Legislature(2023 - 2024)DAVIS 106
04/17/2024 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Alaska State Board of Education & Early Development | |
| HB165 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HB 165 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SJR 17 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
April 17, 2024
8:01 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Jamie Allard, Co-Chair
Representative Justin Ruffridge, Co-Chair
Representative Mike Prax
Representative CJ McCormick
Representative Tom McKay
Representative Rebecca Himschoot
Representative Andi Story
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Representative Jesse Sumner
Representative Julie Coulombe
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
Alaska State Board of Education & Early Development
Bob Griffin Anchorage
- CONFIRMATION(S) - ADVANCED
HOUSE BILL NO. 165
"An Act relating to charter schools; relating to correspondence
study programs; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 17
Urging the United States Congress to extend the deadline for the
state to obligate American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary
School Emergency Relief - Homeless Children and Youth funds.
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 165
SHORT TITLE: CHARTER SCHOOLS; CORRESPONDENCE PROGRAMS
SPONSOR(s): WAYS & MEANS
04/19/23 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/19/23 (H) W&M, EDC, FIN
04/27/23 (H) W&M AT 6:00 PM DAVIS 106
04/27/23 (H) Heard & Held
04/27/23 (H) MINUTE(W&M)
05/04/23 (H) W&M AT 6:00 PM DAVIS 106
05/04/23 (H) Moved CSHB 165(W&M) Out of Committee
05/04/23 (H) MINUTE(W&M)
05/05/23 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM DAVIS 106
05/05/23 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
05/08/23 (H) W&M RPT CS(W&M) NEW TITLE 4DP 1DNP 2NR
05/08/23 (H) DP: MCCABE, MCKAY, ALLARD, CARPENTER
05/08/23 (H) DNP: GROH
05/08/23 (H) NR: TILTON, GRAY
04/17/24 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM DAVIS 106
WITNESS REGISTER
BOB GRIFFIN, Appointee
Alaska State Board of Education & Early Development
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified as appointee to the Alaska State
Board of Education & Early Development.
LOREN LEHMAN, representing self
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the confirmation of
Bob Griffin, appointee to the Alaska State Board of Education &
Early Development.
MARILYN PILLIFANT, representing self
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the confirmation hearing
of Bob Griffin, appointee to the Alaska State Board of Education
& Early Development.
LAURA BONNER, representing self
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the confirmation
of Bob Griffin, appointee to the Alaska State Board of Education
& Early Development.
CAROLINE STORM
Coalition for Education Equity
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to the confirmation
of Bob Griffin, appointee to the Alaska State Board of Education
& Early Development.
DAVID BOYLE, representing self
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of the confirmation of
Bob Griffin, appointee to the Alaska State Board of Education &
Early Development.
REPRESENTATIVE BEN CARPENTER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, presented HB 165.
KENDRA BROUSSARD, Staff
Representative Ben Carpenter
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave the sectional analysis for HB 165 on
behalf of Representative Carpenter, prime sponsor.
DONNA ARDUIN, Staff
Representative Ben Carpenter
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
165 on behalf of Representative Carpenter, prime sponsor.
DEBORAH RIDDLE, Director
Division of Innovation and Education Excellence
Department of Education & Early Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
165.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:01:14 AM
CO-CHAIR JUSTIN RUFFRIDGE called the House Education Standing
Committee meeting to order at 8:01 a.m. Representatives Prax,
McKay, Himschoot, Story, Allard, and Ruffridge were present at
the call to order. Representative McCormick arrived as the
meeting was in progress. Also present were Representatives
Sumner and Coulombe.
^CONFIRMATION HEARING(S):
CONFIRMATION HEARING
^Alaska State Board of Education & Early Development
Alaska State Board of Education & Early Development
8:02:30 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE announced that the first order of business
would be the confirmation hearing on the governor's appointee to
the Alaska State Board of Education & Early Development.
8:03:08 AM
BOB GRIFFIN, Appointee, Alaska State Board of Education & Early
Development, provided his professional background as listed on
his resume [included in the committee packet] and highlighted
that he had been involved in the "education space" for
approximately 15 years. He said he became interested in
education in Alaska, and the more he researched it, his goal was
to improve outcomes in the state. He expressed concern about
the expense and the amount invested in K-12 education. He drew
attention to the increase in the last cycle of the National
Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) scores, which he said
represented improvement. He conveyed his enthusiasm for the
Alaska Reads Act being implemented and that he saw students
showing hopeful signs, and he recognized that the Act is a
critical task in K-12 education and early child literacy. He
gave brief examples of other states' early child literacy
outcomes in comparison to Alaska. He said he also served as
chair on the State-Tribal Education Compacting committee and
expressed excitement about its prospects. He welcomed questions
from committee members.
8:08:50 AM
CO-CHAIR ALLARD expressed her belief that it made a difference
when people have children in the school system and asked Mr.
Griffin whether he had children in the system.
MR. GRIFFIN confirmed he had and that they went through the
Anchorage School District (ASD).
8:09:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY referenced Mr. Griffin's comments about
improvement but noted that she had heard many criticisms about
local schools, and she asked whether the state board had plans
to talk about the improvements schools are making.
MR. GRIFFIN replied absolutely. He related that he gave a
briefing last year expanding on his optimism and "bullish"
attitude towards the improvements that are being made.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked Mr. Griffin about his role as a state
board member and how he saw local control in the system of the
elected school board.
MR. GRIFFIN responded that local control is paramount, and he
reflected on recent conversations about charter schools which he
opined are the ultimate local control. He added that the
charter schools are controlled by the parents and staff but
managed by the school districts.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY pointed out legislation that would have the
state board be the authorizer of charter schools instead of the
local board as the authorizer. She asked Mr. Griffin whether he
supported keeping legislation as it is in the local school
board.
MR. GRIFFIN replied that that was not his understanding of the
pending legislation, he said his understanding was that the
state board would be an additional authorizer that would be
available. He further noted that this technique is popular in
other states.
8:14:51 AM
MR. GRIFFIN spoke to charter school support and pointed out that
Alaska only has one charter school authorizer.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY pointed out statute directing the local
school board to manage the charter school and asked Mr. Griffin
how he felt about working with the local school board that is
"bypassing" and how it would impact its school.
MR. GRIFFIN replied it is a common technique used in almost
every other state and he offered his understanding that the
language meant the board would contract with "a" district in
order to manage the charter school. He said he did not see
charter schools being hoisted on districts that would disapprove
of them.
8:16:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked who controls the money under a
scenario in which a charter school is located in one district
but is chartered by another.
MR. GRIFFIN offered his insight that the money would still go
through the district that is managing the charter school to the
schools that are being chartered. He reiterated that it was a
common technique used across the country.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked Mr. Griffin how he would resolve
conflicts managing money.
MR. GRIFFIN replied that it would be resolved by the contract
that the charter [school] negotiated. The technique being
proposed is similar to correspondence allotment programs, he
said.
8:19:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT referenced Mr. Griffin's comments about
Alaska having the third-worst ranking on how charter schools are
authorized but the highest performing charter schools. She
asked why something needed to be changed.
MR. GRIFFIN responded that Alaska has the best student outcomes
for charter schools in the U.S.; however, there is always room
for improvement. The state is significantly below the national
average in people who participate in charter schools, but there
is a "huge thirst" for school choice programs in Alaska, he
said.
8:21:38 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 8:21 a.m. to 8:35 a.m.
8:35:50 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE announced that the handouts provided by Mr.
Griffin would be available on BASIS for the public online, and
copies provided to those in the hearing room.
8:36:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT circled back to her question about why
anything should be changed when Alaska has the best performing
charter schools.
MR. GRIFFIN reiterated that Alaska has the best charter schools,
which is a great testament to the families who put them together
despite the poor support they receive. He opined that just
because they are very good does not mean they cannot be better,
and it should be a goal. He provided an example of Florida
charter schools, and he restated that Alaska is significantly
below in the number of students that attend charter schools.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked how Florida authorizes charter
schools.
MR. GRIFFIN replied that Florida has two different authorizers
for charter schools: local school districts and the university
system.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT referred to Dr. Peterson from Harvard
[prior invited testifier] not recommending the university
authorizers.
MR. GRIFFIN responded that both paths are available, and
frequently the secondary path is not used; however, when there
is a secondary path available it disarms an "asymmetric power
relationship."
8:40:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked Mr. Griffin how many charter
schools had been declined in the 30 years Alaska has had them.
MR. GRIFFIN said he did not know how many have been declined,
but there are many people who have not bothered to go through
the process.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked whether the state board was
working on the teaching shortages in the state.
MR. GRIFFIN replied that there is a particular committee that
covers that, which he is not a part of. He further noted that
there were findings, and the state board has been very active in
goals such as extending the types of certificates available in
order to get specialists into positions.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT referred to the recently uploaded
document about English language learners (ELL), and that there
was a common misconception that ELL are people who were born
overseas or a non-English speaking family, but they are
typically born into families who do not use academic English at
home, she explained. She asked Mr. Griffin what type of ELL
there is in Alaskan and how they would be placed.
MR. GRIFFIN pointed out that the breakdowns were in the handout.
Nationally, he said, 4.5 percent of students speak English less
than very well, and in Alaska, it is 2.5 percent.
8:47:23 AM
CO-CHAIR ALLARD thanked Mr. Griffin for understanding the
pending legislation and stated that the Department of Education
& Early Development (DEED) members understand what is coming.
She referred to a ruling that would impact how books and
curriculum are purchased, and she asked Mr. Griffin what his
opinion was on how this could impact Alaska students and
families.
MR. GRIFFIN said the board is still in the analysis phase and
there are many things that still need to be determined.
8:50:28 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE opened public testimony on the confirmation
hearing for Bob Griffin.
8:51:16 AM
LOREN LEHMAN, representing self, provided testimony in support
of Mr. Griffin. He gave his background as a past legislator,
including some of the areas of education he worked on. His
personal interest, he said, is his grandchildren in K-6 grades,
and he expressed his belief that Mr. Griffin is one of the best
prepared candidates for the Anchorage School Board that he has
seen. He opined that Mr. Griffin's responses to questions today
show his willingness to challenge the status quo yet provide
meaningful and constructive support. He offered to be available
for questions.
8:54:10 AM
MARILYN PILLIFANT, representing self, provided testimony during
the confirmation hearing for Mr. Griffin and expressed her
concern that Mr. Griffin had been very vocal about the topic of
transgender students. She said trying to weave the topic of
transgender students into athletics is very tricky, and his
vocalization takes away and discriminates from those students
and takes away the parental decision making. She opined it was
a disenfranchisement to kids and parents.
8:58:22 AM
LAURA BONNER, representing self, testified in opposition to the
reappointment of Mr. Griffin because the state board of
education has failed to make measurable improvements, she said.
She further noted that Mr. Griffin is a member of the board of
directors of the Alaska Policy Forum, and the policy forum is a
private entity that pushes for state money to go to private
institutions, which goes against the Alaska State Constitution;
therefore, Mr. Griffin has a conflict of interest and should not
be confirmed, she opined.
9:00:44 AM
CAROLINE STORM, Coalition for Education Equity, testified in
opposition to the confirmation of Mr. Griffin. She noted that
Mr. Griffin is a member of an extreme right-wing organization
called the Alaska Policy Forum, and while Mr. Griffin has been
on the state board, he failed to maintain equity requirements.
Mr. Griffin's drive to expand charter [schools] is not a
solution in remote and rural Alaska and it would disenfranchise
remote and rural students, she opined. She urged the committee
to consider an applicant whose values align with public
education, the state's constitution, and DEED's mission.
9:02:39 AM
DAVID BOYLE, representing self, testified in support of the
confirmation of Mr. Griffin, appointee. He stated that he is a
fellow veteran and that in the military, Mr. Griffin learned
self before service, integrity above all, and he opined Mr.
Griffin is nonpartisan. He added that Mr. Griffin's focus had
been on what is best for Alaska's children and not the system,
and that he was instrumental in getting the Alaska Reads Act
formulated and implemented. He said Mr. Griffin has data and
facts on any state's K-12 systems, and he urged the committee to
confirm Mr. Griffin to the State Board of Education.
9:04:17 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE, after ascertained that no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on the confirmation of Mr.
Griffin. He welcomed Mr. Griffin to respond to public testimony
that related what might be seen as a conflict.
MR. GRIFFIN stressed that he made clear that the Alaska Policy
Forum is a nonpartisan think-tank that advocates for a variety
of different policies and not focused on anything other than
improving student outcomes.
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE asked if the forum had an outlined plan for
its vision for Alaska education.
MR. GRIFFIN replied that he did not recall but there was a
strategic plan that he could provide to the committee at a later
date.
9:07:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked Mr. Griffin how he vetted the data
and points he looked at and then stuck with the "raw numbers."
MR. GRIFFIN, referring to bullet point on allocating resources,
explained that the numbers there are hyperlinked to the Alaska
State Board of Education & Early Development data center numbers
that analyze a 20-year period. He further explained the
analysis and how the numbers were verifiable.
9:11:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY shared that she spoke to local school
boards and parents involved in their communities and asked Mr.
Griffin how he viewed the need for more funding for K-12.
MR. GRIFFIN reiterated that he supported the pending legislation
that would add $680 to the base student allocation (BSA) and he
offered his belief that the bigger concern is that resources
have been poorly allocated and many are being intercepted by
buildings and bureaucracies. He added that it is appropriate to
have increases in K-12 education, but a deep dive should be
taken into how resources are allocated.
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE alluded to Mr. Griffin's comment about the
allocation of resources and some of the testimony given about
his role with the Alaska Policy Forum, as well as a document in
reference to an allotment for correspondence programs being used
to pay for private school tuition. He asked Mr. Griffin if he
had thoughts about how "these things link up," and the
constitutionality of it.
9:14:56 AM
MR. GRIFFIN responded that he was not familiar with the
document, but correspondence content providers have almost
always been private sector content providers, and he stated he
could not think of any public sector content providers over the
years. As for the constitutionality of it, he said there was
not any direct benefit that should be going to any private
schools or education entities and that the allotment goes to the
parents.
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE offered his belief that typically the
allotment is given to the correspondence program and no actual
funds are given to the parents. He read from the Alaska Policy
Forum's page in reference to using state monies for private
schools and asked Mr. Griffin how that aligns with his role with
the board when drafting regulations and having some oversite
with state funds.
MR. GRIFFIN said his understanding was that parents pay for the
programs and are reimbursed by the entities, and in most cases,
they must show receipts to be reimbursed so there is no money
going to private sector providers. He provided examples of
correspondence allotment programs and the monies involved.
9:20:12 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE affirmed that his question was very specific
and that his understanding of Mr. Griffin's opinion was that he
thought public monies as long as they are not directly paid to
a private school but indirectly find a way there is something
he condones.
MR. GRIFFIN replied that it gets down to the content provider
and that he supported the restriction that is in place.
9:22:22 AM
CO-CHAIR ALLARD asked for clarification whether the Alaska
Policy Forum reimbursed parents or had any other type of
authority.
MR. GRIFFIN responded it does not.
CO-CHAIR ALLARD asked Mr. Griffin, as a current member of the
board, when parents ask for reimbursements for allotments
whether they provide the receipts from the school from which the
students attend.
MR. GRIFFIN replied that was his understanding of the process.
9:24:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK referred to Mr. Griffin's time on the
State-Tribal Education Compacting committee and asked to hear
his views on where it is going in the future. He added his
concern over the one charter school he represented which is
Yup'ik speaking.
MR. GRIFFIN replied that he was proud of the tribal compacting
work that has been done, and that in Representative McCormick's
district, the English language arts proficiency rates are double
that of underlying districts that surround, and the charter
school is a high performing Title 1 school, he confirmed.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK stated that he was gravely concerned
regarding Mr. Griffin's public comments about major maintenance
needs and asked Mr. Griffin to provide corrections if the
comments were taken out of context. He further provided
examples of the unfavorable conditions of schools in his
district, and that some are "falling apart." He asked Mr.
Griffin whether he had visited Western Alaska and was in touch
with the realities the region faced.
9:29:13 AM
MR. GRIFFIN replied that he shared Representative McCormick's
concerns and noted that there is approximately $2 billion to $3
billion in deferred maintenance problems. He stated that he
witnessed an escalation in building costs that have outstripped
the rate of inflation. He offered is belief there should be a
commission launched that figures out how to do things more
efficiently and effectively because all schools deserve safe,
clean, and well-lit spaces where they can conduct their
operations, but not when there is an inability to fund. He said
he believed it could be mitigated.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK asked, "How do we mitigate that?"
MR. GRIFFIN reiterated the idea of launching a commission to
"get to the bottom of these things."
REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK shared that growing up in rural Alaska,
he had heard "time and time again" about proposed solutions, and
the need for studies, but he emphasized that more funding was
the biggest need and that maintenance costs money.
9:33:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked whether money spent for allotments is
spent for the benefit of the student as opposed to the teacher
or provider.
MR. GRIFFIN confirmed that is correct.
9:34:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY referenced the "Molly Hootch Case" [Tobeluk
vs. Lind] and Mr. Griffin's no-vote on funding deferred
maintenance and asked how he reconciled that with Molly Hootch
laws in the state.
MR. GRIFFIN expressed his belief that the state had been very
compliant with Molly Hootch court decisions, but the escalation
in the cost of the facilities could be better addressed. He
said the reason for his no-vote was that he did not see it as
being sustainable.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY said there is an obligation to provide
funding and it is important for the state to honor its
commitments to rural Alaska. She asked Mr. Griffin how he
envisioned working with local school boards and superintendents
to get information about how they are experiencing current
situations.
MR. GRIFFIN replied that it had not been an avenue that has had
enough communication and could definitely be improved.
9:39:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked Mr. Griffin if Anchorage should
consolidate classrooms and schools.
MR. GRIFFIN replied that they should, based upon Anchorage being
built out of capacity, and projections show there will be around
34,000 students by 2028.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT observed that if families receive
funding it should be reported as income, and she inquired
whether the families were issued 1099s under the allotment
system.
MR. GRIFFIN said he had not "gotten into the weeds" in that
process and had no knowledge whether 1099s were issued.
CO-CHAIR ALLARD interjected that is not income; it is allotments
for education and there is no 1099 issued.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT referred to Mr. Griffin's comment about
excellent outcomes from home school programs and asked him to
elaborate.
MR. GRIFFIN explained that the value of education in
neighborhood schools had prompted parents to move their kids
into correspondence allotment programs. He pointed out the
choice for students to opt out of testing and that students who
did not test have successfully continued to college from
correspondence programs.
9:43:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT said she was concerned with the
investment of the public dollar and asked for evidence and data
that communicates how well students are doing and how many have
proceeded to college. She further noted that the NAEP testing
data was not shared publicly, and she referenced competition
with other schools and state data going back to 2003.
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE gave Mr. Griffin the opportunity to make
closing comments.
9:46:34 AM
MR. GRIFFIN agreed that performance was better in 2003 and in
2019, things "turned around a little bit." He said the figures
available on DEED's website showed data over the last 20 years
as well as outcomes due to flat funding. He thanked the
committee for its time and consideration.
9:48:30 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE stated that the House Education Standing
Committee has reviewed the qualifications of the governor's
appointee and recommends that the following name be forwarded to
a joint session for consideration: Bob Griffin, Alaska State
Board of Education & Early Development. He said that signing
the report regarding appointments to boards and commissions in
no way reflects an individual member's approval or disapproval
of the appointee, and the nomination is merely forwarded to the
full legislature for confirmation or rejection.
9:49:13 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 9:49 a.m. to 9:51 a.m.
HB 165-CHARTER SCHOOLS; CORRESPONDENCE PROGRAMS
9:51:03 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE announced that the final order of business
would be HB 165, "An Act relating to charter schools; relating
to correspondence study programs; and providing for an effective
date."
9:51:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BEN CARPENTER, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, introduced HB 165 and paraphrased the sponsor statement
[included in the committee packet], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided:
HB 165 would allow Parents to have a greater choice in
their child's education.
Parents in several states can choose the best
education option for their child. That may be a
neighborhood public school for one child, but a
charter school or correspondence program for another
child.
HB 165 would allow the state Board of Education to
authorize charter public schools anywhere in the
state. Charter public schools authorized by the state
Board of Education would be operated by a local school
board. The bill also allows the Board to make
available a state correspondence study program if it
finds the necessity for one.
Currently, school districts have the decision
authority over the existence of these entities.
Currently, correspondence study programs receive a
fraction of the funding for a student than for a
student in any type of public school. Alaska statutes
require schools to meet the same instructional
standards, provide the same level of curriculum, and
meet the needs of students, regardless of if the
student is receiving their education from a physical
school, or a home-based school.
There are 28 thousand students enrolled in charter or
correspondence schools in Alaska, or 20% of Alaska's
students. 22 thousand correspondence students are 17%
of total students in Alaska, but only account for 5%
of total funding.
The current funding formula for a correspondence
student is 90% (0.9) of the BSA with no additional
multipliers. HB 165 would change that formula to
121.5% (1.215) of the BSA, which the same multiplier
in the public school funding formula that is tied to
every student, regardless of school .
HB 165 also allocates an 11 times multiplier for
intensive needs students. HB 165 allows parents of all
income levels to determine the most appropriate method
of schooling for their child. HB 165 is likely to
incentivize more parents to choose charter or
correspondence programs for their children, which will
have an additional benefit of saving the state money.
9:56:46 AM
KENDRA BROUSSARD, Staff, Representative Ben Carpenter, Alaska
State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Carpenter, prime
sponsor, gave the sectional analysis for HB 165 [included in the
committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Section 1
Adds intent language to uncodified law to be clear the
legislature intends that school districts spend the
increase in funding for correspondence schools on
allotments to parents and not on administering the
program.
Section 2
Creates a new section of law under charter schools
that allows the State Board of Education to establish
a charter school in a school district under procedures
established by the Board. Procedures include the
establishment of an academic policy committee
consisting of parents of students attending the
school, teachers, and school employees. The district
local school board will operate the charter under the
charter school law (AS 14.03.255 -14.03.290).
Sections 3 and 4
Amends to the duties of the department of education
(AS 14.07.020 (a)) to offer and make available to any
Alaskan through a centralized office a correspondence
study program if required to do so by the State Board
of Education. Calculate the amount allocated to each
district that offers a correspondence study program,
the amount allocated to the district under the program
and inform the district of the calculation.
Section 5
Adds to the duties of the State Board of Education
that the Board shall adopt regulations regarding
establishment of charter schools by the Board.
Section 6
Amends the state funding calculation for
correspondence program by adding together the results
of multiplying the ADM (student count) by 1.215
(121.5%) instead of 0.9 (90%) and multiplying the
correspondence intensive student count by 11.
This new calculation takes into account that public
school funding formula for every ADM adds to the BSA a
special needs factor of 1.2 and a school vocational
and technical instruction factor of 1.015, for a total
multiplier of 1.215.
In addition to the 1.215 BSA multiplier, as well as
school related factors, every ADM with intensive needs
receives an additional multiplier of 13 from the
public school funding formula. This new calculation
provides for intensive needs correspondence study
program students but leaves some of their funding in
the district for administration.
Section 7
Adds a new subsection of the calculation of the
calculation for state funding for correspondence study
by defining intensive services and correspondence
intensive student.
Section 8 and 9
Provide effective dates
9:59:45 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE drew attention to Section 7 and, in light of
recent court decisions, asked Representative Carpenter to speak
to the inclusion of the language in the section.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER stressed the importance of transparency
and that state law is clear to what the expectations are for
charter, correspondence, and "brick and mortar" schools. The
language helps to bring transparency to the process, he said.
10:02:04 AM
DONNA ARDUIN, Staff, Representative Ben Carpenter, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Carpenter, prime
sponsor, added that a strong suggestion was to make sure records
were kept on how allocations were being spent. She proffered
that if the legislature had the opportunity to make sure records
are kept regarding how reimbursements have been made by the
districts to the correspondence programs and parents, then it
may help with "the lawsuit."
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER added that the parents might assume
great records are being kept, which may be the case for most
schools but not for all schools. The state is required by the
constitution to provide, and conversations should be had on what
the minimum requirements for recordkeeping are and to "level the
playing field."
MS. AUDUIN noted to also provide the information to DEED, as it
was not a current requirement, she said.
10:03:51 AM
CO-CHAIR ALLARD said she was alarmed in reference to the lack of
the "intensifier" for correspondence children. She asked
whether it was an application that had to be put in, or simply
not available. She said some children may be home schooled due
to a disability and considered they are not getting the extra
help. She requested to hear from DEED to elaborate.
MS. AUDUIN clarified that there was no intensive needs factor
for correspondence programs.
10:05:53 AM
DEBORAH RIDDLE, Director, Division of Innovation and Education
Excellence, Department of Education and Early Development,
affirmed that intensive categorization for correspondence
students is not available currently.
CO-CHAIR ALLARD expressed her shock and offered her belief that
that could be a vehicle for its own piece of legislation. She
thanked Representative Carpenter for bringing the subject to
light.
10:07:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked whether parents thought their
available school was not providing the best service for their
child.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER replied that one could argue it is
discrimination, but he said the funding formula does not apply
to special needs children that participate in correspondence
programs. He suggested that perhaps the list of special needs
definitions needed to be addressed because of the large number
of parents choosing distance education.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX said he brought it up because limiting
choice is inherently discriminatory, and it should be minimized
by maximizing the choices available to individuals.
10:09:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY offered her belief that it would be
important to have someone in the department walk through the
levels of special education funding, with level 3 being
intensive students, and that further explanation is needed.
REPRESENTATIVE CARPENTER commented that special education
funding is not just for children who are struggling, but for
children who excel above standards and who may need special
attention due to surpassing standards.
10:11:50 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE extended his agreement to Representatives
Story and Carpenter and stated that he would like further
discussions in future hearings.
[HB 165 was held over.]
10:13:02 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Education Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 10:13 a.m.