Legislature(2003 - 2004)
03/25/2003 03:00 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 165-COMMUNITY SCHOOLS [Due to technical difficulties, the first few minutes of the meeting was not recorded. The first portion was reconstructed from the committee secretary's log notes.] CHAIR WILSON announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 165, "An Act relating to community schools; and providing for an effective date." [Recording begins here.] Number 0092 EDDY JEANS, Manager, School Finance and Facilities Section, Education Support Services, Department of Education and Early Development (EED), informed the committee that the community schools statute was adopted in 1975 and that the intent of that statute was to assist local school districts in establishing community schools programs. The community schools grant program is currently funded at $500,000 a year. If the program was fully funded under its statutory entitlement, it would be funded at $3.5 million. Therefore, its current funding is at about 12 percent. MR. JEANS explained that the grant program was enacted to provide financial assistance to encourage and assist local districts in establishing community schools programs. The department and the administration believe that the statute has fulfilled its need and intent, as all school districts are operating some form of a community schools program. He noted that he had provided a spreadsheet to the House Special Committee on Education showing how much money school districts are reporting as expenditures in community schools, and for many, the amount identified as expended equals the exact amount received in state grants. Therefore, Mr. Jeans said he believes that a portion of those programs are being recorded in the school operating fund under general operating expenses of the school district. He noted that the legislation does have a fiscal note and this is reflected in the governor's budget to eliminate the $500,000 allocation. Number 0258 REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA related that at the recent Anchorage caucus meeting she had specifically asked the superintendent of the Anchorage School District whether community schools supplemented school funding. The superintendent said that the Anchorage School District had found that the community schools program was enormously important in helping provide classes that could not otherwise be afforded for summer school or for the "No Child Left Behind" supplemental classes. Representative Cissna asked Mr. Jeans if the community schools program is used in other communities to supplement regular school districts' programs. MR. JEANS pointed out that community schools programs charge user fees to use the facility and offer additional programs outside the school day. Some of the excess receipts generated by the program go back to support other educational programs. Mr. Jeans highlighted the importance of the legislation [creating the community schools program] which was intended to be seed money from the state to start having districts provide access to school facilities after school hours for community use and activities. Number 0410 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said his understanding is that HB 165 eliminates the funding from the state for community schools, although it does not eliminate any authority that communities or districts have for conducting community schools activities. MR. JEANS responded that is correct. Under HB 165, school districts will still have the authority to rent the facilities after school hours and utilize the facilities for community activities. Mr. Jeans said the department would strongly encourage such use. Number 0470 REPRESENTATIVE GATTO related his understanding that the amount schools will have to reduce their contribution for community schools will vary from 100 percent to 8 percent or so. MR. JEANS pointed out that the schedule he provided to the House Special Committee on Education shows that the contribution will fall below 1 percent when comparing the amount of state grant funds with the total amount that the district has expended under this program. He reiterated that the districts reflecting 100 percent expenditure to the grant amount probably are not recording actual after-school activities in the community schools fund, but rather simply absorbing that in the school's operating fund. Mr. Jeans said that he does not know if any district will have to replace 100 percent because those services are being provided through some other means. REPRESENTATIVE GATTO inquired as to the percentage increase needed to cover the $500,000 reduction for an average school in Anchorage. MR. JEANS replied that Anchorage receives approximately $152,000 from the $500,000, which represents about 12 percent of the total Anchorage spent on community schools in fiscal year 2002. Number 0592 REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA pointed out that HB 165 repeals the school district's statutory authority to provide community schools programs. She questioned why the committee would want to repeal this law when it is already not being funded in the budget this year. MR. JEANS said that the community schools program has been funded at $500,000 a year for a number of years, although this year's budget does not include funding for it. The reason there is no funding for it in the budget this year is because the department is recommending the repeal of the statute, which is part of the fiscal note process. Furthermore, this is not the only statute giving school districts the authority to utilize their school facilities for after-school activities. He noted that there has been some discussion with regard to leaving some language in the statutes that would encourage continued community use of public school facilities after school hours. The majority of the funding that is being obtained is through user fees, not through the grant program. Number 0726 CHAIR WILSON related that in her discussions with superintendents across the state, one superintendent said this program was one that would continue regardless of the state's funding. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if Mr. Jeans had been contacted by any districts that have indicated that they would have to abandon the community schools program. MR. JEANS replied no. Number 0819 MARY RASMUSSEN, Member, Sand Lake Community schools Board and Anchorage Community Education Association, testified via teleconference in opposition to HB 165. She requested that this statute not be repealed and that it be funded at the $500,000 level. With regard to Mr. Jeans and the governor's belief that the [current] level of funding for the program does little on a statewide basis, Ms. Rasmussen agreed. Ms. Rasmussen said that the community schools program provides the state "a big bang for its buck." The amount of money going to the schools enables thousands of volunteers to pursue the mission of community schools. MS. RASMUSSEN strongly disagreed with the statement that this program has fulfilled its intended purpose. However, she interpreted the legislation [creating community schools] to provide funding for initial development, implementation, and operation of community schools programs. She pointed out that operation is an ongoing process and she hoped that it would continue to be funded. Ms. Rasmussen emphasized the need for some base funding in order to continue the community schools programs. However, she acknowledged that the programs are not required to be funded during times in which there is not enough money. Then the grants should be prioritized. She urged the committee not to remove the statutes that acknowledge community schools. This is a time when the children need to work on exit exams because [those graduating in] the year 2004 will be the first group required to pass the exit exams. Number 0999 REBECCA REICHLIN, President, Alaska Association for Community Education, testified via teleconference in opposition to HB 165. She urged the committee not to repeal the community schools grant program. She pointed out that each school district receives state grant money to support its community schools program. These monies validate programs and provide leverage to seek grants and matching funds from cities and municipalities. The state funding enables the creation of a statewide network of activity. With regard to whether community schools programs are a "need" or a "want," Ms. Reichlin related that she recently spoke with the coordinator of the community schools program in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, which receives $47,000 in state grant funds. Those funds allowed the program to offer swim lessons, driver's education, GED [general equivalency diploma] classes, pre-school classes, and computer classes, seventy-seven activities for 1,200 youth, 700 adults, and another 2,000 contact hours. The coordinator had related to Ms. Reichlin that if this program is not funded next year, it will not be in existence. In summary, Ms. Reichlin said that the community schools program is clearly vital to the growth and development of Alaska's citizens. Lifelong learners engaged in healthy activities in a safe environment raise the quality of everyone's life. She asked members to please be proactive and strengthen the community schools network in our communities, not tear it down. Number 1127 ROSEMARY REEDER, Lead Coordinator, Soldotna Community schools, informed the committee that Soldotna has no recreation center, no teen center, and no museum. There is only a small community library. Therefore, the Soldotna Community schools program feels that it provides the cultural, academic, and recreational opportunities for children as well as adults. With regard to the earlier question as to whether the community schools program provides any supplement to the regular school day, Ms. Reeder said she believes that is the case. She noted that the community schools program provides summer programs and enrichment programs. For example, the funds generated from the fees for men's adult basketball are used to purchase most of the balls for the middle school. The money received from the state has been used to leverage other funds. Ms. Reeder pointed out that "the folks that the legislature thinks might help us" if this program is cut are "folks that have already cut us." The school district does not provide any funding for the community schools program. She urged the committee not to cut the community schools program. Number 1218 CURT LEDFORD, Director, Sitka Community schools, testified via teleconference in opposition to HB 165. He pointed out that the community schools program is not merely about usage of buildings and open gyms, the program provides after school activities for over half of the children in the Sitka School District; as well as, tutoring, language classes, independent studies, et cetera. He told the committee that currently there are a group of students using their spring break to build a house for Habitat for Humanity. The $5,000 in funding helps support a wide variety of programs. Although many of the programs are kept going with volunteers from AmeriCorps and Vista, these volunteers cost money. There has been talk of raising fees. He echoed earlier testimony that adults' activities subsidize some of the programs. If this bill passes, and these cuts take place, there will be more hardship for other people. Mr. Ledford informed the committee that the community schools program gave over $20,000 in scholarships to children who wouldn't have otherwise been able to have swimming lessons, French lessons, et cetera. Number 1366 TIM STEELE, Vice President, Anchorage School Board, testified via teleconference in opposition to HB 165. He noted his strong support of community schools. Anchorage has a fairly large community schools program, with something on the order of 53,000 participants in 2001-2002. The state provided $152,000 in funding. Mr. Steele pointed out that the community schools program provides additional help to students as well as bringing communities into the schools. He told the committee that if these cuts are made, the program will be unstable because the Anchorage School District considers the program marginal and not directly the Kindergarten through 12th grade (K-12) educational responsibility. Just this year, three community schools coordinators were added back due to additional funding that was received in the last budget. Since the Anchorage School District faces about $11 million in cuts this year, Mr. Steele said she fears that this program is at risk with regard to the school district's support to make up what the state does not provide. Mr. Steele urged the committee to not cut the funding or the enabling legislation. Number 1484 DEBBIE BOGART, Director, Community Education Program, testified via teleconference in opposition to HB 165. She requested the committee's help in not repealing the community schools program statutes. Eliminating funding would be devastating, even to the Anchorage School District. The Community Education Program in Anchorage is an integral part of the Anchorage School District. The Community Education Program provides tutorial-enriched academic programs, and continuing education for adults; it also provides a safe neighborhood after school, in the summers, and in the evenings. She informed the committee that this past year there were over 19,000 students involved in the K-12 enrichment program. Over 1,500 students were involved in after-school academic activities. Ms. Bogart concluded by urging the committee to continue to support community education. Without state funding, the partnerships that the program has developed will be at risk. Number 1601 LORENA SKONBERG, Alaska Native Health Board (ANHB), testified via teleconference in opposition to HB 165. She informed the committee that she is sitting in for Trudy Anderson, who had planned to speak. Ms. Skonberg said the Alaska Native Health Board passed a resolution in opposition to HB 165, which she read for the record: Whereas the Alaska Native Health Board is a nonprofit organization established in 1968 for the purpose of promoting the spiritual, physical, mental, social, and cultural well-being, and pride of Alaska Native people; Whereas the ANHB is a legally established statewide organization representing Alaska Natives on public health policy issues; Whereas the ANHB membership consists of tribes and tribal organizations throughout Alaska; Whereas House Bill 165 is an Act relating to community schools; Whereas the Act eliminates the community schools program for children which include after school programs; Whereas this will lead to more latchkey children in Alaska; Whereas HB 165 would provide undue hardship on Alaskan families; Now therefore be it resolved that the Alaska Native Health Board strongly and publicly opposed House Bill 165. Number 1634 BLYTHE CAMPBELL, Chairperson, Anchorage Community Education Association, testified via teleconference in opposition to HB 165. She informed the committee that the Anchorage Community Education Association represents the community schools that now operate in Anchorage. Ms. Campbell strongly urged the committee not to pass HB 165. The association could not see any reason to abolish this wonderful program from the statutes, she said. Ms. Campbell pointed out that all programs involve volunteers, do good work throughout the state, and need a balanced source of funding and multiple sources of funding. The state funding is very important and allows matches with other funds, and thus eliminating the state funding will result in the program's suffering. Ms. Campbell informed the committee that she has been with the program for nearly 20 years and that lots of programs have been closed in Anchorage. The funding the state provides through this grant supports about two-and-a-half community schools in Anchorage. With other cuts the school district is facing, Ms. Campbell said she feels that this program is in serious jeopardy. Therefore, she urged the committee not to abolish the statutes that specify that community schools are a good thing. CHAIR WILSON reminded everyone that the statute being repealed in HB 165 is not the total reference to the community schools program and that the program can continue. Number 1729 JONATHAN GREEN, Instructor, Anchorage Community schools Program, testified via teleconference in opposition to HB 165. He informed the committee that he has taught photography classes in the Anchorage Community schools Program for the past six years. He told the committee what a great experience it has been in doing this class. Furthermore, he was not sure where the public would go to learn to operate photography equipment. Mr. Green related his understanding that this program is being cut before considering the possibility of raising fees. Mr. Green urged the committee to keep the program going. Number 1790 LINDA WETHERBY, Coordinator, Rabbit Creek Community schools, testified via teleconference in opposition to HB 165. She informed the committee that the Rabbit Creek Community schools has a pre-school program, a childcare program, and a Spanish program, as well as evening classes. All of the community schools programs are diverse and serve the communities in a variety of creative ways. She expressed concern that if the needs of community schools programs were diminished by the legislature, she would not want the school district to respond similarly. She viewed the community schools program as a good purveyor of education by helping children and families, especially with respect to the No Child Left Behind Act. Number 1888 JOYCE KITKA, Volunteer, Alaska Association for Community Education, testified in opposition to HB 165. She told the committee she strongly disagrees and resents the implication that school districts are using this money to supplement their school districts' programs. Ms. Kitka said she would provide the committee with copies of the state reports that are submitted. Very few reports will include open gyms, and while it is a part of the program, it is not a part of the program that is a priority. She said she knows Mr. Jeans is a participant in the local community schools program that offers open gyms, but it is not the only thing community schools does. She said community schools need the money as seed money. Last year community schools had over 20,000 volunteers that recorded over 200,000 hours in volunteer time. She reported that the National Association for Partners in Education (NAP) said the value of a volunteer hour is $15.62. If the committee multiplies the number of volunteer hours that community schools provides before, during, and after school, and on weekends, the members would find community schools brought in $3,304,427 worth of services. Ms. Kitka said the $500,000 of seed money given by the state is money well spent. Not all the volunteers will go away, but a big part of them will. Number 1974 MARY FRANCES, Executive Director, Alaska Council of School Administrators, testified in opposition to HB 165. She pointed out that this is an example of a funded mandate that over time has been seriously underfunded. The portion of the $500,000 in state funding for a particular district that she used to run, which was Petersburg, was $2,000. It is safe to say that the program will not die with that $2,000 going away, but as an administrator and as a person who represents administrators, she said she asks that the legislature not make mandates and then have them underfunded or seriously defunded over time so that it brings the program to its knees. Number 2016 CARL ROSE, Executive Director, Association of Alaska School Boards (AASB), testified in opposition to HB 165 and responded to questions by the committee. He said that in talking about community schools it is important to remember that schools are the center of communities. He told the members that AASB has a resolution in support of full funding of community schools. Every dollar that is reduced from the funding of schools, one way or the other, comes out of the foundation formula. MR. ROSE said the argument that these funds are seed money is a familiar argument in education. There are a number of things that were given seed money to provide a program, and as the programs start to take root, the money goes away. It places an increased burden on schools. A number of people across the state are dependent on many of the programs that are provided. He told the committee he thinks the partnership that exists with the legislature to at least fund those things that are valued is important. He said he knows most of the committee values community schools because he has heard them say so, and he hopes the committee will maintain that level of support and commitment. Number 2067 REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked, if the funds were relabeled from seed money to grant money, whether it would make a difference. Number 2079 MR. ROSE responded that schools get a lot of money from peripheral areas such as pupil transportation and LOGs [Learning Opportunity Grants]. If those monies go away, it is an increased burden on the foundation formula. He told the committee he was very surprised this fall when he realized a number of people who talk about the foundation formula did not understand that the foundation formula is there to provide for facilities, heat, lights, and all the peripheral costs, and not just instruction in the classroom. This is a larger discussion; when there is talk about funding for education, all of the education dollars are leveraged, and there is great demand placed on schools with the No Child Left Behind Act and the Quality Schools Initiative. He told the committee school boards want to do the right thing and want to do a good job, but this could be the "death of a thousand cuts." Number 2109 REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA told the committee that she has put together community schools programs, and has for many years rented space in the schools for various community meetings. It did not seem to be the same program and she did not go through the same people to do it. Representative Cissna said the schools can continue to rent out space, but that is really different from the community schools program. She asked Mr. Rose if these two functions are part of the same program. Number 2137 MR. ROSE replied that he is not qualified to comment on each individual district's programs. Number 2164 MR. SWEENEY told the committee that he wanted to clarify an earlier statement that there are other references to community schools in state statute; he said that is not the case. There are references to schools' being able to use the facilities outside of the normal school day. He reiterated that the statutes in this bill are the only references to community schools. He told the committee if there is concern that community schools would go away by removing these statutes, he believes there is a way that community schools could stay in statute, but still eliminate the $500,000 in grants. Number 2197 CHAIR WILSON commented that in talking with administrators at the schools, she was assured that community schools would not go away if they did not receive these funds; however, there will have to be some effort to make up for the funds in some other way. Chair Wilson said she wants to be sure school districts can still run community schools without a problem. Number 2208 MR. SWEENEY replied that there would not be a problem for the schools to continue offering community schools programs. He said the department agrees with Chair Wilson that the elimination of the grants would not mean the elimination of community schools statewide. Mr. Sweeney said eliminating the language about community schools means that there is no other reference to them in statute. However, he reiterated that this would not impact the schools' authority to run community schools programs. Number 2225 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON told the committee that he is concerned about the elimination of the statute because it is a concern expressed in testimony before the committee and something he heard when he was back in his district. He said he would like to see the bill modified so that there is still reference in statute that says the legislature supports community schools, even though the legislature is not funding them. He asked Mr. Sweeney if he thinks this is something that could be done easily or if it would require another hearing before the committee. Number 2254 MR. SWEENEY replied that he could not speak to that change without talking with the governor's office. He said he believes there is an easy way to tweak the first section of the bill to show that the state still encourages school districts to utilize their facilities as an extension of the school day for community schools programs. Passing this bill would eliminate the idea of having community schools grants, which he said the governor believes has fulfilled its service, since now every district does have community schools programs up and running. Number 2269 REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL suggested that a precedent has been set for use of facilities in the districts. He said he does not believe it is necessary to add language in support of community schools unless it is the intent of the legislature to provide funding. This bill would not forbid school districts from continuing the practice of charging for opening the buildings or allowing an administrator to use the buildings for a variety of programs. Number 2294 CHAIR WILSON said that she wants the committee to be comfortable with the language, but agrees with Representative Coghill that there is nothing in the bill that prevents school districts from continuing their community schools programs. Chair Wilson said she is comfortable with the bill. Number 2309 REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA told the committee she is not comfortable with the bill because it does not talk about funds, but talks about repealing sections of statute. She asked how the bill could be tweaked if the bill actually repeals eight sections of statute. Representative Cissna said running community schools programs is different from renting space. When renting space it is just a question of filling out a form, but with community schools programs there are many differences. She cited the examples of advertising classes, and having many people coming into the school at night. The whole school is alive at night. She said this is very different. Number 2351 CHAIR WILSON repeated her earlier statement concerning her conversations with several superintendents of schools and that none of them mentioned that they were concerned that these services would disappear. Number 2363 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON commented that he agrees with Chair Wilson that the superintendents who are in place right now have a structure that they are working with and that when reference in statute goes away, those superintendents will continue the programs. He said his concern is that the legislature is setting state policy in place for all future superintendents that have not been involved in this system and have not grown up with this. So the fact that the legislature does not have any mention or encouragement for the continuation of community schools programs is an important point. TAPE 03-27, SIDE B Number 2380 REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said he understands that the governor's intent is to eliminate the funding. The legislature is setting the policy for all future superintendents who may come from outside this state and may not be familiar with community schools. Representative Seaton said he sees this as a system policy, and would like to see the committee work with the Department of Education and Early Development to accomplish their goal and the legislature's as well. Number 2357 CHAIR WILSON announced that no further action would be taken on HB 165 until Thursday's meeting [April 3, 2003]. [HB 165 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|