SENATE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE  April 28, 1999 1:36 p.m.   MEMBERS PRESENT    Senator Mike Miller, Chairman Senator Pete Kelly, Vice-Chairman Senator Gary Wilken Senator Drue Pearce Senator Kim Elton   MEMBERS ABSENT    All members were present   COMMITTEE CALENDAR    Confirmation of Appointments to the University Board of Regents Confirmation of Appointments to the Board of Education   Board of Dental Examiners Mr. Kenneth L. Crooks, D.D.S., Dillingham Board of Marital and Family Therapy Ms. Sandra M. Samaniego, Fairbanks State Medical Board Mr. Keith M. Brownsberger, M.D., Anchorage Ms. Sheila Means, Juneau Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority Board of Trustees Mr. Nelson G. Page, Esq., Anchorage Board of Certified Direct-Entry Midwives Ms. Marilyn Holmes, Juneau Board of Nursing Ms. Barbara Berner, ANP, Ed D, Anchorage Board of Examiners in Optometry Mr. Thomas N. Carter, Fairbanks Mr. Erik D. Christianson, O.D., Ketchikan Mr. John C. Cobbett, O.D., North Pole Board of Pharmacy Ms. Margaret D. Soden, R.Ph., Fairbanks State Physical Therapy and Occupational Therapy Board Ms. Joanne Bell-Graves, Juneau Ms. Leslie F. Schwartz, Petersburg Board of Professional Counselors Ms. Toni Chrestman, Nome Ms. Anne L. Henry, Juneau Mr. David F. Leonard, Esq., Fairbanks Mr. Allan A. Morotti, PhD., Fairbanks Mr. Robert L. Pound, Anchorage Professional Teaching Practices Commission Mr. Steven Beardsley, Anchorage Mr. Bruce F. Johnson, Sitka Mr. Vickie L. McCubbin, Anchorage Board of Psychologist and Psychological Associate Examiners Mr. Paul Craig, Anchorage   Board of Social Work Examiners Mr. Denny Patella, Anchorage      SENATE BILL NO. 112 "An Act relating to a program of postsecondary education for high school students." -MOVED CSSB 112(HES)OUT OF COMMITTEE SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 94 "An Act relating to the medical use of marijuana; and providing for an effective date." -HEARD AND HELD   PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION    SB 112 - See HESS Committee minutes dated 4/19/99 and 4/26/99 SB 94 - See HESS Committee minutes dated 3/24/99   WITNESS REGISTER    University of Alaska Board of Regents Mr. Brian Rogers, Fairbanks Ms. Frances H. Rose, Anchorage Mr. Robert A. Malone, Anchorage Mr. Joseph E. Usibelli, Jr., Healy Board of Education Ms. Paula R. Pawlowski, Anchorage Ms. Susan A. Stitham, Fairbanks Mr. Roy Nageak, Sr., Barrow Mr. Harry Rogers PO Box 398 Valdez, AK 99686 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 112 Mr. Duane Udland, Chief of Police Anchorage Police Department POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SSSB 94 Mr. James "Scooter" Welch, Deputy Chief Fairbanks Police Department 656 7th Avenue Fairbanks, AK 99701 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SSSB 94 Mr. Dean Guaneli, Chief Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division, Department of Law PO Box 110300 Juneau, AK 99811-0300 POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SSSB 94 Mr. Del Smith, Deputy Commissioner Department of Public Safety PO Box 111200 Juneau, AK 99811-1200 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SSSB 94 Mr. Elmer Lindstrom, Special Assistant Department of Health & Social Services PO Box 110601 Juneau, AK 99811-0601 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SSSB 94 Mr. Matthew Fagnani, President Worksafe, Inc.; President-Elect Alaska Support Industry Alliance Anchorage, AK POSITION STATEMENT: Supported SSSB 94 Dr. Andrew Embick PO Box 1899 Valdez, AK 99686 POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SSSB 94 Mr. David Finkelstein Alaskans for Medical Rights POSITION STATEMENT: Opposed SSSB 94 ACTION NARRATIVE  TAPE 99-21, SIDE A  Number 001 CHAIRMAN MILLER called the Senate Health, Education and Social Services (HESS) Committee to order at 1:36 p.m. and took up the confirmation of appointments to the University of Alaska Board of Regents and the Board of Education. He said the report to the Senate President from the committee recommending confirmation of appointments to 13 boards would be forwarded to a joint session for confirmation. MR. BRIAN ROGERS briefly stated he has been associated with the University of Alaska in various capacities since 1970, and the University is important to him as a small business owner who relies on trained people. SENATOR WILKEN asked Mr. Rogers how he would characterize the "cocktail conversations" he's heard about the University. MR. ROGERS responded that the anecdotes in 1980-81 related to problems with transferal of credits, but with changes, it's no longer much of a problem although the stories continue. Some of the stories about poor customer service are true, with students being put "on hold" or misdirected. With President Hamilton's initiatives to work with staff to improve customer service, he said this won't be a problem in a year or two. SENATOR WILKEN encouraged Mr. Rogers to bring concerns to the legislature in the future, and congratulated him on his appointment. SENATOR ELTON congratulated Mr. Rogers, and asked if he views campuses other than UAF as auxiliary campuses. MR. ROGERS replied his position has always been that it is a statewide university. People everywhere need higher education, and there are multiple missions that can't be dealt with in a single location including the traditional 4-year baccalaureate mission, community college mission and research mission. Number 116 SENATOR PEARCE asked several questions, leading with whether the 8- year term is the right length of time. MR. ROGERS said the board changes slowly and it's a complex institution with multiple missions and constituencies. As a board member it could easily take three years to get up to speed on the policy issues. SENATOR PEARCE asked his vision for the University in 2007. MR. ROGERS said its history has included necessary reallocations in the early 1990s with focus on trimming back the administrative structure, and more recently, the faculty. The retirement incentive program has achieved the objective of saving money but the University is letting too much of its intellectual capital out the door without replacing it. He would want to see the University with a stable, sustainable fiscal future, relying on the legislature to solve the fiscal realities. The traditional role of a land grant university is to support the economy of the state, and he hopes it will recognize and meet that challenge by the time he leaves the board. SENATOR PEARCE countered it is not a question of people not understanding the University's role, but the stark reality of a $1 billion fiscal gap, and how the state can continue to use shrinking general fund revenues for the multitude of services provided to the public. She asked what alternate financial resources the University should look at tapping. MR. ROGERS said tuition revenues have been pushed as far as possible without losing students at the base levels of tuition. There might be specialized tuitions corresponding to economic opportunities created for students, or extra charges for delivery systems making classes easier and lowering costs for students, such as distance delivery or intensive courses lasting a week or two. Federal and other external research funds have grown significantly and without more core state support, there won't be much opportunity to drive that. Revenues could be generated from non- academic activities, but he's seen problems with the University in competition with the private sector, and has concerns about getting too far outside the core of teaching, research and public service. The University has grown its land revenues from the existing land base, largely due to timber harvesting. He didn't think the same proportion of revenue would be seen from the existing land, but continuing to look for revenue opportunities and building a land grant trust fund and endowment fund will create a revenue stream. MR. ROGERS said private giving will become more significant in the University's revenues as his generation ages and wishes to give back to society what it has been given. SENATOR PEARCE asked if he would support the concept of a bill asking all of the communities with local campuses to return to local contributions to support the community college mission of the University. MR. ROGERS responded the concept of local support is embodied in the concept of community colleges, and several do contribute today, though not every community is positioned to make as significant a contribution as Valdez makes. Provisions within University policy today give more local control to the community college if the community contributes. It may be difficult to get some communities to agree to this right now. SENATOR PEARCE asked if it is a fair expectation of the legislature that the University attract the "best and brightest" students at the same time it has an open enrollment policy and expends tremendous resources on the part-time, non-traditional, non-degree student. MR. ROGERS said it is the University's mission and not unreasonable to ask that it meet the postsecondary education needs of Alaskans. Needs and talents vary widely in the segments of Alaskan society. It's a big job, but not an unreasonable expectation. Number 294 MS. FRAN ROSE, Anchorage, stated she was employed as an instructor and program coordinator at the Anchorage Community College for 13 years. In 1975 she received a Master's in Education from UAA. She currently owns an investment business. SENATOR PEARCE asked her vision for the University in 2007. MS. ROSE answered that it should be world-class in some area, and that arctic research has enormous potential for attracting students and business. She would like to see the University become a well- grounded liberal arts school that functions throughout the state electronically with distance delivery. Its vocational programs will add to the economics of the state by preparing students for various businesses. SENATOR PEARCE replied that it would seem we're trying to be all things to all people at a time when there is a billion dollar fiscal gap. She asked what alternate financial resources the University could tap. MS. ROSE said the University has the least amount of land of any land grant university. Private donations, particularly from successful graduates, and grants and research would help. A portion of the earnings of the Permanent Fund would establish an endowment and provide a continual steady income for the University. SENATOR PEARCE responded that with the $1 billion fiscal gap that higher oil prices won't plug because of falling oil production, the legislature could use every dollar of the PF earnings just to plug that gap and not have the funding to set up another separate endowment for the University. She asked if Ms. Rose would support asking all the local communities to contribute to the community college mission at some equitable level from campus to campus. MS. ROSE said she would, but with lowered state revenue sharing "there might be a lot of hollering and screaming about that." She didn't know how it could be worked out to be equitable. SENATOR PEARCE asked if she thought the University has a responsibility to provide university courses in every community in the state. MS. ROSE said not in every community, but courses could be provided electronically. SENATOR WILKEN pointed out that at Chukchi campus for the school year ending May 1998, seven students were graduated, four of whom were 2-year degrees and one, a GED. It cost $900,000. At the Northwest College, nine students were graduated, five of whom were 2-year degrees, and two, GEDs. It cost $1.3 million. That's $2.2 million for 16 students, half of whom were 2-year graduates. When the Senator brought that to President Hamilton's attention, he said there's more to that outreach than just degrees. SENATOR WILKEN said a lot of the legislators question whether the state can spend that kind of money for so few students unless it is understood what else is being provided in outreach other than graduating students with degrees in higher learning. He asked Ms. Rose to comment. MS. ROSE said it does concern her, but she doesn't know yet what goes on at all the campuses. It probably shouldn't cost so much for so few students, but she didn't know the enrollment. There may be short-term training for jobs that doesn't show up in these figures. SENATOR WILKEN asked Ms. Rose to keep her eye on those numbers and take it on as a mission to educate the legislature about the outreach campuses so it can better decide how to fund them. Number 442 MR. BOB MALONE, Anchorage, stated he is a 6-year resident of Alaska employed by Alyeska Pipeline Service Company, with experience in the mining industry and more recently, the oil industry. He has a diverse business background, and has been involved with the Children's Trust and the University system. SENATOR ELTON congratulated Mr. Malone on his appointment, and asked if he would expect to be in Alaska for the full 8 years of the term of his appointment as a Regent. MR. MALONE replied it was a topic when he received a call from the Governor, and he told Mr. Knowles he could not guarantee he'd be in Alaska for 8 years. However, he felt certain he could at least make a contribution in the short term. SENATOR PEARCE asked about his vision for the University in 2007. MR. MALONE said the most important goal would be enhanced, strong credentials for the University itself, followed by fiscal stability. His son went to the Lower 48 for a mechanical engineering degree. Part of his focus will be on making the University an attractive educational alternative for our children, capitalizing on the unique geographical location and opportunities in the natural resource areas of mining or petroleum engineering or forestry. He'd also like to see the University attracting a lot more external research dollars in the new millennium. SENATOR PEARCE asked what alternate financial resources the University should tap. MR. MALONE said he's not familiar with the budget, but he believes where communities can contribute, it helps with the ownership of the system. It worries him whether the communities can fund their necessary services and also add the University system. SENATOR PEARCE brought up an example of Senator Halford taking a welding class at UAS for which he paid $300 and calculated the total cost of providing the class at $600. It was a non-degree, non-job training continuing education class for which Senator Pearce felt Senator Halford should pay over 50% of the cost. MR. MALONE said Alyeska pays the full cost of training their people at the community college and University. Number 554 SENATOR WILKEN asked Mr. Malone to become familiar with the rural campus mission and efficiency in delivery of education, and help the legislature understand its needs. SENATOR KELLY said he doesn't know if the benefits of the rural campuses outweigh their costs, but University people tell him there is more value than meets the eye. He would like the Regents to begin thinking about mission misalignment and social needs. MR. MALONE said he would commit to do that. SENATOR ELTON commented in regard to costs and investments that he hoped for recognition of the benefits that will be reaped in the future. There are divergent views among legislators and the Regents about the University's role in the rural campuses. TAPE 99-21, SIDE B  Number 586 SENATOR PEARCE said that many legislators do not feel that all undergraduate degrees should be offered at all of the campuses, despite the fact that students leave Alaska for their postsecondary education. The only way to get quality is to choose a campus to specialize in specific programs. She would not argue over the best engineering programs being in Fairbanks, the original land grant campus, while Anchorage has a better setup for the nursing programs. CHAIRMAN MILLER announced that Mr. Joe Usibelli, Jr. is out of the country and cannot be contacted. The three Fairbanks' senators would vouch for him as a strong advocate of the University system and CHAIRMAN MILLER stated he personally felt Mr. Usibelli would be a good appointee to the Board of Regents. CHAIRMAN MILLER brought up the Board of Education appointments and announced that Mr. Roy Nageak from Barrow is out whale hunting and the first whale of the season had been struck. Number 545 MS. PAULA PAWLOWSKI from Anchorage described her background of 25 years in public service in education, and through the military, her knowledge of different educational systems in several states. Ms. Pawlowski was appointed last August. SENATOR PEARCE asked if the Board adopted a standard for the Practice Exams for teachers that the legislature passed a bill to require. She replied that was correct. She asked her if the level of the exam itself was changed last November before any of those exams had been administered to teachers. MS. PAWLOWSKI answered the State Board was considering one set of scores when the test score was set for the Practice Exam. When the committee went through the tests, it recommended to the Board that the score be lowered by less than 10 points. The Board took the committee's recommendation as a compromise. MS. PAWLOWSKI said the committee was comprised of teachers around the state. SENATOR PEARCE asked why the Board would ever lessen the requirements for teacher standards, particularly without even administering the tests to see if there is a problem. The intent in passing the law was to have the strictest standards possible to ensure having the best teachers. She didn't understand why the Board would allow any group, even legislators, to advise lowering the standards and make such a move. MS. PAWLOWSKI replied the Board did not set the scores before the committee began to work. Alaska is in the top five states in its requirements. She did not believe that negotiating a ten-point spread was a step backward, but a step in alignment with what other states have required. The Board wants teachers to come from all states and pass those scores. There was a lot of debate and research into what other states have done, and the Board will review how it went a year from last November. The exam is for the teacher attending a teacher preparation course, a basic test of skills and a tool for the teachers who did not pass the standard test during their sophomore year of college. It is not a high standards test, but a qualifying exit exam. SENATOR PEARCE questioned why we'd want that person to stay in the degree program or to lower that standard if it truly is that basic. MS. PAWLOWSKI repeated the Board did not lower it, but put it in alignment with other states. She assured the Senator that the test scores will be reviewed next November. Number 467 SENATOR ELTON asked if the test scores or "Pass/Fail" are released to schools who are hiring teachers. MS. PAWLOWSKI said teachers can take it more than once in order to pass all of it. She didn't know if the scores are released. SENATOR ELTON commented that his concern would be mitigated if districts know whether they are hiring a teacher in the top or bottom ten percentile. MS. PAWLOWSKI said the Board wants a teacher to pass the exam with much higher than the minimum requirement, and would keep an eye on it. CHAIRMAN MILLER said that after hearing the final Board appointment his intent was to take up SB 112, followed by the agencies invited to speak on SB 94. The committee would go until 3:30 if necessary. Number 438 MS. SUSAN STITHAM of Fairbanks stated she has been involved in education in Alaska for 20 or 25 years. The Board is a cohesive group with commitment to quality education and has made progress in terms of standards, and she's pleased to have the opportunity to continue serving on it. CHAIRMAN MILLER returned to Senator Pearce's question about the test scores, and said it sounded like the exam would be in line with other states but Alaska wouldn't be at the top of the list for having a tough test. If that perception is accurate, it concerns him. MS. STITHAM replied that she voted against that test score, and she shares the committee's concerns but understands that the advice from the Educational Testing Service (ETS) was that the score was way out of line and "too high." There might have been legal liabilities and ETS made a recommendation for Alaska based on work they'd done here. With any high stakes assessment there is potential litigation: if you don't pass this exam, you don't get a license. The Board will revisit this once the test results are in. This test measures literacy and numeracy, and there should be a high standard. She expressed frustration that this test didn't measure what a person doesn't know, with a score of 30 versus a score of 25. She would like to see a move toward performance assessments. SENATOR WILKEN asked if she is near retirement and thanked her for her service to the kids at Lathrop High. CHAIRMAN MILLER asked for an all-inclusive motion to move the confirmation of appointments. SENATOR ELTON moved that the committee forward to the full body the names of the appointments to state boards in its three-page report. Without objection, it was so ordered. Number 360 SENATOR WILKEN moved that the committee report out the individuals considered for the State Board of Education. Without objection, it was so ordered. SENATOR WILKEN moved that the committee report out the four individuals nominated by the Governor for the Board of Regents. Without objection, it was so ordered. SB 112-POSTSECONDARY CLASS FOR HIGH SCHOOL  CHAIRMAN MILLER brought up SB 112, and explained the proposed CS addresses Senator Pearce's concern by adding on page 2, line 3, "a student in good standing." SENATOR ELTON said that in addition to that language, the CS also states on page 2, lines 11 and 12, that "good standing" shall be determined by the governing body of the district. It will be defined by the individual districts, not in statute. SENATOR PEARCE moved to adopt the Committee Substitute. Without objection, it was adopted. Number 331 MR. HARRY ROGERS, Valdez School District, stated his district has a concern that SB 112 may have a negative effect on its current program that successfully blends high school and college for those going on to a degree program or to a school-to-career program. He described the partnership between parents, PWS Community College and Valdez High School. Of the 229 high school students, 104 are taking college credit. If this bill passes, it could add a considerable fiscal note to the school district without gaining anything beyond what it's already doing. With a fiscal note of $75,000 or $80,000 the district will have to reevaluate what it's doing. SENATOR ELTON commented that one addition to the bill is a provision that it will not preclude other arrangements that lower tuition and do some of the things Mr. Rogers' district is doing with adjunct professors. He would follow up with a phone call. MR. ROGERS thanked the Senator. SENATOR ELTON moved CSSB 112(HES) Version I from committee with individual recommendations. Without objection, it was so ordered. SB 94-MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA    TAPE 99-21, SIDE B  Number 280 MR. MIKE PAULEY, Staff Aide to Senator Leman, offered to defer his comments and requested the Chairman accommodate the people holding on-line. MR. DUANE UDLAND, Anchorage Chief of Police, called in from Chicago and said Senator Leman deserves thanks for bringing this bill forward. Two issues are important to police chiefs: (1) mandatory registration of the patient and the primary care giver with restriction on how many patients a primary care giver can serve, to avoid becoming a local dealer; and (2) the definition of how much marijuana can be possessed under this law; two ounces or 6 plants is too broad and needs work. The police don't want to arrest people who have the medical marijuana exception, or deal with the same problems that California has developed. MR. "SCOOTER" JAMES WELCH, Chief Law Enforcement Officer for Fairbanks Police Department, said enforcement's concern is to strike a balance between compassion and legitimizing a narrow field of what is an illegal activity. One plant can yield a pound of marijuana selling for $4500, and can be harvested 3 times a year. Six plants could be big business, producing an $80,000 per year income. There must be some way to regulate, and the existing legislation is too broad. Similarly, pharmaceutical cocaine is available for legitimate medical purposes or you can buy street cocaine, with a vast difference between the two products. Law enforcement doesn't want to overlook the voters of the state but, MR. WELCH said, the legislation needs some changes. Number 180 MR. DEAN GUANELI, Chief Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division of Department of Law, said the voters have spoken for the medical use of marijuana. The administration wants to make the initiative work, but it must be changed because it has technical and serious substantive problems. The initiative allows registered patients to sell to other registered patients, or to anyone if it's not known for certain that the person is not entitled to use marijuana. After California's initiative passed, marijuana clubs with memberships sprang up, and open buying and smoking. The club owners' defense was that they were the primary care givers. The profits of the largest club in San Francisco were $1 million a month until it was shut down by the state. The state was able to shut it down because there wasn't anything specific in their law allowing marijuana clubs. In Alaska, there is something specific allowing a registered patient to do that. The initiative states a registered patient can't use marijuana in public but registration is not required to use it, so if you're not a registered patient and simply use it, you can use marijuana in public. This raises the question of constitutionality. MR. GUANELI said it creates a strong argument that it is not constitutional in treating two similarly situated people differently for no apparent reason and it is likely to be struck down. Arguably, anyone can use medical marijuana in public. A tricky provision in the initiative states that if a person uses marijuana for medical purposes, it is not a controlled substance. Almost all prescription drugs are controlled substances with state and federal controls. If a person uses medical marijuana for pain or nausea and gets very stoned and drives a car, that's okay because the driving while intoxicated law states you're guilty of that crime if you're under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance. Medical marijuana is not a controlled substance, and therefore you can't be punished for driving under the influence. A specific provision in the initiative says the registration card can be taken away for one year. Since you don't have to be registered to use marijuana, it has no effective penalty. There is a problem with the amount of marijuana that can be used. One ounce plus six plants can be a lot of marijuana. The average amount from a mature plant is about 4 ounces of usable, dried marijuana. The average of usable marijuana, from seedlings to mature plants, is about 1 ounce. Mr. Guaneli gave an example of how, under the initiative, a person could possess up to one pound of marijuana. The initiative goes further and allows using more if you can prove that it's justified. The initiative puts many restrictions on law enforcement officials in terms of search and seizure and forfeiture, by placing marijuana in a separate category from other drugs or prescription drugs. When police officers take some of this property, they have to preserve it and water the plants. If for some technical search and seizure reason the case gets thrown out of court, the police have to give the property back. It is completely different from any other provision in law, and DOL believes it is not appropriate. Senator Leman's bill corrects a number of these problems. It makes registration mandatory which addresses the practical problem for law enforcement officers regarding arrest or release for legitimate use. It changes the law so that marijuana, for medical purposes or not, is a controlled substance. Finally, it ensures there is one care giver for one patient, to avoid the problems arising in California. Number 058 CHAIRMAN MILLER commented that, as a business owner, he does not allow cigarette smoking in his store. If the initiative were left intact, he asked if someone smoking medical marijuana in his store could be treated differently than someone smoking a cigarette. Could he ask them to leave his store, or would that violate the law? MR. GUANELI replied there is a provision that nothing in the initiative shall require the accommodation of medical use of marijuana in any place of employment. Arguably, restrictions could be placed. CHAIRMAN MILLER asked if that applies to employees or to customers. MR. GUANELI said you could restrict customers because it would bother employees. On the other hand, with the Americans with Disabilities Act, there might be an argument that because state law allows a certain substance to be used, it might be a kind of discrimination against someone with a disability. This question presents a potential problem. MR. GUANELI said that Senator Leman's Sponsor Substitute takes care of a number of the problems he mentioned, and there are a number that it does not address. Amendments have been prepared and he offered to explain them. CHAIRMAN MILLER asked if he has seen Mr. Luckhaupt's draft amendments that put Mr. Guaneli's amendments into legislative language. He replied that he had, and they cover all of the topics suggested by the administration with the exception of the last one which is still being drafted. TAPE 99-22, SIDE A Number 001 CHAIRMAN MILLER stated his intent to take public testimony today and discuss the Sponsor Substitute and the amendments prepared for it. SENATOR ELTON questioned Mr. Guaneli about his description of "two people similarly situated," one under the authority of a physician who can use marijuana in public and someone like himself who wouldn't be able to use it publicly. MR. GUANELI clarified that he meant a registered user with a physician's recommendation, and an unregistered user who has a physician's recommendation but who has chosen not to register, to use it and run the risk of arrest. CHAIRMAN MILLER asked, if the committee moves the amendments proposed by DOL and Public Safety as the vehicle and it passes the legislature with no major changes, would the administration support these changes to SB 94 and would Mr. Guaneli recommend that the Governor sign the bill. MR. GUANELI said the departments are in consensus that these are appropriate amendments. They have discussed them with Pat Pourchot, the Governor's legislative liaison, and are prepared to support this bill as amended. Number 048 MR. DEL SMITH, Deputy Commissioner of the Department of Public Safety, echoed the comments of Chief Udland and Chief Welch and spoke for mandatory registration. The department's concern is not to figure out whether people ought to have marijuana, because obviously that's the case. He said mandatory registration with a card, or computer verification of medical use with the DHSS would be preferable to seizing marijuana from someone who later turned out to have a doctor's note. The possession issue and the amount must be clearly delineated for the officer on the street. Number 082 MR. ELMER LINDSTROM, Special Assistant to Commissioner Perdue, Department of Health & Social Services, said the department has a somewhat different perspective. Law enforcement notified DHSS of enforcement concerns shortly after the initiative passed, and DHSS would defer to those concerns. However, its difficulty is to craft a solution that doesn't make administration of the program impossible or difficult, or that is inappropriately intrusive of the patient/physician relationship and violates the standard practice of medicine in this state. With these amendments, the department would not be opposed to the legislation. He pointed out the DHSS 4/27/99 fiscal note totaling $87,700. DHSS had an increment in the House and Senate Finance Committees to operate its registry under the initiative as it was passed, but unfortunately it was not approved by either committee. Without the resource and despite the best efforts to improve the legislation, the department would not be able to get information to law enforcement in a timely manner. Under the registry system, a patrolman could call in from the street to the DHSS dispatcher and find out immediately if a person was a patient or a registered care giver. If these amendments were approved by the committee, MR. LINDSTROM said the fiscal note would be reduced by about $30,000. MR. SMITH agreed with Mr. Lindstrom that law enforcement would need to know in the middle of the night, not at 8:00 when personnel come in to work. Number 120 CHAIRMAN MILLER said although he did not support the initiative the intent of the committee is to make the program work. The initiative was supported by the voters so the program must be made to work for law enforcement and the folks who truly have a legitimate medical need for the substance. He thanked the departments for their time and effort. He said his intent is to bring back the Committee Substitute on Monday, which would essentially be their amendments. Number 140 MR. MATTHEW FAGNANI stated he is President of Work Safe Inc., the largest drug and alcohol testing business in the state, providing testing to 2500 private businesses and public sector organizations. Its objective is to improve workplace safety and reduce customers' exposure to liability from employees' illegal drug use. He spoke to the potential workplace impacts of the marijuana initiative, saying numerous loopholes in the language provide for ample abuse of the law. Senator Leman has corrected some of these, and Mr. Fagnani supported the administration's amendments as well. He supported further revising the definition of "debilitating medical condition" because the current broad definition would potentially enable persons with certain conditions to obtain a recommendation for use and be in the workplace. He suggested incorporating the requirement of a three-physician panel to review the decision of the physician and ensure that other means of alleviating pain have been explored. Also of concern is the loophole allowing patients of primary care givers to sell or distribute marijuana to each other. He said marijuana is especially dangerous in the workplace because it impairs coordination and judgment, making it a major cause of accidents. Use of it off the job causes residual effects. The Alaska Human Rights Commission has informally indicated they will view a medical recommendation for marijuana the same as a legitimate prescription for other drugs. Employers will have to make reasonable accommodations in the workplace even though the federal Americans with Disabilities Act does not recognize use of medical marijuana as a disability. Although the statute does not require accommodation in the workplace, it also does not prohibit it. Number 244 DR. ANDREW EMBICK, a physician in private practice in Valdez, spoke in opposition to SB 94. He said he is neither an expert on marijuana nor on the legal system, but the "replacement bill creates an impossible standard which cannot come even close to being met by physicians," because it requires that marijuana used medically be the only therapeutic modality in use, rather than one among a number of useful treatments. This is his primary objection. If it is so dangerous, he asked, why in twenty years has he never run into anyone with a medical problem from it? Number 303 MR. DAVID FINKELSTEIN of Alaskans for Medical Rights (AMR) stated a recent national Gallup Poll indicated 73% of Americans support the medical use of marijuana at this time. He thanked Senator Leman for the improvements in his Sponsor Substitute to SB 94 that addressed his group's concerns. He stated the AMR believes the legislation is not necessary. The AMR doesn't disagree with the goals of law enforcement, and also wants a law that is easily enforced. The interpretation of minor drafting errors should be dealt with through regulations or in the Revisor's Bill. The standards involved allow for these kinds of regulations. Regulations for the registration system won't be in place until this summer. He said he doesn't foresee any significant problems occurring from the implementation of this bill, but if there are, these could be addressed next session. Mr. Finkelstein would discuss their major concerns with the Sponsor Substitute that fall into nine areas, and said he wouldn't address the amendments from the administration today. A concern is the elimination of protection from arrest. It's an affirmative defense and it's not appropriate when a person gets a doctor's recommendation, applies to the state and meets all the other requirements. Another concern is access to the list by law enforcement agencies. The SS adds "in the course of a criminal investigation or prosecution" and this provision will significantly discourage people from signing up on the list. An additional concern is mandatory registration. To avoid arrest, you must be registered with the state. There will be situations where people aren't registered although they have complied with all the other requirements, and they could be convicted. Future administrations may not support the registration system. The letter from 19 doctors indicates no additional requirements are necessary. Adding standards for the doctor will make it much harder for them to make recommendations for legitimate patients. Doctors must be allowed to make their own judgments. He referred to AS 08.64.101 which allows for review of doctors, various reprimand levels or elimination of their license. The provision in AS 17.37.010 states the recommendation of the doctor would specify the nature of the patient's condition. If that is added, MR. FINKELSTEIN said he doubts many patients would ever register with the state. Records including details of their medical history is completely inappropriate and would lead to a system unintended in the initiative. A concern is the protection given to doctors. In the initiative, doctors are protected from prosecution if making a recommendation is based on a legitimate doctor-patient relationship. The language in the SS gives doctors legal protection when they also base it on other approved treatments. That higher standard and the complexity involved is a discouraging factor, because it's unclear that the doctor will be protected by law if he is making a legitimate attempt to address the medical needs of the patient. This protection shouldn't be conditional. SENATOR WILKEN asked if he is looking at Version I. MR. FINKELSTEIN said yes, and referred to page 9, line 15. SENATOR WILKEN asked him to repeat his testimony. MR. FINKELSTEIN said that subsection (A) is basic, that a physician should not be penalized for making these diagnoses based upon assessment of the patient's medical history and condition, and in the context of a bona fide patient-doctor relationship. The Sponsor Substitute adds that the recommendation is also based on other approved medications and treatments. While that may be legitimate, would the doctor have legal protection if he inaccurately interpreted or applied subsection (B). It would discourage any doctor from even touching the subject, and to prosecute a doctor for misinterpretation of this section would be unfair. Another concern relates to one patient per care giver. The concerns expressed by law enforcement are reasonable. Draft regulations would limit one person per care giver except for Hospice situations or where people apply to the state. The AMR thinks there are others such as family members who should also be covered, which is partially addressed in the Sponsor Substitute. He said this kind of detail can be handled in the regulations. An additional concern relates to the approach on excess amount. The way the law is written, if you have more than an ounce or 6 plants, 3 of which are mature plants, then you're subject to arrest. There are cases where patients legitimately need more than an ounce and it's not easy to obtain it. MR. FINKELSTEIN concluded with a final concern regarding the way doctors are treated and the standards for what is a bona fide doctor-patient relationship. Number 492 CHAIRMAN MILLER announced the committee would recess and reconvene at 6:00 p.m. Depending on how many people want to testify on SB 94, a time limit might be imposed on each speaker because the committee could meet only from 6:00 to 8:00. The committee recessed at 3:45 p.m.