04/03/2003 11:05 AM House EDU
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
April 3, 2003
11:05 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Carl Gatto, Chair
Representative Paul Seaton, Vice Chair
Representative Dan Ogg
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Kelly Wolf
Representative Les Gara
Representative Mary Kapsner
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 19
"An Act relating to appropriations for operating expenses for
primary and secondary public education; and providing for an
effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 19(EDU) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 26
"An Act relating to the base student allocation used in the
formula for state funding of public education; and providing for
an effective date."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 19
SHORT TITLE:EDUCATION FUNDING
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)STEVENS
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/21/03 0036 (H) PREFILE RELEASED (1/10/03)
01/21/03 0036 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/21/03 0036 (H) EDU, HES, FIN
02/04/03 (H) EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124
02/04/03 (H) -- Meeting Canceled --
02/06/03 (H) EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124
02/06/03 (H) Heard & Held
MINUTE(EDU)
02/07/03 0154 (H) COSPONSOR(S): WOLF
04/03/03 (H) EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
DOUG LETCH, Staff
to Senator Gary Stevens
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 19 on behalf of Senator Gary
Stevens, sponsor.
EDDY JEANS, Manager
School Finance and Facilities Section
Education Support Services
Department of Education and Early Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 19 and responded to
questions from the committee.
AMY LUJAN
Nome City Schools
Nome, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 19 and answered questions
from the committee.
TODD SYVERSON, Assistant Superintendent
Kenai Peninsula School District
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 19 and answered questions
from the members.
STEVE CATHERS, Superintendent
Valdez City Schools
Valdez, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 19.
DOROTHY MOORE, School Board Member and City Council Member
City of Valdez
Valdez, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 19.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 03-16, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR CARL GATTO called the House Special Committee on Education
meeting to order at 11:05 a.m. Representatives Gatto, Seaton,
Wilson, Wolf, Gara, and Kapsner were present at the call to
order. Representative Ogg arrived while the meeting was in
progress.
HB 19-EDUCATION FUNDING
Number 0159
CHAIR GATTO announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 19, "An Act relating to appropriations for
operating expenses for primary and secondary public education;
and providing for an effective date."
Number 0337
DOUG LETCH, Staff to Senator Gary Stevens, Alaska State
Legislature, presented HB 19 on behalf of Senator Gary Stevens,
sponsor [who had been a Representative at the time he first
sponsored the bill]. He explained that while this bill had been
heard by the House Special Committee on Education earlier in the
session, there was no proposed committee substitute as a result
of that hearing. Mr. Letch told the committee the purpose of
the bill is to provide for a separate appropriation for the
education budget in an effort to help school districts and local
governments plan their budgets by giving them advanced notice of
state appropriations for education. Currently, the districts
and local communities do not know what they will be receiving
until the last day of the fiscal year, June 30th.
MR. LETCH reminded the committee of Senator Gary Stevens' main
reasons for introducing this bill. During Senator Gary Stevens'
many years of service as a member of the Kodiak Island City
Council and the Kodiak Island School District Board of
Directors, he found that school districts often had to lay off
teachers because they were not sure of the funding level. Later
the district would find that they were allocated sufficient
funds, but would lose those individuals to other jobs before the
funding was known.
Number 0486
CHAIR GATTO said his understanding is that on May 1 the school
districts solidify their budgets, and it is done without knowing
how much money the district will actually have. That is a tough
call when dealing with a $120-million budget or, in Anchorage's
case, a $400 or $500 million budget. This bill says that
districts will be advised by April 1 and then the districts can
solidify their budget on May 1. He commented that this bill
should be a big help.
MR. LETCH responded that is correct.
CHAIR GATTO asked if there is any drawback to this legislation.
MR. LETCH replied that historically, whenever there has been a
substantial increase in education funding, it has happened at
the end of the legislative session as part of negotiations to
end the session and to tap the CBR [Constitutional Budget
Reserve]. There are a number of individuals that feel districts
are in a position of being a player if the foundation formula
funding is not finalized until the end of the session. That is
an argument against the bill.
CHAIR GATTO commented that if districts get numbers earlier,
then they may lose out at the end of session, so the districts
are undecided on this issue. Districts would like to know how
much money they will be getting earlier and bargain later, but
it cannot be both ways.
MR. LETCH said that Chair Gatto is correct. This is the
argument districts make, and there is merit to that point. He
said he believes this bill may be a little ahead of its time
because the state still has the CBR. There is a danger in
waiting until the end, however, especially in these days when
there may not be anything there in the end. He said that this
bill in no way precludes the legislature from coming back later
and adding funding either to the foundation formula or Learning
Opportunity Grants (LOGs). This is a good-faith effort to say
to the school districts that this is the minimum amount they
will be getting in funding, so start to plan now.
CHAIR GATTO commented that this is a way for the districts to
know they do not have to lay off employees and then hire them
back later.
Number 0745
EDDY JEANS, Manager, School Finance and Facilities Section,
Education Support Services, Department of Education and Early
Development, testified on HB 19 and responded to questions from
the committee. He said that Mr. Letch explained the bill very
well and it appears that the members have a good understanding
of the pros and cons of the bill.
Number 0758
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF said that his understanding of this
legislation is that it does not prevent the legislature from
setting the foundation formula figure in April, and then
increasing funding at the end of session.
MR. JEANS responded that is correct. What this bill requires is
that the legislature make an appropriation for the foundation
program only. He commented that he knows the members are aware
of the other programs related to education like pupil
transportation, school debt service, and others. He said that
as this bill is currently written, the budget that would come
before the legislature would be the fully funded foundation
program, which is required under the current statutory scheme.
The legislature would have the ability to add money later on in
the session, or the legislature could also prorate this
legislation if that is what legislators felt would be necessary
to meet their budget plans. Mr. Jeans said what Mr. Letch
mentioned about this bill being a good-faith effort is true.
There is a lot of flexibility in this legislation.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF commented that this is really a "people"
bill. This is about letting people know if they have a job or
not.
Number 0889
MR. JEANS replied that retention notices must be issued by March
15, so the districts still need to consider retention of
teachers before they get notification of the appropriation.
Number 0933
CHAIR GATTO said that this is a complicated issue. It is likely
that all the tenured teachers will be hired; however, the non-
tenured teachers will still be waiting to know if they have a
job. It is tough on those waiting to be rehired.
CHAIR GATTO asked Mr. Jeans to clarify, if the foundation
funding formula were fixed, whether the legislature could add to
the funding later.
MR. JEANS replied that to add money later in the session to the
base student allocation would require legislation. If there was
a desire to add additional funding outside of the foundation
program, that would also require an appropriation. The
legislature still would have the authority and ability to add
additional monies.
CHAIR GATTO asked how this bill would affect the legislature.
Number 1007
REPRESENTATIVE GARA pointed out a problem with providing early
funding and then possibly adding to it later on in the session.
He said that if school districts have gone ahead and fired
teachers based on early funding notification, then they have
lost a compelling case to argue for more funding. If the
legislature does all funding at the same time, the school
districts can say this is the number of teachers that will be
fired if there is not adequate funding. He said he believes
this undercuts their negotiating position.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked Mr. Jeans to clarify the point that
this bill as it is written only addresses the foundation-funding
formula. He asked if that is correct.
MR. JEANS replied that is correct.
Number 1100
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said that in a year like this one when there
is $30 million in last year's LOGs, $6 million in additional
appropriations made last year outside the foundation formula
program, and a proposed $10-million reduction in student
transportation funding, the school districts still will not know
what their funding will be. The districts will only know of the
foundation formula appropriation. He asked Mr. Jeans if he saw
this as a problem for the districts as the bill is currently
written.
Number 1111
MR. JEANS responded that this bill does not address any funds
outside the foundation formula program, and even though this is
the majority of the funding that school districts operate on,
districts are accustomed to receiving additional money such as
LOGs, and full funding for transportation. This legislation
addresses one piece of the entire puzzle.
CHAIR GATTO commented that education funds will be coming from
one pile of money, whether it is LOGs or pupil transportation
reductions. If the legislature fixes the amount of the
foundation formula without knowledge of other funding
requirements, then later on when there is a reduction in pupil
transportation funding, the funds will have to come out of the
classroom to pay for that reduction because at that point
districts will already have contracts [for pupil
transportation].
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said his point is that if this bill is
adopted, the members should not assume this is a fix for the
school districts because they still do not know about the other
$40 million in funding. Representative Gara said even if the
legislature assumes the pupil transportation money will come
from transportation funds, if the districts do not get enough
money for transportation, the funds will be taken from the
classrooms.
CHAIR GATTO said he would like to go to each of the school
districts and ask what they would like done.
Number 1227
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked Mr. Jeans, if this bill passes,
whether it is possible that the legislature could put a budget
in place, and then at the end of session find that the budget
put forward is not possible. Could the legislature change the
numbers at that point?
MR. JEANS responded that as the bill is written, if the
legislature passes an education budget within the timeframe this
piece of legislation requires and the governor signs it into
law, the figures are locked in. He said that does not mean the
legislature could not pass another law later on, reducing the
amount. There are still many avenues available to the
legislature after the appropriation is made.
Number 1308
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said he thinks what the members are really
dealing with are the issues of the foundation formula and LOGs
that are used for pupil instruction and hiring of teachers.
Debt reimbursement does not really go to the school districts;
that goes to the boroughs and communities. If the borough does
not have as much money, then it might not fully fund education.
He said that is not direct money that comes out of instruction.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON pointed out that the districts have to
fire all the teachers unless the legislature funds them early
enough. When the districts do not know the funding, then they
send out all these pink slips because they are required to give
the teachers notice. He said it is not as though they fire them
later. That is one of the problems that this bill attempts to
fix. He said he thinks the idea in the past has been that if
the districts wait around until the end of session, it will be
possible to negotiate and get more money into education.
Representative Seaton said the way he looks at it, for the next
number of years, is that the legislature is looking not at money
to allocate, but at cuts to allocate at the end. He reiterated
his statement that it is not so much allocating additional funds
later as it is allocating additional cuts. He said the
legislature is looking at a little different scenario than in
the past. He said he thinks it would be better for the
legislature to get the education budget on the fourth day of the
session and work through the foundation formula, and get that
section out of the way by the deadline.
Number 1480
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER commented that she believes this is a sad
discussion the committee is having because it is a foregone
conclusion that districts will be issuing pink slips. She said
the members are not talking about adequate funding, but forward
funding. She said she thinks this whole conversation should be
put on hold until school districts can be told that the
legislature is looking at adequately funding education. She
reminded the committee that Kodiak said that with inflation
there was a 36 percent decrease in the funds available to the
school. She said she gets tired of telling people that the
school districts are faced with the No Child Left Behind (NCLB),
administrative overhead and the cost of remedial education
because the state does not do enough in the early years of
education. As a result, the state then has to worry about
whether or not students can pass the exit exam. Representative
Kapsner said there has been a 300 percent increase in insurance;
she mentioned teachers' contracts coming up, and said the list
goes on and on.
Number 1562
CHAIR GATTO told the committee that the governor has said the
administration has no problem with members' adding to the
budget, but the members must say where the funds would come
from. That is the subject that is not discussed here, and maybe
it is not this committee's domain to discuss that issue.
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER responded that she does not believe
anyone got voted into office based on cuts to education. She
said that she has been getting a lot of e-mails saying that
constituents regret their votes because they did not understand
that there would be cuts to education. Representative Kapsner
told the committee that having a conversation about issuing pink
slips to teachers, which directly affects parents and students,
is not something she is thrilled about.
Number 1639
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON told the committee that if this bill were
law today and the school districts she represents were advised
that they would be getting the same foundation formula funding
this year as last year, the districts would still be handing out
pink slips to 25 percent of the teaching staff. She said she
does not see how this bill will make that much of difference to
districts and this would possibly be taking away some of the
bargaining chips. Representative Wilson told the committee she
does not believe this is the right time for this bill.
CHAIR GATTO said he understands that Representative Wilson does
not want to hamper districts if there is a possibility that
there will be more funding for education later in the session.
Number 1717
CHAIR GATTO said he would like to hear from all the
superintendents of schools. This bill does not change the
amount of money appropriated for education; it is just a matter
of rearranging when school districts will be notified of the
education budget. Whether it is known early or late, it is
probably the same information.
Number 1746
REPRESENTATIVE OGG commented that he was delayed in arriving at
the meeting and is not sure if this question has already been
asked. He said it appears this bill covers all receipts that
the school districts would receive through different sources.
He asked if this bill includes the LOGs or pupil transportation.
MR. JEANS replied that the other funding sources for LOGs and
pupil transportation are outside the foundation-funding program.
This proposal refers to AS 14.17 [Chapter 14.17, Financing Of
Public Schools], which is the foundation program and is limited
to that program.
CHAIR GATTO reiterated that the bill only addresses the
foundation formula. This bill does not address any other
funding.
Number 1802
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON told the committee that he is seriously
concerned about the dilemma of adequate funding of education.
However, he pointed out that this bill addresses strictly a
structural problem in laying out the date requirements and
providing some security or information in concrete terms to the
school districts so they can know a minimum level of funding.
Representative Seaton told the committee that he knows all the
members support education and will be looking for other funding
mechanisms to increase funding, but this bill only deals with
the foundation formula. He said this bill is really a separate
issue from the adequacy of education funding.
Number 1877
REPRESENTATIVE GARA commented that it would be nice to have the
school districts here at the meeting. He said he recalls Larry
Wiget [Executive Director, Public Affairs Division, Anchorage
School District] saying that he would prefer adequate funding
rather than early funding. Representative Gara said he does not
think this bill gets education anywhere beyond where it is
today. School districts know that they will at least get last
year's foundation formula funding, since the legislature has
never cut foundation formula funding in recent history. The
districts could base their pink slips on last year's funding
level and not do a pink slip for every employee. What they
really want to know is if they will be getting more than last
year. Representative Gara said he does not think this bill
changes anything for the districts. They will still have to
issue a certain number of pink slips. He said he agrees with
Representative Kapsner that the legislature needs to come up
with an acceptable way of dealing with the foundation formula
and inflation-proofing first. That commitment and a bill like
this would make a difference. Representative Gara summarized
that he does not believe this bill can work on its own.
Number 1987
CHAIR GATTO asked Mr. Jeans to verify the accuracy of
Representative Gara's statement that the state has never reduced
the foundation formula.
MR. JEANS responded that Representative Gara said that the
funding formula has not been prorated in recent history. And he
said he would agree with that statement. The foundation program
was prorated in 1987 by 10 percent, but it has been fully funded
since then.
CHAIR GATTO asked what guarantee there is that the foundation
formula will not be reduced.
MR. JEANS responded that the answer is in the hands of the
legislature.
CHAIR GATTO asked if there is anything in statute that says the
foundation formula must be fully funded.
MR. JEANS replied that it is not in statute that it must be
fully funded. The statute says the program is subject to
legislative appropriation. He clarified his comment that when
he refers to fully funding the foundation program, he means the
legislature is funding the statutory obligation. That does not
account for the cost of inflation or other expenses that
districts incur.
Number 2050
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER told the committee that although there
has not been a decrease in the actual overall foundation
formula, there have been changes in the foundation formula,
which has meant certain school district do get less money. For
example, with SB 36 [legislation which was enacted in 1998]
there were major funding shifts and some districts did see a
loss in the foundation formula.
MR. JEANS commented to the committee that there have been a
number of foundation formula rewrites in which the resource
allocations have changed. So some districts have experienced a
reduction in state aid and some have experienced an increase in
aid, but these have been a result of the formula's being
rewritten and the amendment of the allocation of those
resources, not necessarily as a result of the legislature's
electing to prorate the formula.
CHAIR GATTO pointed out that the members are wandering away from
the purpose of the bill and asked the members to address their
concerns on this specific legislation.
Number 2119
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER asked Mr. Jeans to describe the
difference between flat funding and fully funding the foundation
formula.
MR. JEANS indicated that is not a question he can respond to.
CHAIR GATTO said he believes that flat funding means no change
in funding; however, fully funding depends on interpretation.
It means different things to different people.
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER commented that often when there are
discussions about fully funding education, she believes the
funding is really flat funding.
Number 2202
AMY LUJAN, Nome City Schools, testified on HB 19 and answered
questions from the committee. She commented that she has worked
in school administration for nine years and every year the
uncertainty becomes worse. She said she is disappointed that
this bill will not address the LOGs because in recent years that
has been the icing on the cake. That does determine how many
people the districts will be able to hire. If this bill does
not address LOGs, it will not solve the problem. The teacher
job fair is next week, and they still do not know how many
vacancies that can be filled. In Nome's case, it is a matter of
holding off on filing vacancies, then bringing in teachers at
the last minute, right before school starts, which is very
disruptive to staff and students. She pointed out that by
waiting until the last minute, they do not get the best people.
Ms. Lujan said because funding is up in the air, the districts
are not able to make the best decisions for students. She
encouraged the committee to continue to look at this problem.
Number 2264
CHAIR GATTO asked Ms. Lujan if she knows what happens at job
fairs in other states and if they face the same problems that
Alaska does or have found a way to fix this problem.
MS. LUJAN responded that she could not comment on other states.
She thought Mr. Jeans might know more about other states'
solutions to this problem. She said that Nome public schools
are having to go to other states to find teachers and it is a
problem because the wages are higher down there.
Number 2340
TODD SYVERSON, Assistant Superintendent, Kenai Peninsula School
District, testified on HB 19 and answered questions from the
members. He told the committee that he believes having adequate
funding is the most critical factor for school districts. Mr.
Syverson said he represents 9,500 students and 1,200 employees
in 43 schools with urban, rural, and remote sites. He said he
has a strong belief in public education. It is the state's
responsibility to provide the funding for students and schools,
and that is the legislature's primary charge. The Kenai
Peninsula School District is one that follows all the rules by
meeting the 70-to-30 criterion for instructional expenditures,
and spends less than 5 percent on administrative costs; even
with local funding to the cap, which is approximately $25
million and is one-third of the district's budget, he said they
are punished for being competent, efficient, and frugal.
Currently, the Kenai school district is in a crisis when the
district has absolutely no other way of obtaining additional
dollars other than through state funding. Just to give the
members a picture of what it is like on the Kenai Peninsula with
inefficient funding, he said the status quo budget for FY 04
will mean a $5.2 million problem. The reductions to his school
district have been done, whereas other school districts are just
now starting to consider the same cuts. In order to balance the
budget this year, the district will be laying off 56 teachers.
The student-teacher ratio has been bumped up three students in
each classroom. In the small schools with multi-grade, single
classrooms the PTR [pupil teacher ratio] is 19 students for 1
teacher. In the larger elementary schools the PTR is 29 pupils
for 1 teacher. He said they will be cutting entire programs at
the Homer High School such as the Spanish foreign language
program. They have had Spanish and French and just cannot
afford to keep both. Library, music, physical education, and
vocational education are getting massive cuts.
Number 2460
CHAIR GATTO interjected that Mr. Syverson's discussion is really
targeted to a different issue. The committee is really
interested in hearing what his thoughts are on forward funding.
MR. SYVERSON responded that if the district knew it was going to
get $4,500 per student, the district would be in favor of
forward funding. The district is more interested in adequate
funding than early funding.
CHAIR GATTO asked Mr. Syverson to clarify whether he favors the
passage of this bill.
MR. SYVERSON said not knowing the amount concerns the district.
CHAIR GATTO responded to Mr. Syverson's comment by asking: What
if the district knew what was funded, but did not like it?
Number 2471
MR. SYVERSON replied he would like to pick the amount [laughter
and applause].
Number 2521
STEVE CATHERS, Superintendent, Valdez City Schools, testified in
support of HB 19. He said that he supports forward funding as
long as it does not mean a reduction in funding as was discussed
earlier. Mr. Cathers said he believes districts fear that with
forward funding after April 1 there will not be any urgency
about adequately funding schools. There might be the feeling
that the work has been done, since there are a number of other
issues that have piled up at the end of session. There is
concern that any extra money will be diverted. Mr. Cathers said
all the districts are cutting and feeling a lack of adequacy at
this time. If the question is if districts want early or
forward funding or want adequate funding, it is like being asked
if they would like to chop off their arm or leg. If the full
package of funding including LOGs could be identified by April 1
that would be helpful. The legislature has a priority to fund
education as well as possible, and the predictability and the
ability to plan are things the districts have needed for many
years. To that extent, he said he supports this legislation.
Number 2627
DOROTHY MOORE, School Board Member, City Council Member, City of
Valdez, testified on HB 19. She said that having served on the
city council for five years, she felt the budget process was
difficult, but when she got on the school board she realized
that in Valdez the district could be working more closely with
the city. She found working on the school budget to be one of
the most frustrating things she has ever done. Ms. Moore said
the "moving target" funding and the inability to know what the
funding frustrated the process immensely. She said she is in
favor of the idea behind this bill, but as the superintendent
pointed out, it is more important to have adequate funding.
Number 2673
CHAIR GATTO advised Ms. Moore and others who are listening that
the committee will be addressing the foundation funding formula
soon. He said he is hoping it will be addressed next Tuesday.
But even though the House Special Committee on Education
addresses the bill, until it is approved he urged those
interested in education to continue to follow legislation.
Number 2696
CHAIR GATTO announced there would be a brief at-ease at 11:45
a.m. The committee reconvened at 11:56 a.m.
CHAIR GATTO spoke about the members' decisions to support
forward funding or not. Some of the language in the bill refers
only to mental health trusts, and new language only refers to
the formula. He said some of the members were thinking of the
constitutional budget reserve and the possibility that if it is
not there forever, then it is possible they may wish to rethink
this bill. He said his thoughts are that he would like to move
the bill out of committee. The next committee of referral is
the House Health, Education and Social Services Standing
Committee. The membership on that committee is almost the same
as the House Special Committee on Education. He said he would
like to hear from superintendents, principals, and those
directly involved, including teachers, because they always have
very valuable input.
Number 2784
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to adopt Amendment 1, as follows:
Page 1, line 1, after "relating"
Delete "to appropriations"
Insert "the appropriation date"
Number 2804
REPRESENTATIVE GARA objected to the motion for purposes of
discussion. He asked, if the committee changes the title of the
bill to say that this is the bill that is going to involve the
appropriation date for public education, whether that prevents
the committee from appropriating more [funds] later on.
CHAIR GATTO commented that although that is a legal question, he
does not believe it would prevent additional appropriations.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON agreed that he does not believe this
amendment would prevent additional appropriations. He said the
problem is that the title right now makes this an Act relating
to appropriations, which could be the amount, could be early
funding, or could be all kinds of things, and the idea of this
bill is to specifically talk about early funding. This title
change clarifies that confusion.
Number 2850
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked if Representative Seaton would mind a
friendly amendment to Amendment 1, as follows:
Page 1, line 1, after "relating to"
Delete "the"
Insert "an"
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON responded that the foregoing amendment to
Amendment 1 would be fine. [Although there was no formal
motion, the amendment to Amendment 1 was treated as adopted.]
Number 2879
REPRESENTATIVE GARA removed his objection to Amendment 1 [as
amended].
CHAIR GATTO asked if there are any objections to Amendment 1 [as
amended], which would read as follows [page 1, lines 1-2]: "An
Act relating to an appropriation date for operating expenses for
primary and secondary public education; and providing for an
effective date." There being no objection, Amendment 1 [as
amended] was adopted.
Number 2899
REPRESENTATIVE OGG said he wishes to speak on the bill. He said
while he will be voting to move the bill forward with a
recommendation of "do not pass" because he believes the language
needs to be a little clearer, he is not willing to make an
amendment at this time. He hopes that this bill would include
all the appropriations that would go to K-12 education,
including LOGs, transportation, and anything else.
Number 2940
CHAIR GATTO commented that it does sound like a major amendment.
TAPE 03-16, SIDE B
Number 2977
REPRESENTATIVE WOlf moved to report HB 19, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes.
Number 2970
REPRESENTATIVE GARA objected to the motion. He told the
committee that he agrees with the chair that he would like to
hear from superintendents and teachers about any amendment that
might need to be made. He said since he is not on the next
committee of referral, he believes the work should be done in
the House Special Committee on Education.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Gatto, Seaton, Ogg,
Wilson, and Wolf voted in favor of HB 19, as amended, out of
committee. Representatives Gara and Kapsner voted against it.
Therefore, CSHB 19(EDU) was reported out of the House Special
Committee on Education by a vote of 5-2.
Number 2885
MR. LETCH thanked the committee and those who testified on HB
19. He said he believes the discussions today helped to clarify
people's thoughts on the early funding issue.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON spoke to the question concerning other
states' actions with respect to job fairs. She said most
states' communities are close enough that when people want to
apply for a job, they just go to the school system and apply.
She said some states that have geographical challenges like
Alaska have job fairs, but most do not.
CHAIR GATTO said his personal experience with respect to other
states' handling of funding issues has been that the communities
decide how much to spend and then adjust the mill rate to
reflect how much is needed.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Education meeting was adjourned at 12:05
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|