Author Topic: missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation  (Read 8273 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BuzzKill

  • Posts: 1815
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« on: October 25, 2005, 09:12:00 PM »
http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2005 ... news08.txt
Panel to begin work regulating youth homes
By JOHN STROMNES of the Missoulian

   

Is solitary confinement in an isolated ?hobbit hole? appropriate behavior-changing therapy for a troubled, defiant teenager?

Are leg restraints appropriate when bringing such teens to Montana against their will (but at their parents' insistence) to live in a private boarding school?

 
 
Who is responsible when an untrained youth ?counselor? seduces teenagers half his age while they're in his care at a church-based residential facility?

These are some of the questions facing - but unlikely to be quickly answered - by the state's newly formed Board of Private Alternative Adolescent Residential or Outdoor Programs.

The board will take its first baby steps toward self-regulation of the unregulated - and burgeoning - ?behavioral health-care industry? in Montana on Wednesday, with a public hearing in Helena on proposed administrative rules that will govern board procedures and the establishment of fees to register existing facilities.

The board was established by the 2005 Legislature as an alternative to a state Department of Health and Human Services measure that would have regulated the programs as health-care providers, as are similar facilities for youths confined by court order.

The push for regulation came about because of much-publicized concerns about the mistreatment or neglect of youths whose parents have enrolled them in behavior-modification programs in Montana, Utah, Arizona, the Caribbean, Mexico and even Central Europe.

Many of the programs operate without government registration or regulation, and abuses have occurred. In well-publicized cases from some ?wilderness experience? programs, youths attending by parental order have even died.

Government and private therapeutic treatment programs for youths committed because of delinquency or crimes are intensively regulated in Montana. Many states also regulate the nonjudicial alternative programs, where the youths in custody are turned over by their parents. But in Montana, these private-pay, private-enroll programs are called ?substitute-care providers? and are specifically exempted from state regulation.

In 2003, Montana's Department of Health and Human Services published a report, ?Unregulated Youth Residential Care Programs in Montana,? to provide background information on the need for regulations.

In 2005, the sought-for legislation - which would have registered and ultimately regulated the programs - was proposed by DPHHS and would have been administered by the department, said Mary Dalton, director of the DPHHS Quality Assurance Division.

The agency already regulates 380 residential facilities and 629 child day-care providers.

But the industry quickly mustered its forces - one program spent $34,000 on lobbying - and proposed its own bill.

?When it became evident that the state would be moving in this direction (toward regulation), the programs wanted to be willing participants and ahead of the curve rather than being dragged along on a leash,? said Rep. Paul Clark, D-Trout Creek, who sponsored the industry's bill and himself works for two smaller wilderness-based adolescent programs in western Sanders County.

The industry bill differed in a number of crucial ways from the DPHHS proposal.

First, it put the entire registration and regulatory proposal under the auspices of the state Department of Labor and Industry, through a board mainly composed of industry representatives, instead of the health-care professionals in DPHHS.

Second, it exempted any faith-based or religious private behavioral therapy programs; at least seven of the 30 programs in Montana are faith-based.

Third, it would be self-supporting through fees and not cost taxpayers any money, as the DPHHS regulation presumably would have.

The Legislature weighed its options and quickly favored Clark's bill, which passed both houses easily. The DPHHS bill died in committee.

Dalton said the fact that Clark, a respected legislator who works in the industry, sponsored the industry bill and helped secure its passage. Clark said the fact that his proposal cost taxpayers nothing was ?a big issue? to many legislators.

?The programs themselves, not the state, are paying for it. That was a big issue - $40,000 and $50,000 for the two years,? he said.

The first step in the approved process is to establish rules by which the board will operate and register existing programs. That will be the topic at Wednesday's meeting in Helena. The rules also propose how site visits will be made. A week's notification in advance must be given to the program, under the proposed rules.

Programs that are exempt include any that are already regulated, or recreational programs, or boarding schools or residential schools that focus on academics, or sports-oriented camps.

Specifically exempt are alternative residential programs that are adjunct to any organized church, such as Pinehaven near St. Ignatius.

The new board is composed of five members - three from various segments of the industry and two interested members of the public. Serving on the board at present are Clark, as representative of small programs; Michele ?Mickey? Manning, principal at Spring Creek Lodge Academy west of Thompson Falls, with 500 students perhaps the largest such boarding program in Montana, and the largest employer in Sanders County; Mary Alexine of Chrysalis Inc., near Eureka, representing medium-sized programs; Carol Brooker of Plains, a Sanders County commissioner; and Maureen Neihart of Laurel, a licensed clinical child psychologist.

The board must meet at least twice a year for two years to examine the benefits and drawbacks of licensing and registration. To do so, it will conduct an extensive survey of current standards and other issues.

It will report back to the 2007 Legislature and either recommend further legislation, or recommend the board be disbanded with no further action advisable.

The law asserts that ?necessary licensure processes and safety standards for programs are best developed and monitored by the professionals that are actively engaged in providing private alternative adolescent residential care.?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2005, 09:31:00 PM »
"The first step in the approved process is to establish rules by which the board will operate and register existing programs. That will be the topic at Wednesday's meeting in Helena. The rules also propose how site visits will be made. A week's notification in advance must be given to the program, under the proposed rules."



A week's notification in advance?  That is a joke.  The site visits need to be done unannounced.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2005, 11:08:00 PM »
How ironic, the WWASP program gets a member on the board. This is BS.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #3 on: October 26, 2005, 12:23:00 AM »
A whole week, huh?!! Ya know, the older people get, the less they care about the youth!!!!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #4 on: October 26, 2005, 06:10:00 PM »
yay! maybe some justice will actually come of this since there is a member on the board from wwasp, there needs to be fair representation in order for true justice to prevail, come on you guys must surely know that, or does your lack of brain cells prevent you from making such realizations?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #5 on: October 26, 2005, 07:00:00 PM »
private interest- hence wwasps, does not equal justice...justice 101- duh
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline AtomicAnt

  • Posts: 552
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #6 on: October 26, 2005, 10:16:00 PM »
Quote
On 2005-10-26 15:10:00, Anonymous wrote:

"yay! maybe some justice will actually come of this since there is a member on the board from wwasp, there needs to be fair representation in order for true justice to prevail, come on you guys must surely know that, or does your lack of brain cells prevent you from making such realizations?"


I'll watch while you explain how that is justice to the kids imprisoned by these sickos.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline chaking

  • Posts: 39
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #7 on: October 27, 2005, 04:01:00 AM »
That is interesting... The part where anon stated that having a wwasp board member would bring justice...
I'm trying to think of a good example to put in place here... I think maybe Congress (that's really just one big board right? supposedly looking out for public interest...) Well what would you think about having a wal-mart VP as someone with a lot of sway? (I guess people did vote for two oilmen to be our president though) Personally, I would be appalled. Its sole purpose is supposed to be the public interest... As this board's sole purpose is supposed to be the children's welfare...
It is accepatable to have a wwasp employee detail "their" side of the story to a board member, and consequently let the board member make an open decision on the task at hand (open, as in fully sharing with the public why the decision was made)... But it is wholly unacceptable to have a person with such a conflict of interest to be a key part of the decision making process... This is common sense... I would also like to know what qualifications Michelle Manning has? Why is the principal of the academic program at SCL sitting as a board member on issues unrelated to academics?
Having a board that consists of reps from 3 "programs" and only 2 independent citizens is also plain wrong... We'll see what happens, but it doesn't look promising...

Just look at how they are starting off:
"The first step in the approved process is to establish rules by which the board will operate and register existing programs. That will be the topic at Wednesday's meeting in Helena. The rules also propose how site visits will be made. A week's notification in advance must be given to the program, under the proposed rules."

A week huh? Wow... This pretty much cuts to zero the chance of any abuse being witnessed... It in no way assures compliance with anything... You could probably have the most unsanitary conditions you could find, and given a week, be spotless... It is a sure sign that the board is compromised.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #8 on: October 27, 2005, 09:47:00 AM »
I agree with you.  The visits should be done unannouced and the Board should be made up of those who are not profiting in ANYWAY off of the schools.

Unannounced visits = a true picture of what takes place.

Board with not interest (not profiting) off of the placement of teens and their families who are in crisis = non-bias decision making.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #9 on: October 27, 2005, 11:17:00 AM »
This is an old tactic. If you commit a crime, the best way to get away with it is to investigate the crime yourself! (or get your friends to) This way it looks like something is being done, when in fact it is not. It actually now provides Spring Creek Lodge in Montana with MORE credibility, because they are now part of a REGULATED industry. This is a scam. Why did WWASP give so much money to government officials in Montana? So they could come around and give them shit? Nope. This 'regulation' is bought and paid for. Just another scam to keep the gravy train flowin'.

The week advance notice is a dead giveaway.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #10 on: October 27, 2005, 11:46:00 AM »
I'm really getting tired of trying to do things the right way. All these years of doing it by the book, wwasps is still running, and even expanding. We play by the rules, they don't, and it's getting us absolutely fucking knowhere. I'm sure there is something that we can do, that's NOT violent, but that will bring media attention to these places. Any ideas???
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #11 on: October 27, 2005, 03:52:00 PM »
Who are the people on the board?

http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... rt=0#89671
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... t=0#110536

Might Clark have a conflict of interest?
4/1994 Paul and Cheri opened last summer and inquiries from consultants continue.
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... een01.html

4/1998 Paul Clark, a co- founder of Galena Ridge filed to run for a position in the Montana House of Representatives.
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... een02.html

Paul Clark, a co- founder of Galena Ridge, a family model residential program and summer short term wilderness program near Trout Creek, Montana has filed to run for a position in the Montana House of Representatives. He was asked to run by several local residents who feel the current incumbent has too close a ties with the local militia.
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... een02.html

The largest employer of the town is the nearby Spring Creek Lodge Academy.
http://north-america.traveltoworld.com/ ... s/&paged=3

Lobbying Legislature
Third was the Montana Association of Realtors at 45,903, followed by Spring Creek Lodge, a Sanders County school for troubled youths, at 34,253 and the Montana Association of Counties at 33,794. The Montana Farm Bureau Federation was sixth at 31,067. (Missoulian, MT)
http://www.missoulian.com/articles/2005 ... news05.txt

SCL sponsor of 2005 Governor?s Ball
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:eYLd ... tzer&hl=en

The Board of County Commissioners of Sanders County, Montana met in regular session on Tuesday, January 11th at 10:00 a.m. Present were: Carol Brooker, Chairman; Harold L. Laws, J. Gail Patton, Commissioners; and Jackie Dean, Secretary.
Judy Henaghan, Christine Nowak, Recovery Northwest; Billie Schmalz, Robert Croft, Job Service; Greg Barisich, Vicky Croft, Juanita Triplett, Mental Health Center; Thomas Butcher, Spring Creek Lodge; Cass Rocco, Special Education Cooperative; Pam Wales, Co-Op Counselor; Diane Morrin, Counselor; Valerie Borgmann, Justice Court Clerk; Gene Arnold, Sheriff; Bob Zimmerman, County Attorney; Tootie Welker, SCCFF; Cheryl Meyers, Steve Kendley, Juvenile Probation Officers, Barbara Monaco, Chief Juvenile Probation Officer; and Don Jensen, Principle met with the Board to meet the new Juvenile Probation Officers and discuss their plan of action for Sanders County.
http://www.co.sanders.mt.us/SANDERS%20C ... n_2000.htm

The Board of County Commissioners of Sanders County, Montana met in regular session on Tuesday, December 16th at 10:00 a.m. Present were: J. Gail Patton, Chairman; Carol Brooker, Harold L. Laws, Commissioners; and Jackie Dean, Secretary.
The Board attended the COPS Resource Officer meeting called by Jerry Pauli, Superintendent of Thompson Falls Schools. Others attending were: representatives from all Sanders County School Districts, Spring Creek School; Gene Arnold, Sheriff; Donna Neal, Sheriff's Office Administrator; Rube Wrightsman, Undersheriff; Robert Zimmerman, County Attorney; and the Youth Officer. The major topic of discussion was how to finance the fourth year of the grant. Should it be done by the schools or Sanders County. Spring Creek School[?] volunteered to pay $45,000.00 and the County school districts will pay proportionately the other half. More discussion on the financing next month.
http://www.co.sanders.mt.us/SANDERS%20C ... c_2003.htm

Maureen Neihart, Psy.D- advocate of the ?gifted and talented? child.

She and her husband, Doug, live in Laurel, Montana where they are licensed as therapeutic treatment foster parents and work with seriously emotionally disturbed adolescents in their home. [for ten years- from another link]
http://www.ctd.northwestern.edu/resourc ... ihart.html

Interesting comments on a trip to China
Given that Xinjiang Province is predominantly Muslim and that fewer than 2 percent of the people there are Christians, we didn't expect to have much opportunity to talk about our faith. The Chinese are allowed to believe or not believe as they choose, but sharing one's faith outside of government control is not permitted. Christians are allowed to worship in politically approved churches where only pastors favored by the government are allowed to preach. Bibles are hard to come by, if you are not a member of a registered church. The only way most Chinese learn about Christ is one-on-one with a Christian.
As it turned out, there were people waiting for us to show up just so they could ask us about Christ. Some came under cover of darkness to our dormitory to ask, "What do you believe? Do you think Jesus is the Messiah? Do you think he's the son of God?"
http://www.laureloutlook.com/articles/2 ... idhart.txt

Chrysalis- NATSAP Member
Both Mary and Kenny met while working at Pathways Treatment Center in Kalispell, Montana, and worked most recently at Montana Academy where Kenny was the Program Director/Therapist and Mary was Lead Therapist.
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... /np03.html

Home-based, expanded in 2001
http://www.strugglingteens.com/archives ... sit01.html

Natsap Standards Used As Template for Montana Legislation
NATSAP standards have been utilized as a template, both for numerous discussions and as the foundation for the actual bill draft. John Santa (Montana Academy), John Mercer (Mission Mountain School), and Penny James-Riddell (Explorations) have assisted in the process by
working with like-programs statewide to educate others regarding the process of devising standards applicable to a wide-range of programs and schools. NATSAP Interim Executive Director, Jan Moss, provided input to program representatives in Montana at a meeting held in
November in Kalispell. Mercer and Santa developed the initial draft language for the sub-committee work, with James-Riddell, Kenny Pannell {Chrysalis), and Patrick McKinnon (The Monarch School) also contributing to the final bill language. The bill is anticipated to be brought forth in the January session. NATSAP member
programs, as well as others throughout the state, watch the outcome with anticipation.
http://www.natsap.org/images/NATSAP%200 ... Nwsltr.pdf

More details on Board Bios:
Governor announces new members of alternative
adolescent residential or outdoor programs board
Governor Brian Schweitzer today announced new members of the Alternative Adolescent Residential or Outdoor Programs Board. Michele ?Mickey? Manning, Thompson Falls - Manning is the Principal of the Spring Creek Lodge Academy
in Thompson Falls and is a member of the Association for Supervision Curriculum Development. She has a bachelor?s degree from
University of California at Santa Barbara and a master?s degree from Cal State University
Northridge. Manning fulfills the qualification as a representative of a large size residential adolescent program.

Mary Alexine, Eureka- Alexine is Co-owner and
Co-director of Chrysalis Inc. in Eureka. Chrysalis Inc is a private residential adolescent
program for girls ages 13-18. She has worked as the Lead Therapist for both the Montana Academy and Pathways Treatment Center. Alexine has a bachelor?s degree from the University of Montana
and a master?s degree from Antioch University in Yellow Springs, Ohio. She is a licensed Clinical Professional Counselor and a Licensed Addiction Counselor. She fulfills the qualification as a
representative of a medium size residential adolescent program.

Paul Clark, Trout Creek- Clark is the Wilderness
Program Director for Galena Ridge and also works for 20 Peaks Ranch. He serves in the Montana House of Representatives in House District
13 and is a board member for Making American Agriculture Productive and Profitable. Clark has a bachelor?s degree from Rutgers University.
He fulfills the qualification as a representative of a small size wilderness adolescent program.

Dr. Maureen Neihart, Laurel- Dr. Neihart is a licensed clinical child psychologist whose area of expertise is the development of gifted children. She and her husband were licensed as therapeutic treatment foster parents for ten years. Dr. Neihart is currently working on a novel
about the humanity of inner city adolescents. She fulfills the qualification of public member.

Carol Brooker, Plains- Brooker is a County Commissioner in Sanders County. She is past president of the Montana Association of Counties.
Brooker attended the University of Montana. She
fulfills the qualification of public member.
http://www.whitefishfreepress.com/pdf/W ... -08-24.pdf
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #12 on: October 27, 2005, 04:42:00 PM »
How HB 628 came to be......

February 18, 2005
HEARING ON HB 628
Sponsor:  REPRESENTATIVE PAUL CLARK, HD 13, Trout Creek
Opening Statement by Sponsor:  
REP. CLARK opened the hearing on HB 628, and reported that Northwestern Montana is the home for many alternative adolescent residential schools, programs and outdoor wilderness programs. He was the founder of his program, Galena Ridge, which is one of the outdoor wilderness programs. He worked with at-risk kids.  The bill was really a business bill and did not pertain to education. The bill would create a board, and the board would develop rules for registration of alternative adolescent programs. The board would look into the possibility of licensure, should the program go in that direction. He was not in a business that takes any money from the state. They are in a business where the state taxes them, where they have employees, and they are in a growing business.  
Many of the kids in his program came from out of state. He did not work with kids that had been referred to him by the State of Montana or payed for by the State. The estimated annual revenues coming into Montana from the out-of-state programs had increased to about $40 million.  They have programs serving between 800 and 1,000 students and most of them are from out of state and are voluntarily sent to the programs by their parents because their parents and the family system are in family crisis. He works with kids that are typically chemically dependent or at least have a long history of substance abuse.  The kids may have had problems with the law or be on the verge of that kind of trouble. He would like to see a board established so that programs can proceed toward getting a better understanding of how they can work, some self-regulation (not to keep new programs from coming to Montana) and to make sure that the programs in Montana are of high quality. He would not have been before the committee if the programs were not being pursued for regulation by the Department of Public Health and Human Services(DPHHS). He felt they were functioning fine being unregulated. He did not feel all the programs in Montana could be bunched together in a basket under the umbrella of DPHHS. He was before the committee asking for the opportunity to regulate their programs themselves in a responsible and accountable way and a way that would NOT COST THE STATE MONEY. He wanted it done in a way that would  maintain the programs' independence, and where the programs pay their own expenses and pay the Department of Labor and Industry for their expenses that are directed toward their process. He walked the committee through the bill.
EXHIBIT(edh40a06)

Proponents' Testimony:
SEN. JIM ELLIOT rose in support of the bill because the schools were in his district and he had attended the meeting to attest to the character and the integrity of the people who run the programs addressed in the bill. The most important thing that he had seen as an outsider was the way the kids came to the program and the way they left it. What he had seen in the programs was, to the largest extent possible, good. He informed the committee that they were seeing a group of people with a willingness to come together as a profession with many facets and to work together to achieve a framework of regulation that is appropriate for the many facets of the profession and suitable to the profession.  
John Santa, Co-founder of Montana Academy of Co-educational Therapeutic Boarding School in Lost Prairie, Montana, rose in support of the bill.  They have 80 students and 65 well-trained members on their staff. The students need environments that are nurturing, structured, and will contain them and allow them to grow up and mature enough to become productive adults. He believed the leaders of the programs could come together and create appropriate standards that are far superior to being dictated to from outside sources.  
 
Christina Johnson rose in support of the bill and presented written testimony.
EXHIBIT(edh40a07)
{Tape: 2; Side: A; Approx. Time Counter: 0 - 25.7}
Matt Ihrig, enrolled in Spring Creek Lodge Academy, testified that the program had helped him earn his high school diploma, gain self confidence, morals, goals, and confidence and self-esteem.
Penny James, Trout Creek, testified that she and her husband own one of the programs being discussed. When she thought of being regulated by an outside entity, in an industry and profession such as theirs, it was difficult for her.  She desired to be part of a board and be able to speak to the things that they already had been researching and working on.  
Brandee Dellasilva was enrolled at Spring Creek for twelve months. She graduated the program eight months ago and since then she has earned scholarships for college and has traveled around the state talking to students about drugs. Spring Creek program had changed her life around.  
Randy Lovel, Physician, had been to treatment in 1993. He introduced his daughter who was a graduate of Spring Creek.
{Tape: 2; Side: A; Approx. Time Counter: 25.7 - 30}
{Tape: 2; Side: B}
Renel Hanson, Monarch School, reported that she represented about 65 students and 40 staff members. She informed the committee that she and her colleagues were very passionate about what they do.  
Elizabeth Kleg, Chrysalis resident, testified that before arriving at Chrysalis her life was unmanageable from the time she was twelve years old and coming to Chrysalis was a rebirth for her and her family.  
Rachel Berlin-Allaire reported that she had lived at Chrysalis for two years. Before arriving there, she had been making very poor decisions and her parents decided to send her to Chrysalis. She had learned to love herself and in doing so had gained values and morals.  
Liz Gochnauer, Carroll College student, testified that she had graduated from the Chrysalis program about six months ago. At fifteen she had been expelled from high school and her parents sent her away. Her life is changed and she is earning A's in college. She never dreamed she could do that.  
Time had run out for the proponents. They were asked to come to the podium and state their names.
Laurel Jones presented written testimony.
EXHIBIT(edh40a08)
Ramsey Riddell,Emily Lovell,Kenny Pannell,Jay Whitacre,Sara Bowles,Angele Anjaliplainfield,
Mickey Manning,Ali Turner,Laurie Worth,Darya Brutoco,Mary Alexine,Rick Reed,James Kraus,Carol Santa,Ron Mendenhall,Jacqueline Rutzke,Jerry Bottorff
Jean Windham presented written testimony from Pinehaven Christian School as they were not able to attend the hearing.
EXHIBIT(edh40a09)
Dana Tash,Mike Chism,Wade Boteler,Charlie Speicher,Amanda Locket,Teran Adams,Alex Banker,Sarah Musante,Heather Pruett,Norman Kahn,
Steffani White,Vickie Horton,Elizabeth Ebberhard,
Kaitlan Lennen,Hillary Carter-liggett,Rick Wedell
EXHIBIT(edh40a10)
{Tape: 2; Side: B; Approx. Time Counter: 0 - 13.2}
 
Opponents' Testimony:  
Kimberly Gardner, Administrator of Alternative Youth Adventures, Boulder, rose in opposition to the bill.  She presented written testimony and written opposition testimony from Gerald Robert Byrd; M. Angela Johnson, LCPC, NCC, EAPI; John J. Madsen, MSW; and Linda Fowler, MSW, LCSW.
EXHIBIT(edh40a11)
EXHIBIT(edh40a12)
EXHIBIT(edh40a13)
EXHIBIT(edh40a14)
EXHIBIT(edh40a15)
EXHIBIT(edh40a16)
John Clymer testified that he had worked with children for a number of years and his greatest concern was the protection of children. He recognized that the bill addressed a very difficult issue in the state. He believed there were 36 programs across the state that would be part of the bill.  He informed the committee that sometimes the children receive the promised help, but others don't receive it and may even receive harsh treatment. He believed it was the responsibility of the State of Montana to regulate the facilities. The bill recognized that there is a concern but he didn't believe the bill would meet the needs of the programs. He pointed out the weaknesses in the bill. He was very worried about how the facilities handle the mental health issues when they are not Regulated. Another weakness he saw was no governmental involvement in the board that was to be created.  
{Tape: 2; Side: B; Approx. Time Counter: 13.2 - 30}
{Tape: 3; Side: A}  
SEN. TRUDY SCHMIDT, SD 11, Great Falls, testified that she had sponsored a bill in the Senate that addressed some of the same kinds of issues as the present house bill. She was sorry the committee would hear a bill of such magnitude so late in the session. She believed that the programs discussed in the house bill should be under the direction of DPHHS.  
Mary Dalton, Department of Public Health and Human Services, Division of Quality Assurance, presented written testimony.
EXHIBIT(edh40a17)
 
Informational Testimony:  
Bud Williams, Office of Public Instruction, presented his written testimony at the end of the hearing.  
Lisa Addington, Health Care Chief of Department of Labor, offered information as to how SB 101 would be administered by DPHHS in comparison to the bill the committee was hearing which would be overseen by a board.
   
Questions from Committee Members and Responses:  
REP. GALVIN-HALCRO explained to the committee why Education was hearing the bill instead of the Business and Labor Committee. That committee could not fit it into their schedule and it was felt that the Education Committee could make time to hear it.
REP. SALES informed the committee that he did not like regulation and wondered why the SPONSOR had brought the bill to the session.
REP. CLARK testified that they could see regulations coming and they wanted to be pro-active.  
REP. WINDHAM asked SEN. ELLIOT if the issues in the two bills might be a subject for an interim study. The Senate bill was offered as an exhibit. SEN. ELLIOT was in favor of HB 628 although he knew the Senate bill was at the request of DPHHS.
EXHIBIT(edh40a18)
REP. KOOPMAN requested information from the SPONSOR. He pondered how the programs could succeed the proposed regulation without state government regulations. He didn't understand why the bill was proposed when the programs had functioned so well without any government regulations. He also wondered if there was anything stopping the groups to do what the bill proposed without any legislation. REP. CLARK testified that the programs desired to be self-policing and self-regulatory in nature. They brought the legislation because they knew there were individuals seeking legislation to regulate them under DPHHS.
REP. ANDERSEN asked the SPONSOR about Page 2, Section 3. She was curious about what the new board would do with all the requested information. REP. CLARK reported that the authors of the bill were looking to get a sense of standards to regulate the programs and use the information to present to the legislature. REP. ANDERSEN asked him if all of the schools or programs that he was aware of would be included in the gathering of the information requested in the bill. REP. CLARK informed her that not all of the programs he knew of would fit in the definition of the programs in the bill.
REP. GALVIN-HALCRO informed REP. CLARK that she did not see a definition in the bill for a wilderness program and wondered why it wasn't there. REP. CLARK assured her that the definitions in the bill included wilderness programs. REP. GALVIN-HALCRO asked the SPONSOR if any of the programs he knew of received Average Number Belonging (ANB) monies from OPI. REP. CLARK informed her that he did not know of a program that received state money.
REP. GALVIN-HALCRO asked the SPONSOR if he would keep records and report to the next session the information that had been discussed during the hearing. She asked that the information include any problems or accidents that occurred in the two years. REP. CLARK assured her that he could do that.
REP. BUTCHER explained to the SPONSOR that he believed on Page 1, Line 13, where it discussed the board make-up, the programs involved should make up a list of nominees for the board positions just as other groups under the direction of boards make recommendations to the governor for his selection. REP. CLARK informed him the programs would be comfortable with that procedure.  
REP. WINDHAM also required information from the SPONSOR.  She felt it was very important that the board discussed in the bill had legitimacy. She questioned the governor appointing two members from the general public. REP. CLARK was sure the appointments would be made appropriately.
Closing by Sponsor:  
REP. CLARK asserted that the criticism from OPI and DPHHS did not apply to the programs he had seen in operation. He was firm in his belief that the programs could regulate themselves as they had been operating for a number of years. He took exception to the opposition testimony as he had information about the programs that were in conflict to what had been said.
 
EXECUTIVE ACTION ON HB 628
Motion: REP. WINDHAM moved that HB 628 DO PASS.  
Motion/Vote:  REP. WINDHAM moved that HB 628 BE AMENDED. Motion carried unanimously by voice vote.  REPS. LAKE and SONJU voted by proxy.
EXHIBIT(edh40a19)
Motion/Vote:  REP. WINDHAM moved a CONCEPTUAL AMENDMENT FOR AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE ON THE BILL.  Motion carried unanimously by voice vote. REPS. LAKE and SONJU voted by proxy.
Motion:  REP. WINDHAM moved that HB 628 DO PASS AS AMENDED.  
Discussion:  
REP. BUTCHER spoke in favor of the bill as he felt the programs should be left alone but he realized they felt bureaucracy ascending down on them to engulf them into their nets of regulation. He was familiar with several programs that had not attended the hearing and had observed very closely their operations and he was very intrigued with them. He wished to allow the programs to remain independent and create their programs to meet the needs of troubled Children.  
REP. SALES reported that he hoped the Senate bill would be defeated and HB 628 would pass out of both houses. He would be supporting the bill.
REP. ANDERSEN testified that she would support the bill and she reported that she was very impressed with the poise and maturity of the students she was able to visit with. She wished to thank the students for giving her the opportunity to spend time with them.  
REP. WINDHAM reported that she felt the bill represented the understanding that the government is not going to go away. The programs are being pro-active and they do want to be responsible and accountable. She believed that peer review is a wonderful way of control. She commented that the programs are PRIVATE INDUSTRY at its best.  
REP. GALVIN-HALCRO said she was not going to support the bill in committee because she was concerned about the "bad apples out there" that the committee had not heard about. She didn't see the bill addressing them. She planned to visit with the SPONSOR and do what she could to have her concerns met.  
Vote:  Motion that HB 628 DO PASS AS AMENDED carried 13-3 by roll call vote with REPS. GALVIN-HALCRO, REP. KOOPMAN, and REP. MCKENNEY voting no.  REPS. LAKE, RASER, and SONJU voted by proxy.
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:MjQI ... tana&hl=en

March 10, 2005
HEARING ON HB 628
Opening Statement by Sponsor:  
REP. PAUL CLARK, HD 13, Trout Creek, opened the hearing on HB 628, a bill requiring registration and board duties for certain alternative schools and programs. It would establish a self-funded board of private, alternative, adolescent, residential programs, and it is the first attempt by the State of Montana to regulate these schools. The schools did not want to be on the defensive regarding regulation, so therefore, they pro-actively came forth with HB 628. The programs would pay fees to pay for this oversight board. All programs would be registered through the board, and the board would report to the legislature on the need for any additional regulation. :skull:
{Tape: 2; Side: B; Approx. Time Counter: 0 - 2}
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:l8 ... tana&hl=en
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164661
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #13 on: October 27, 2005, 08:51:00 PM »
Quote
On 2005-10-27 01:01:00, chaking wrote:

"That is interesting... The part where anon stated that having a wwasp board member would bring justice...

I'm trying to think of a good example to put in place here... I think maybe Congress (that's really just one big board right? supposedly looking out for public interest...) Well what would you think about having a wal-mart VP as someone with a lot of sway? (I guess people did vote for two oilmen to be our president though) Personally, I would be appalled. Its sole purpose is supposed to be the public interest... As this board's sole purpose is supposed to be the children's welfare...

It is accepatable to have a wwasp employee detail "their" side of the story to a board member, and consequently let the board member make an open decision on the task at hand (open, as in fully sharing with the public why the decision was made)... But it is wholly unacceptable to have a person with such a conflict of interest to be a key part of the decision making process... This is common sense... I would also like to know what qualifications Michelle Manning has? Why is the principal of the academic program at SCL sitting as a board member on issues unrelated to academics?

Having a board that consists of reps from 3 "programs" and only 2 independent citizens is also plain wrong... We'll see what happens, but it doesn't look promising...



Just look at how they are starting off:

"The first step in the approved process is to establish rules by which the board will operate and register existing programs. That will be the topic at Wednesday's meeting in Helena. The rules also propose how site visits will be made. A week's notification in advance must be given to the program, under the proposed rules."



A week huh? Wow... This pretty much cuts to zero the chance of any abuse being witnessed... It in no way assures compliance with anything... You could probably have the most unsanitary conditions you could find, and given a week, be spotless... It is a sure sign that the board is compromised."




"As this board's sole purpose is supposed to be the children's welfare... "


No, according to the bill, that's part of it, but they have a job to do:

THE PURPOSE OF THE BOARD IS TO EXAMINE THE BENEFIT OF LICENSING PRIVATE ALTERNATIVE ADOLESCENT RESIDENTIAL OR OUTDOOR PROGRAMS AS A PUBLIC SERVICE TO MONITOR AND MAINTAIN A HIGH STANDARD OF CARE AND TO ENSURE THE SAFETY AND WELL-BEING OF THE ADOLESCENTS AND PARENTS USING THE PROGRAMS.

Why not have someone who knows their profession do it?

Children's welfare in Montana is covered already---by DPHHS, whom everyone seems to think is so inept that "thousands" of kids are abused and that agency can't convict anyone for it. (This is the group that somehow managed to forget to do the paperwork and lose the funding for foster kids to get winter clothes. Ooops!)

So make another law, create another fat and awkward agency, do whatever redundant things you want to do. It still doesn't make the abuse claims real or truthful. They're largely BS, folks.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline chaking

  • Posts: 39
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
missoulian/10*24*05/ SCL &self regulation
« Reply #14 on: October 28, 2005, 12:05:00 AM »
Thanks for telling me what I witnessed is false... But I don't think you have clue...
The only reason the panel was made up in the first place was for the children's benefit... Of course there are a bunch of stipulations but I fail to see your point...

As for the Department of Health and Human Services... At least they have some people trained in this field... Unlike the Department of Labor and Industry who are the ones now given the assignment of monitoring...

But whatever... You want to use the tired talking points of Rove in this situation... It doesn't apply.. Who said to make up another agency? Nobody said that... Why are you saying it?

And how can you argue that giving the programs a week's notice before an inspection will assure compliance with anything?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »