the criminal justice system. He observed that the Alaska State Troopers Alaska Association of Chiefs of Police, the Alaska Peace Officers Association, and Victims for Justice support the legislation. Mr. Pauley asserted that, in the criminal justice context, people typically employ deception in two ways: they lie to protect another person who has committed a crime, or they lie to protect themselves. The first situation of lying to protect another is addressed in section 1 of the bill; section 2 addresses the issue of lying to protect oneself. Mr. Pauley reviewed the legislation by section. He noted that section 1 makes it a crime to hinder prosecution by rendering assistance to another person who has committed a crime, with the intention of hindering the apprehension, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of the other person. The definition of "rendering assistance to another" includes using deception to prevent or obstruct the discovery or apprehension of that person. Under current statutes it would be a crime if a person lies to a police officer in order to stop another person who has committed a crime from being apprehended. Mr. Pauley explained that this statute applies only if a person lies to prevent apprehension of a person who has committed a crime that is punishable by imprisonment of greater than 90 days. This means that class B misdemeanors are not covered under existing law. class B misdemeanors include such offenses as disorderly conduct, harassment, misconduct involving weapons in the fifth degree, and criminal mischief in the fourth degree. Although these crimes are not the most serious offenses on the books, they do consume a significant amount of time and resources of both law enforcement agencies and the court system. It is the Sponsor's view that it is not appropriate for the statute to sanction deception under these circumstances. Senate Bill 26 amends the existing law to applies to all crimes, including class B misdemeanors. Section 2 of SB 26 amends current statute on making false reports (AS 11 .56.800). Under existing law, it is a crime to give false information to a police officer with the intent of implicating another in a crime. It is also a crime to give a false report to police that a crime has occurred or is about to occur. The legislation adds an additional provision, stating that it is a crime to provide false identity information to a peace officer while the person is under arrest, detention, or investigation for a crime, or while the person is being served with an arrest warrant of being issued a citation. Mr. Pauley observed that according to law enforcement personnel, false identity information can be a significant impediment to successful investigations and prosecutions. The law should not sanction this type of behavior. ANNE CARPENETI, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, LEGAL SERVICES SECTION, CRIMINAL DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF LAW noted that concerns by the department have been addressed and that the Department of Law supports the legislation in its present form. Representative Foster questioned if there are any provisions that would preclude someone from having to give testimony, such as in the case of a spouse testifying against a spouse. Ms. Carpeneti noted that a spousal exception is contained under another statute and explained that the legislation addresses the person himself or herself that is under investigation or arrest for a crime from giving false information. In response to a question by Representative Foster, Ms. Carpeneti explained that it is against the law to hinder the apprehension of a person who has committed a misdemeanor. Representative Foster concluded that it would be better to say nothing rather than lie. Co-Chair Therriault observed that the legislation would address the issue of a person lying about their identity to a process server. In response to questions regarding a situation where a person lies about the presence of their spouse, Mr. Pauley referred to AS 11.56.770: (a) A person commits the crime of hindering prosecution in the first degree if the person renders assistance to a person who has committed a crime punishable as a felony with intent to (1) hinder the apprehension, prosecution, conviction, or punishment of that person; or (2) assist that person in profiting or benefiting from the commission of the crime. (b) For purposes of this section, a person "renders assistance" to another if the person (1) harbors or conceals the other person; Mr. Pauley observed that the statute requires demonstration of intent. Ms. Carpeneti added that the statue includes harboring or concealing another person. Co-Chair Therriault noted that this provision is under the existing law. The legislation would not change the elements of defense in any other way. Representative Grussendorf questioned how intimidation would affect the provision. Ms. Carpeneti observed that coercion would be a defense; the legislation does not change any of the defenses to hindering prosecution. Representative Grussendorf questioned if the burden of proof would be with the defender. Ms. Carpeneti responded that the state would have to demonstrate that there was intent. Vice Chair Bunde asked if there were specific cases that led to the legislation. Mr. Pauley responded that law enforcement officers contacted the sponsor with concerns regarding specific cases. He gave an example where a person was arrested and refused to give his identity. He lied about his identity in court. Vice Chair Bunde noted that it was the perpetrator that lied. Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that many of the Committee's questions and concerns are with existing law and not with the application of the law to all misdemeanors. Vice Chair Bunde MOVED to report CSSB 26 (FIN) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. CSSB 26(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with "no recommendation" and a fiscal impact note by the Department of Public Safety; a fiscal impact note by the Department of Corrections; a zero fiscal note by the Department of Public Safety; and a zero fiscal note by the Department of Law. SENATE BILL NO. 204 "An Act extending the termination date of the Alaska Commission on Aging; and providing for an effective date." SHARON CLARK, STAFF, SENATOR MILLER testified in support of SB 204, on behalf of the sponsor Senator Leman. She observed that SB 204 extends the termination date of the Alaska Commission on Aging. The Alaska Commission on Aging was first established as a single Planning and Service Area (PSA) in the Department of Administration, Older Alaskans Commission, July of 1981 under AS 44.21. As a PSA, the Commission is the only agency in the state that plans, funds, and oversees services to seniors statewide. The Commission's name was changed to the Alaska Commission on Aging in 1994, (Chapter 131,SLA 1994). The Commission is authorized to administer and coordinate state programs for older Alaskans and to administer federal programs provided under the Older Americans Act, 42 U.S. Code 300 1-30451, as amended. The provisions of AS 44.21 and the Older Americans Act establish the Commission's authority, purpose, and scope of work. Ms. Clark observed that a special report on the Department of Administration, Alaska Commission on Aging (ACA) by the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee, September 17, 1999 concluded that the expiration date of ACA should be extended. Ms. Clark maintained that the ACA has demonstrated that there is a public need for this commission. According to AS 44.66.010, the Commission is scheduled to expire June, 30,2000. The legislation would extend ACA's expiration date to June 30,2004. Ms. Clark noted that the legislation was amended (in the House HESS committee). She noted that the amendment separated the Long-Term Care Ombudsman's office from the Department of Administration and put it in a separate entity. The sponsor does not oppose the amendment. She noted that Senator Green expressed concerns, in the Senate Finance Committee, that the Office of the Long-Term Care Ombudsman would be under the Department of Administration. Representative Phillips questioned if there was testimony on the feasibility of merging the two ombudsman offices. Ms. Clark stated that there had been discussions with the sponsor. The issue was not discussed in Committee. Representative Grussendorf questioned if the Department of Administration testified on the amendment. Representative Phillips expressed concern with the amendment adopted in the House HESS committee. She noted that the Legislative Council has been downsizing the Office of the Ombudsman. She noted that the Legislative Council did not discuss the amendment. Co-Chair Therriault pointed out that Senator Miller is the chairman of the Legislative Council. Co-Chair Mulder noted that the Office of Long-Term Care Ombudsman is federally funded. JERRY BURNETT, STAFF, SENATOR GREEN provided information on the amendment adopted in the House HESS Committee. He noted that Representative Dyson offered the amendment on behalf of Senator Green. He observed that the Office of the Long-Term Care Ombudsman would be separate from the legislative ombudsman. Co-Chair Therriault read from a letter by Representative Dyson: It is not possible for the Director of the Commission on Aging to neutrally monitor the Long Term Care Ombudsman who may be investigating actions of that Director, his/her employees, and colleagues within the Department of Administration. Mr. Burnett clarified that there would be two ombudsman offices with separate staffs. He observed that the Long-Term Care Ombudsman has a distinct function and that the funding come from the Older Americans Act. He pointed out that the provision was discussed with the Department of Administration, the Executive Director of Legislative Affairs Agency and the chairman of the Legislative Council. Representative Grussendorf asked for the Department of Administration's position on the merger. JANE DEMINERT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA COMMISSION ON AGING, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION provided information on the legislation. She noted that the Commission has been in existence for many years. The Commission is a grant-making agency and has been involved in educational issues affecting older Alaskans. The Commission is also involved in the operation of the Office of Long-Term Care Ombudsman. The Older American's Act provides that each state shall have a Long-Term Care Ombudsman. The Long-Term Care Ombudsman is an advocate for people in long-term care and conducts investigations regarding the quality of care or allegations of abuse and neglect. Ms. Deminert observed that there are different organizational structures to conduct the function. The Commission has done an extensive amount of structuring in its by laws to accommodate the function. She acknowledged that there are several viable models to conduct the function. If the function were transferred it would maintain its current staff: one paralegal II and a clerk. The office would continue to be in Anchorage. She did not know if it would be physically relocated. There would not be a significant change in the way the office is operated. A reimbursable services agreement would occur for the on-going operation of the office. She observed that the Commission is closing in on the final stage for a long-term care ombudsman. She recommended that their search be halted if the legislation goes forward. The position is currently a range 20 within the state personnel system. She acknowledged that the position would also be effective under the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee. Representative Grussendorf observed that the change was not requested by the Commission and questioned where the office would be most effective. Ms. Deminert affirmed that it is a new development, but noted that it was discussed in the previous session. She added that the function is distinct from the traditional governmental ombudsman. She felt that there would be a learning curve and investment would need to be made by the new oversight group. ALISON ELGEE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION provided information on the legislation. The LBA audit pointed out that housing of the position in the Department of Administration could be perceived as a conflict of interest. The Commission could not find an entity that would voluntarily accept placement of the office. The Commission adopted bylaws to exclude those on the Commission that have association with pioneer home programs from direct oversight of the ombudsman. She reiterated that there would be a heavy learning curve with transfer of the function, but added that the department understands the perceived conflict of interest and would be happy to see the function externally located. Vice Chair Bunde spoke in support of the legislation and noted that concerned constituents have contacted him. Co-Chair Therriault questioned if the Legislative Council membership supported the move. Ms. Clark did not believe that discussions occurred with the current Council. Discussions did occur with the previous chair, Senator Miller. Senator Miller did not express objections. MARIE DARLIN, AARP, JUNEAU testified in support of the legislation and extension of the Commission on Aging. HB 204 was heard and HELD in Committee for further consideration. CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 254(HES) "An Act relating to heirloom certificates of marriage." ELMER LINDSTROM, SPECIAL ASSISTANT, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES testified in support of the legislation. He explained that legislation was enacted to allow the issuance of heirloom birth certificates. That program has been quite successful and has generated thousands of dollars for the Alaska Children's Trust. He observed that SB 254 expands the program to allow the sale of heirloom marriage certificates. Revenue from the sale of the certificates would be available to the legislature for appropriation to the Alaska Children's Trust. (TAPE CHANGE, HFC 00 - 124, SIDE 1)    Mr. Lindstrom estimated that the sale of certificates would net $270 thousand dollars in revenue. There is a first year operating cost of $55 thousand dollars. Vice Chair Bunde questioned why the money would go into the Children's Trust rather than martial counseling. Mr. Lindstrom stated that the legislation was viewed as an opportunity to generate additional revenues for the Children's Trust. He pointed out that purchase of the more expensive heirloom certificates is not required. Co-Chair Therriault questioned why "the state registrar shall issue" was added on page 1, line 6. Mr. Lindstrom responded that the language notes that if someone requests the certificate that it shall be issued. In response to a question by Co-Chair Therriault, Mr. Lindstrom noted the legislation was modeled on the birth certificate statute. AL ZANGRI, STATE REGISTRAR, CHIEF, BUREAU VITAL STATISTICS, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION provided information on the legislation. He noted that the language mirrors exactly the birth certificate language and that both use the word "shall". Approximately $50 thousand dollars has been generated from the heirloom birth certificates. The money has been set aside for deposit into the Alaska Children's Trust. Money has been deposited into the Trust on a regular basis from the heirloom birth certificates. Representative Phillips echoed concerns by Vice Chair Bunde. Co-Chair Therriault reviewed the fiscal notes. Vice Chair Bunde questioned why there would not be a payback from the Trust for the costs. Co-Chair Therriault clarified that the fiscal note would not be changed. He observed that the legislation does generate program receipts. Mr. Lindstrom explained that $270 dollars in program receipts would be generated. Approximately $55 thousand dollars of the program receipts would be necessary to establish the program. The legislation would be revenue neutral. Co-Chair Therriault added that the cost of the program would be $47.7 thousand dollars after the initial year. Vice Chair Bunde MOVED to report CSSB 254(HES) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal note. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. CSSB 254(HES) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with a fiscal impact note by the Department of Health and Social Services, published 4/13/00. CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 34(FIN) "An Act relating to tattooing, body piercing, and ear piercing; relating to other occupations regulated by the Board of Barbers and Hairdressers; relating to fees charged by the Board of Barbers and Hairdressers; and providing for an effective date." SENATOR JOHNNY ELLIS, SPONSOR testified in support. He offered the legislation on behalf of a constituent whose child was injured from body piercing that was not done in a sanitary manner. The state of Alaska is the only state in the union that does not license the procedure. Injured clients have no recourse. There can be serious public health implications. National standards were used to craft the legislation. The Division of Occupational Licensing will license and test. The Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Public Health will handle inspections. Co-Chair Therriault questioned the level of support from industry. Senator Ellis observed that there is support from industry. Representative G. Davis spoke in support of the legislation. Senator Ellis explained that the legislation was expanded to include permanent cosmetics at the request of a Fairbanks practitioner. Permanent cosmetics are used to paint permanent eyebrows on burn victims. Vice Chair Bunde spoke in support of the legislation. He pointed out that serious illnesses can result from unsafe practices. Senator Ellis observed that the Hepatitis C Coalition supports the legislation. In response to a question by Representative Phillips, Senator Ellis expressed support for the House Labor and Commerce version of SB 34. Parental permission was added to the legislation. DAINA RHOADES, STAFF, SENATOR JOHNNY ELLIS responded to a questioned by Representative Grussendorf. Temporary shop license could be used to operate temporary sites such as the Palmer Fair. Temporary shops would be inspected by the Department of Environmental Conservation and would have to comply with regulation requirements. The legislation does not address animals. Co-Chair Therriault referenced page 13, line 30. The legislation distinguishes between ear piercing and piercing of body parts. Senator Ellis noted that shops that do ear piercing would not be required to go through an apprenticeship and testing. The Department of Environmental Conservation would form regulations covering the guns used in ear piercing. She emphasized that greater oversight is required when other body parts are pierced. Co-Chair Therriault asked if the Department of Environmental Conservation would charge the fees and questioned the cost of travel. JANICE ADAIR, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, DEC provided information on the fiscal cost. She observed that there are approximately 10 tattoo parlors. No travel costs have been included. Ear piercing would only require regulations. Those regulations would cover basic sanitation issues. She added that there would be a fiscal note to cover the cost of locating ear-piercing locations. There are 675 ear-piercing establishments in the State. Co-Chair Therriault asked if there was a problem with ear piercing. Ms. Rhoades replied that most establishments do not like the guns. There is a growing concern that the needles on the guns are dangerous. National standards indicate that the guns are okay. Guns could be inspected under the regulations. She urged that the provision be retained and noted that many people are concerned about continued use of ear piercing guns. Senator Ellis agreed that it would be good to have some review regarding the use of ear piercing guns. Ms. Adair clarified that the occupational licensing fee would cover the oversight of the industry. Food inspectors would be used for the inspections. In response to a question by Vice Chair Bunde, Senator Ellis explained that the regulation would not apply to noncommercial practices. Vice Chair Bunde questioned if Native practices, which are noncommercial but involve one person tattooing another, would be covered under the legislation. Senator Ellis thought that the tattooing would have to be done in a safe and sanitary way, but suggested that the Board could address the issue. KENDALL THOMAS, ALASKA HEPATITIS C COALITION, ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference in support. SB 34 was heard and HELD in Committee for further consideration. CS FOR SENATE BILL 261(FIN) "An Act relating to needle stick and sharps injury protections and the use of safe needles by health care facilities and health care professionals; relating to the vaccination of health care workers against diseases transmitted by bloodborne pathogens; and providing for an effective date." SENATOR KIM ELTON, SPONSOR testified in support of the legislation. He noted that the legislation brings needed protection to health care workers from accidental needle stick injuries. There are between 600,000 and a million accidental sticks a year. The affect of these sticks is that there have been 50,000 - 60,000 cases of serious disease contracted by health care workers over the last decade. On the average, at least one health care worker per week is exposed to HIV. Health care workers are at risk from Hepatitis C contracted from accidental sticks. Health care workers are four times more likely than a police officer to be injured on the job. There are a number of safe needle devices that could reduce this risk. Senator Elton observed that the bill requires an evaluation of safe needle devices. Management working with front line health workers, like nurses would evaluate the devices. The use of safe needles would be required with a few exceptions: devices would not be required if it were demonstrated that they would jeopardize the safety or care to the patient and if the provider can demonstrate that the safety device is not more affective in preventing accidental needle stick exposures. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requires all facilities to use safe needle devices. Senator Elton explained the difference between the bill and the OSHA requirements. The legislation sets up an accidental sharp needle injury log, which would allow health facilities to identify accidental sticks. The legislation would also require the involvement of front line health workers in evaluating the devices. Senator Elton pointed out that the legislation was amended to exempt facilities or employers with fewer than 25 employees. The employers would still have to use safe needle devices because of the OSHA requirement, but they would not be required to set up an evaluation committee and maintain a log. In response to a question by Vice Chair Bunde, Senator Elton observed that the log requirement was based on practices of other states. The intent is to maintain a log of the critical points for accidental needle sticks in order to determine the action of the health facility in response to sticks. This would help to further advances in health care. Co-Chair Mulder expressed concern that the Department of Labor and Workforce Development would have authority to establish regulations for training and education. Senator Elton noted that there is a zero fiscal note and observed that the Department of Labor and Workforce Development would collect information. AL DWYER, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS AND SAFETY, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT clarified that the they are federal requirements. He did not anticipate additional regulations. The bill clarifies federal requirements that are enforced by the department. Representative Phillips expressed concern with the exemption for employers with less than 25 employees. Senator Elton noted that the change was made in the Senate Finance Committee. The exemption would not affect the use of safe needle devices because employers would still be required by OSHA to use safe needle devices. The employers would not be required to set up an evaluation committee with frontline health care workers or maintain a log. In response to a question by Representative Foster, Senator Elton acknowledged that tired health care workers are responsible for many of the accidental sticks that they receive. He pointed out that the devices are self- retracting. Problems also occur with bedding where needles may have been lost. Senator Elton stated that there are zero fiscal notes reflecting the fact that the devices are already required under OSHA. ANGIE SCHMITZ, STAFF, SENATOR ELTON provided information on the fiscal notes. She observed that there were three zero fiscal notes: Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Department of Corrections and Department of Health and Social Services. Representative Foster MOVED to report CSSB 261(FIN) out of Committee with the accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered. CSSB 261(FIN) was REPORTED out of Committee with a "do pass" recommendation and with three zero fiscal notes: Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Department of Corrections and Department of Health and Social Services.   (TAPE CHANGE, HFC 00 - 124, SIDE 2)    CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 73(FIN) "An Act relating to assisted living homes; and providing for an effective date." SHARON CLARK, STAFF, SENATOR MILLER testified in support of the legislation, on behalf of the sponsor. She observed that the State of Alaska with its scattered population represents a unique challenge to provide services to residents who need assisted living supports. The intent of this bill is to provide good health care for long-term care residents in assisted living homes. While the term Assisted Living in Alaska includes smaller and larger facilities, the primary focus is on smaller facilities (15 beds or less.) Assisted living homes, which were formerly called adult foster care homes, provide a cost effective alternative to institutional care. The program is regulated by the old general assistance regulations, which need to be revisited and updated to be in line with the standard of care that is practiced by the other assisted living programs. The rate was established in 1983 at $35 dollars a day. The Alaska Rate Study Report completed December 1998 found that the value of $35 dollars in 1983 would be equal to $68.30 in 1998 dollars. The rate study concludes that the general relief rate be increased by $38.31. Ms. Clark reiterated that the purpose and intent of the legislation was to increase the daily rate paid to the "mom and pop" (15 beds and less) facilities by the state for the vulnerable adults that are unable to provide safely for their own medical, emotional and personal care needs. She noted that the original intent by Senator Miller was to increase the base rate from $34.50 dollars to $70.00 dollars per day, based on individual care needs. Senator Miller acknowledged that the increase to $70 dollars was not supportable with the current budget. He therefore supports a base rate of $42.25 dollars a day the first year and $51.00 dollars a day for the second and following years. This would include a geographical cost of living differential. Ms. Clark observed that Senator Miller has a personal interest in the legislation as the result of the care of his father. Ms. Clark referred to a report published by the from the Alaska Commission on Aging "Alaska Seniors', Living Longer, Growing Strong" February 1998. "Alaska is second in the nation in a proportional growth of our senior population- with a 42% increase in people age 65+ in only 6 years (1990- 1996... Equally impressive is the anticipated long-term growth of Alaska Senior population. In 1980, there were 11, 547 people over the age of 65. Using moderated growth projections, population experts agree this number may reach 80,927 by the year 2015. This is a cost of 600% increase in only 35 years." Ms. Clark maintained that caregivers cannot afford to remain in business. She questioned how care would be given to Alaska's seniors. Nursing homes and hospitals cost over $300 dollars a day. She stressed that an increase in the rate would keep people in their own communities and in smaller homes.   Representative Phillips noted that the rate was increased to $75 dollars in the House HESS Committee. Ms. Clark stated that the sponsor supports the increase. Co-Chair Therriault observed that the issue is the overall cost. The Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority will cover a portion for the first two years. The Trust indicated that they would cover an additional year at a smaller amount. Representative Phillips observed that the Trust and the Division of Mental Health have requested in the fiscal note that the payment be increased to $100 dollars. DWIGHT BECKER, PROGRAM COORDINATOR, DIVISION OF SENIOR SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, ANCHORAGE provided information on the legislation. He responded to a question by Vice Chair Bunde. He agreed that closer of the "mom and pop" organizations would result in increased state support and cost. KAY BURROWS, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF SENIOR SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION ANCHORAGE testified via teleconference in support of the legislation. She stressed the need for small assisted living homes to receive an increased rate. ALISON ELGEE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION testified in support of the legislation. The legislation impacts both the Division of Senior Citizens and Division of Mental Health clientele. General relief payments do not go to every assisted living client. Personal resources are offset. The department also looks at other forms of public assistance and waivers. Vice Chair Bunde questioned the impact of the loss of small assisted living homes. Ms. Elgee responded that the information was not currently available. She clarified that the concern is that the existing assisted living providers would refuse to accept general relief clients. These clients are vulnerable and subject to abuse. More expensive alternatives would be required if they were not cared for by the smaller private providers. Assisted living homes cost approximately $70 dollars a day versus $300 dollars a day in a nursing home. Not all of the placements would be eligible for nursing home assistance. She explained that the Department of Administration initiated a study in response to complaints that the rates ($35 dollars a day) were insufficient. She explained that the 1998 study identified a cost of $70 dollars a day. Individuals in assisted living are allowed to keep $75 to $100 dollars a day in personal needs allowance before the department offsets the cost. Vice Chair Bunde questioned if people could be feed for $35 dollars a day, let alone be cared for at that rate. SB 73 was heard and HELD in Committee for further consideration. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m.