Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/16/2003 07:13 AM House EDU
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
April 16, 2003
7:13 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Carl Gatto, Chair
Representative Paul Seaton, Vice Chair
Representative Dan Ogg
Representative Les Gara
Representative Mary Kapsner
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Kelly Wolf
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 259
"An Act relating to public school transportation, and to the
minimum wages for school bus drivers; and providing for an
effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
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."
- SUBCOMMITTEE ASSIGNED
HOUSE BILL NO. 220
"An Act relating to the base student allocation used in the
formula for state funding of public education; and providing for
an effective date."
- SUBCOMMITTEE ASSIGNED
HOUSE BILL NO. 222
"An Act requiring an annual inflation adjustment of the base
student allocation used in the formula for state funding of
public education; and providing for an effective date."
- SUBCOMMITTEE ASSIGNED
HOUSE BILL NO. 233
"An Act relating to the base student allocation used in the
formula for state funding of public education; and providing for
an effective date."
- SUBCOMMITTEE ASSIGNED
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 259
SHORT TITLE:PUPIL TRANSPORTATION FUNDING/DRIVER WAGES
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)GATTO
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
04/11/03 0934 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
04/11/03 0934 (H) EDU, L&C, FIN
04/16/03 (H) EDU AT 7:00 AM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
CODY RICE, Staff
to Representative Carl Gatto
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 259 on behalf of Chair Gatto,
sponsor, and answered questions from the members.
EDDY JEANS, Manager
School Finance and Facilities Section
Education Support Services
Department of Education and Early Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 259 and responded to
questions from the committee.
TONNIE BARLOW
School Board Member
Wrangell City School District
Wrangell, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 259.
SUSAN SCIABBARRASI, Superintendent
Wrangell City School District
Wrangell, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 259.
DAVE SPENCE, Director
Planning and Operations
Kenai Peninsula School District
Kenai, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 259.
MIKE SCHWARTZ
Petersburg, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 259.
STEVE BRADSHAW, Superintendent
Sitka Borough School District
Sitka, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 259.
STEVE KALMES, Director of Transportation
Anchorage School District
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 259 and answer questions
from the members.
CAROL COMEAU, Superintendent
Anchorage School District
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 259 and answered questions
from the members.
CAROL ENZLER, Superintendent
Petersburg City School District
Petersburg, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 259.
JANELL PRIVETT, President
School Board
Wrangell City School District
Wrangell, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 259 and answered questions
from the members.
DEBBIE OSSIANDER, President
Association of Alaska School Boards
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 259 and answered questions
from the committee.
JOHN STEINER, Member
Anchorage School Board
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 259 and answered questions
from the committee.
CARL ROSE, Executive Director
Association of Alaska School Boards
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 259 and answered
questions from the members.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 03-17, SIDE A
Number 0001
VICE CHAIR PAUL SEATON called the House Special Committee on
Education meeting to order at 7:13 a.m. Representatives Seaton,
Ogg, and Gara were present at the call to order.
Representatives Gatto and Kapsner arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
HB 259-PUPIL TRANSPORTATION FUNDING/DRIVER WAGES
VICE CHAIR SEATON announced that the first order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 259, "An Act relating to public school
transportation, and to the minimum wages for school bus drivers;
and providing for an effective date."
Number 0099
CODY RICE, Staff to Representative Carl Gatto, Alaska State
Legislature, presented HB 259 on behalf of Chair Gatto, sponsor.
He told the committee HB 259 is in response to recent criticism
of the pupil transportation funding at the K-12 level. The idea
is to encourage efficiency through the school districts by
allowing the districts to keep any money they might save through
cost cutting and/or increased efficiencies. This is would be
accomplished by taking the FY 03 entitlement for pupil
transportation and dividing it by the FY 03 enrollment, less
correspondence students. That would give a per-head number for
pupil transportation on a district-by-district basis. That
number is set in statute and is used as a multiplier against the
enrollment in future years. That would mean pupil
transportation entitlement would be linked to the number of
students that need to be transported.
Number 0240
VICE CHAIR SEATON asked Mr. Rice to address page 1, line 14,
where it says "by $1,200 per student".
MR. RICE responded that the idea was to limit the per head
amount per year for students at $1,200. That figure appears to
be a reasonable limitation. At that price, it is believed that
districts could create efficiencies.
Number 0320
VICE CHAIR SEATON asked for some clarification on paragraphs (1)
and (2) [Page 1, line 11 and line 14 of the original bill]. He
asked if this bill refers to the lesser of the two amounts. For
instance, one is the per-student allocation divided by the
amount received.
MR. RICE replied that is correct.
Number 0342
REPRESENTATIVE OGG asked what the allotted amount of funding is
under the present budget for the FY [03] budget for per head
cost in student transportation.
MR. RICE told the members that the numbers vary district by
district. He referred to a three-page fiscal note in the bill
packet which breaks down the costs by districts. Mr. Rice
referred to page 2 [of the fiscal note] in the third column from
the left titled "Estimated FY03 COST PER STUDENT."
Number 0412
REPRESENTATIVE OGG asked if this bill would provide for each
district to have a different "per capita" or would there be a
statewide "per capita."
MR. RICE responded that each district will have a separate per-
capita based on what was actually received in FY 03.
VICE CHAIR SEATON noted for the benefit of the audience that
$1,200 per student was the maximum for the FY 03 costs. The
[Ketchikan] Gateway [Borough Schools], Bristol Bay Borough
Schools, Copper River Schools, Delta/Greeley Schools, and
Southeast Island Schools have FY 03 costs per student of $1,200.
Denali School District's cost is $1,179, and the cost drops
significantly from there.
Number 0515
EDDY JEANS, Manager, School Finance and Facilities Section,
Education Support Services, Department of Education and Early
Development, testified on HB 259 and responded to questions from
the committee. He clarified the fiscal note where it refers to
the per-student amounts listed. Those that show the $1,200
amount actually exceeded that amount but were capped. He said
if he recalls correctly, Delta/Greely was the highest in the
state with a cost of $1,400 per student. Mr. Jeans told the
committee any school district that shows a $1,200 per-student
cost was actually capped at that price and the actual cost was
likely more.
Number 0565
VICE CHAIR SEATON asked if he has the actual numbers with him so
the members can see the differences.
Number 0584
MR. JEANS responded that he does not have them with him, but
would be happy to provide the numbers to the committee.
MR. RICE commented that he recalls of the five districts that
were capped, only Delta/Greely was above $1,300. The rest were
between $1,300 and $1,200.
Number 0619
REPRESENTATIVE GARA commented that he was curious about the
districts that had exactly a $1,200 per-student cost because
that seemed suspicious. He asked if there has been any analysis
on the districts that spend more than $1,200 per student. Is
there any documentation of waste within the districts? He asked
if there is a reasonable expectation that those districts could
go down to $1,200 per student without affecting student
transportation.
Number 0656
MR. JEANS told the committee that the current system is a
reimbursable system. The department has in regulation what are
reimbursable expenses. In each of these districts that were
capped, they contract for their routes, so they are using the
current system to the maximum extent they can in terms of
reimbursement from the state. He said in other words, the
districts do not really look for efficiencies. The state will
reimburse it, so they submit a request for reimbursement. Mr.
Jeans said when he took a look at page three in the fiscal note
Delta/Greely had projected to the department their FY 04 cost
under the current system of [$882,572]. He said he also knows
that Delta/Greely would like to add a couple of routes that were
not included in this number because they have had an influx of
students in the Delta Junction area. Mr. Jeans pointed out that
under this proposal they would generate a grant of [$1,014,000].
He said he believes this would more than cover the cost of the
existing system and provide enough in funding to cover the costs
of the routes the district would like to add next year.
MR. JEANS said that as the department works with school
districts and a projection like this is given to add routes, the
department really holds their feet to the fire and makes them
jump through a lot of hoops to get those routes because if the
department allows them to get additional routes here, the rest
of the state pays for that under the current system. It would
simply be prorated and everyone would pay for those additional
routes. Under the system proposed by this legislation, the
district could go back to their contractor and try to
renegotiate for a lower rate. Depending on what happens with
the fuel tax, districts could purchase fuel for their
contractors so the contractors do not have to purchase it
directly. He summarized by saying that this bill really does
open up a lot of avenues for districts to try to find
efficiencies.
Number 0847
REPRESENTATIVE GARA commented that before he decides to cap the
costs of pupil transportation from 1,000 miles away from another
community at $1,200 per student, he needs some assurance that it
is fair to those districts. He said he understands the theory
that there is a desire for the districts to be efficient, but he
does not know the reality of whether or not they can manage at
less than $1,200. Representative Gara told the committee until
he is convinced of that, he will have a problem with the $1,200
cap. He added that he does not think getting rid of the cap as
undermining the concept of the bill. The bill's concept is to
take what was spent last year and inflation proof it in the
future. He questioned whether the bill really inflation proofs
the costs well enough.
VICE CHAIR SEATON asked Mr. Jeans if the Department of Education
and Early Development has contacted the districts on their
position on this bill.
Number 0936
MR. JEANS responded that he has not contacted the districts
directly, but he does know that school business officials were
in town a few weeks ago and one of the items they supported was
moving the current reimbursable program to a grant program. He
told the committee that the current system is a reimbursable
system whereby the state reimburses districts for student
transportation services for students who live beyond a mile and
a half from school. A district may determine that the high
school or junior high school students can walk two miles or two
and half miles. Those are changes that could be made at the
local level that would affect how much it would cost for their
program. However, on the statewide level there needs to be a
uniform application to the program, so one and a half miles is
the state standard right now. Mr. Jeans said this legislation
provides a way at the local level to make efficiencies in pupil
transportation.
Number 1012
VICE CHAIR SEATON asked about the differences in hazardous bus
routes that are within four blocks of the schools, have no
sidewalks, and require students to walk on icy highways; some
districts are busing when they determine there is a hazardous
bus route. Does the state reimburse on those hazardous bus
routes?
MR. JEANS responded that the state does reimburse on those
hazardous bus routes at the rate of 50 percent on the cost of
those routes. He said he sees this as a problem at the state
level because the local board gets to establish what is a
hazardous route and the state reimburses 50 percent. In some
cases, the district may be able to use crossing guards instead
of establishing hazardous routes. Those are the things the
districts must look at from a local level that the state cannot
control.
VICE CHAIR SEATON responded that the districts on a local level
could be lobbying for a bike path or some other way to avoid the
hazardous routes. The district would then have the savings
incorporated within the district grants instead of just losing
the money because the district has nothing to reimburse.
MR. JEANS replied that he believes that is an accurate
assumption.
MR. RICE noted for the record that he has contacted the Delta-
Greely School District and at this point they have not weighed
in on their position on HB 259.
VICE CHAIR SEATON added that his office has contacted the Kenai
Peninsula School District, but they have not had enough time to
analyze the numbers yet. He asked if any other school districts
have weighed in on this.
Number 1184
MR. RICE told the committee that he also contact the Matanuska-
Susitna (Mat-Su), Fairbanks, and Anchorage School Districts. In
response to Vice Chair Seaton's question as to their position on
the bill, Mr. Rice said all three districts were very interested
in the bill, but were not willing to go on the record at this
point.
Number 1230
VICE CHAIR SEATON announced for the record that Representative
Kapsner has joined the committee, and that the House Special
Committee on Education does have a quorum.
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER said that Lower Kuskokwim School District
was contacted but no official response has been received.
Number 1250
VICE CHAIR SEATON referred the members to Section 2 in the bill
that refers to nonpublic school student transportation. In that
section it removes the word "department" and replaces it with
the word "district". He asked if the state has areas where the
department provides transportation to public and private schools
that are not in a district and that would still need to receive
transportation from the department. He asked if there will be a
loss of transportation services by this change in language.
MR. JEANS said that this language removes the reference from the
department and replaces it with the district. What is currently
happening under this system is that school districts are
providing transportation for non-public school students when
there is space available and when it is over an existing route.
This would allow districts to continue that practice as the
state moves to a grant program.
VICE CHAIR SEATON asked if this practice is on a space-available
basis. Mr. Jeans said yes. Vice Chair Seaton asked if there
would be any required changes by districts for providing that
public transportation.
MR. JEANS replied that this service is for non-public school
students. For example, the bus goes by a private school
student's house, there is space available on the bus, that child
can get on that bus, the bus goes right by the private school,
and the student can be dropped off at the private school.
VICE CHAIR SEATON clarified that even though there is a change
in the wording, there is no required change by the districts.
Number 1390
MR. RICE asked that the committee take up Version V before the
committee for consideration. He pointed out that the difference
between Version U and Version V is that Version U is a
[proposed] sponsor substitute and Version V is a proposed
committee substitute. Mr. Rice stated that is the only
difference between the two versions of the bill.
Number 1440
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said that he recalled one version of the
bill having language that addressed cost increases into the
future. He commented that Version U of the bill has the number
set in stone forever.
MR. RICE responded that to his knowledge, there never has been
an inflationary increase component in the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA replied that 10 years from now the number
will still be the same as this year.
MR. RICE replied that would be entirely up to the legislature.
Number 1472
MR. JEANS clarified the point that the bill does not allow for
any inflationary adjustment, but the amount of money
appropriated will change from year to year based on the changes
in enrollment. So if a district has more pupils, it will
qualify for a larger grant. What this bill will do is lock in
the student amount. On page two of the fiscal note where the
department has identified estimated FY 03 costs per student,
that would be the amount per student that the district would
qualify for and then as the districts' enrollment increases or
decreases, their grant will increase or decrease from year to
year.
VICE CHAIR SEATON pointed out that this bill does not have any
inflationary amounts built into it, but does allow the districts
some flexibility in how they provide pupil transportation. For
instance, if they have one child at the end of 20-mile road,
they could send a taxi for that student, instead of sending a
bus.
MR. JEANS commented that it is true that the bill allows
districts flexibility. He said it is important to note that the
grant will change from year to year based on how many students
are enrolled in the district.
VICE CHAIR SEATON added that the allocation amount for pupil
transportation per student would remain the same.
Number 1565
MR. JEANS agreed that the amount would remain the same until the
legislature changes it.
REPRESENTATIVE OGG posed a situation in which a district, for
example, Kodiak Island School District, believes that they are
providing pupil transportation as efficiently as possible;
however, the contractor comes in and says insurance costs have
gone up, and fuel costs have gone up, and the actual bid comes
in over what the grant allows based on pupil enrollment. If
Kodiak Island Borough wants to add more money to keep the same
service, will that amount have an impact on the cap that local
governments can contribute to education?
MR. JEANS responded that it will not impact the cap for
education. The reason is that pupil transportation is from a
special revenue fund and districts account for that outside the
operating fund. The cap under the foundation program only
applies to the school-operating fund. So if a district did find
itself in a position where the costs were actually higher than
the grant, the municipality could make an appropriation to the
pupil transportation fund to cover those additional costs.
Number 1658
VICE CHAIR SEATON told the committee an amendment will be
offered for a new section to eliminate the one-and-a-half-mile
distance requirement that is in another section of statute.
That amendment is currently being drafted by Legislative Affairs
Legal Services. He mentioned this because he wants the members
to be aware that amendment will be offered at some point.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked how the amendment would change
statute.
VICE CHAIR SEATON responded that it eliminates the distance
requirement so if the districts decide that they want to change
the requirement to one mile and three-quarters or two miles and
provide ways for students to get there, the districts can change
that distance requirement.
MR. JEANS told the committee that he believes the distance
requirement is not in statute, but in regulation. He said that
if the grant program passes, the department will be repealing
all the regulations dealing with reimbursable expenses.
Number 1719
VICE CHAIR SEATON thanked Mr. Jeans for the information.
Number 1748
TONNIE BARLOW, Member, School Board, Wrangell City School
District, testified on HB 259. She encouraged the committee to
take some time to allow districts to review the bill and
understand the impact of the legislation. Ms. Barlow explained
that it is difficult to understand the effect the legislation
will have on the districts because amendments are being
discussed that they have not had the opportunity to review. She
said because Wrangell is a small district, any amount will
impact them greatly. She asked that time would be provided for
districts to ensure that transportation issues are addressed
adequately. Ms. Barlow said she believes that pupil
transportation should be reimbursed by the state at 100 percent.
Currently, the state approves contracts by districts. Wrangell
has a five-year contract already approved by the department, so
when fiscal cuts are made the district is looking at honoring a
contract that has been committed to with less funding. She said
this will impact student achievement because funds will have to
be taken away from instruction to pay for transportation.
Number 1820
VICE CHAIR SEATON asked Mr. Jeans how existing contracts that
extend over multiple years would be influenced by this change in
law.
MR. JEANS commented that many districts are in the middle of
five-year contracts right now. By using the FY 03 as a base
year, at a minimum the state is covering the existing contracts.
The contracts do have inflationary adjustments built into them,
but he submits that the districts could go back to the
contractors and reopen those negotiations based on the level of
funding available to them. Mr. Jeans said he has already been
contacted by a number of districts that want to reopen their
contracts if the gas tax passes to purchase the fuel for the
contractor. These are issues that will be addressed at the
local level.
Number 1895
SUSAN SCIABBARRASI, Superintendent, Wrangell City School
District, testified on HB 259. She told the committee that
Wrangell, other communities in Southeast, and other areas of
Alaska continue to be hit hard with major economic decline.
This has been devastating to the school districts. Wrangell has
the highest city sales tax in the nation, at 7 percent. She
said this tax allows the community to support the schools to the
cap each year to compensate for flat funding. The city cannot
continue to pay for unfunded mandates, cutting of
transportation, and underfunding.
MS. SCIABBARRASI said that Wrangell has a history of valuing
education, but with the economic decline, current high tax rate,
and major cuts to education, the district will have to cut the
school budget between $700,000 to $900,000 next year. She said
the district is reducing their certified teaching positions by
29 percent, thereby increasing the pupil-teacher ratio (PTR) and
eliminating many elective classes that have proved to enrich the
quality of education. This bill continues that downward spiral,
especially for districts that are already in crisis. Ms.
Sciabbarrasi urged the committee to fully fund pupil
transportation. Research shows that for students to get a
quality education, they must attend school. Decreasing
transportation budgets could cause a decrease in bus routes,
thus providing a reason not to attend school or to attend
sporadically.
Number 1994
VICE CHAIR SEATON clarified any confusion about some comments
that have been made. He said the governor's budget came to the
legislature with only a portion of pupil transportation funding
and it is anticipated that the issue will come forward again
next year. The attempt here is to try to change the system so
that the districts do not get a portion of reimbursement without
having the flexibility of containing their costs. He said that
is the objective of this legislation; it is not just a cutting
measure. It is a way to change the process so that districts
are not faced with short-funding pupil transportation.
Number 2060
REPRESENTATIVE GARA agreed with Vice Chair Seaton. There will
be continuing pressure in the future to figure out a new pupil
transportation formula. That just seems to be a reality. He
encouraged school districts to come up with a proposal that
would meet the governor's concern. The governor's concern is
that by fully funding every school district's pupil
transportation costs, it is unclear if some districts are
spending too much and whether there is any waste in the existing
contracts. There are those that are looking for a funding
mechanism that will try to assure the legislature that contracts
are being negotiated in the most efficient manner possible. He
asked the districts to advise the members of any proposals they
might have in addressing this problem. He said he is not
speaking for anyone else on the committee, but that he just
wants those listening to understand the concern that has been
shared with the members and what this bill is trying to address.
Number 2153
DAVE SPENCE, Director, Planning and Operations, Kenai Peninsula
School District, testified on HB 259. He said he appreciates
the efforts of the committee in considering an equitable way to
address transportation costs. The school district would like to
be a part of the process, but they need time to really
understand what the consequences will be in having a fixed grant
amount to provide pupil transportation. Mr. Spence said he
believes the Kenai Peninsula School District has been quite
competent in providing transportation in an efficient and
economical manner. He pointed out that there are changes that
impact the costs of transportation with increases in insurance,
gasoline, and maintenance costs. There are also other things
that come into play. He pointed out that the district does not
know how the [federal] No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation
will impact the schools. [The district] continues to have a lot
of pressure for remediation, and transportation accompanies that
in the summertime. The district continues to address special
education needs, and there are transportation costs associated
there. Other agencies have a domino effect on how the district
can provide transportation around Kenai.
Number 2218
MR. SPENCE pointed out that what happens in other departments
also affects transportation. For instance, how well the roads
are maintained, hazardous bus routes, and bad weather also
impact the costs of transportation. He said the district would
like to understand what locking in the amount will mean to the
district. Mr. Spence said that like other districts around the
state, their school district has had financial problems that
could be severely impacted by this legislation. The current PTR
has significantly gone up. They have laid off a lot of teachers
and have had to eliminate activities travel. He said they would
like to request some time, consideration, and careful study on
this bill.
Number 2330
VICE CHAIR SEATON thanked Mr. Spence for his testimony and
explained that this is the first committee of referral for this
bill. There will be many more opportunities for the district to
provide their position. He told Mr. Spence that Version V will
be "on line" shortly; however, Version U is the same bill with
the exception of a title change from sponsor substitute to
committee substitute.
Number 2411
MIKE SCHWARTZ testified via teleconference in opposition to HB
259. He explained that he owned the transportation company in
Petersburg for many years and recently sold the business to a
young man who lives there. Currently, Petersburg is getting
$229 per student and Wrangell is getting $449 per student. He
said there is a stranglehold on education that goes beyond his
comprehension.
Number 2453
MR. SCHWARTZ said that the bid in Wrangell took place when his
equipment was five years old. By law, school buses can be no
older than ten years old. So he was able to compete.
Wrangell's contract, on the other hand, had ten-year-old buses
and they had to go out and buy all new buses, which was his
justification for getting $449 per student. Mr. Schwartz said
that in the twenty-five years he was involved in pupil
transportation the districts tried saving money in all sorts of
ways including payment for transportation on a daily basis. He
said he was paid so much per day, per mile, and per route. For
those in the business, there is a total cost required and that
is what it is going to take to run the business. Petersburg is
already in a stranglehold educationally. He said he went to
school in Petersburg, taught school there, and has two children
who are currently teaching there. The cut to education this
year is going to be $500,000. The district will have to cut
teachers and programs, and they are eliminating sports and music
programs. When the contractor comes in next year to bid this
contract, he will have to come in with brand-new equipment. If
the legislature passes this legislation, the contractor will not
be able to buy new buses, but will have to find five-year-old
buses, which will not be easy because everyone will be looking
for the same thing. This is a huge hardship on many
communities.
Number 2560
VICE CHAIR SEATON commented that Mr. Schwartz brings up a good
point about aging equipment.
MR. SCHWARTZ told the committee the first time the districts cut
a hazardous run and a student is killed, the legislature will
look back on this and wonder why this was done. He said this
legislation will hurt a lot of communities. He asked fair it is
that some districts are locked in at $1,200 while others are
locked in at a lower rate.
VICE CHAIR SEATON announced for the record that Chair Gatto has
joined the meeting, but that he himself will continue to chair
the meeting, since Chair Gatto is the sponsor of HB 259.
VICE CHAIR SEATON asked Mr. Jeans about the question of old
equipment and purchase of new equipment, and how that might be
addressed.
Number 2639
MR. JEANS responded that he knew this would come up as an issue.
He told the committee in his experience with contracts, even
when a district has a contract with new buses, he does not see
the contracts going down five years later. He said that once
the contract is signed at a certain level, the costs just keep
going up from that level. He said he understands Mr. Schwartz's
point about Petersburg's dilemma. He pointed out that Annette
Island does it cheapest in the state at under $100 per day.
VICE CHAIR SEATON said that is an issue the committee will be
considering as the legislation goes forward.
Number 2738
STEVE BRADSHAW, Superintendent, Sitka Borough School District,
testified via teleconference on HB 259. He told the committee
he appreciates the intent of the bill and would like to take the
time to see what the impact would be on the district. He said
he appreciates being held harmless this year because like many
districts in the state, Sitka is in the first year of a five-
year contract, so this could have a tremendous impact on the
school district. The governor's proposal for transportation
will cost this district about $150,000, and the district cannot
afford that. He asked that the district be given time to look
the legislation over. He told the committee one concern that
occurred to him is that the grant is based on a per-pupil basis
and that could be very difficult. Currently, the Sitka district
is building in 30 fewer students in the budget than last year,
but that does not mean any bus routes could be cut or that the
cost of transportation would go down. Mr. Bradshaw said his
initial reaction is that it will be tough to base the grants on
a per-student basis. He summarized his comments by asking the
members to give the district more time to provide input.
Number 2809
VICE CHAIR SEATON asked Mr. Bradshaw if he would fax his
thoughts on the bill to Chair Gatto's office.
Number 2845
STEVE KALMES, Director of Transportation, Anchorage School
District, testified via teleconference on HB 259. He reminded
the committee that 98 percent of all students that are injured
on their route to and from school are not school bus riders.
They walk, bike, or are driven by their parents. School bus
transportation is the safest possible way to get kids to and
from school.
MR. KALMES said there is an assumption that there are
inefficiencies in pupil transportation across the state. He
said he does not believe that is the case. In Anchorage they
currently run fewer buses than in 1985, when enrollment was
10,000 students fewer. Costs have increased. A commercial
driver's license is now necessary that has a whole host of
requirements that go along with it, including drug and alcohol
testing, background checks on drivers, a 40-hour driver training
program, and a certified school bus instructor that is required
by the state; all drivers receive first aid and CPR
[cardiopulmonary resuscitation] training. The districts are
also required to do specialized training for special-education
students.
Number 2926
MR. KALMES said there are significant increases in the cost of
equipment and supplies. For example, the cost of a tire has
more than doubled in the last 10 years. The minimum wage for
school bus drivers that is soon coming will be an added expense.
He told the committee they have done things in the Anchorage
School District to control costs. They worked with the
Department of Education and Early Development to consolidate
contracts with [Matanuska-Susitna School District] and
[Fairbanks School District]. Prior to that, the district had no
other bidders on transportation contracts. He said this time
there were six bidders, so the district has been successful in
attracting competition. The district uses larger buses. For
instance, four buses transport the same number of kids that used
to require five, so the district saves operating costs on one
bus. The staff does not like to hear this, but the
transportation department sets the school times to ensure there
is the most efficient system in place. The district increased
the fleet age in the last contract from 10 to 12 years. The
wages for the district's school bus drivers have been frozen,
and the top paid drivers make $.25 more per hour than they did
20 years ago. Mr. Kalmes told the committee the district uses
crossing guards and has eliminated hazardous routes wherever
sidewalks have been built.
TAPE 03-17, SIDE B
Number 2981
MR. KALMES pointed out that the district may start the year with
over 200 students and end the year with over 300. That is an
increase over the course of a year which impacts the number of
routes that operate.
VICE CHAIR SEATON told Mr. Kalmes that the committee appreciates
the efforts districts have made in cost saving efficiencies. He
asked where this bill would differentiate between the governor's
proposal of funding at the 80 percent level, and if there are
some other mechanisms to fund pupil transportation that would
not be as detrimental to districts.
MR. KALMES said the Anchorage School District would be more than
willing to work with other districts and the department to come
up with something. The problem with putting something in place
is that some districts would like to keep the savings; Anchorage
School District just wants to pay the bills. What will happen
is that efficient districts will not be able to find savings to
keep, but the inefficient districts that will find efficiencies
will be rewarded. He volunteered to work with other districts
toward a solution or audit other districts' transportation
systems.
VICE CHAIR SEATON asked Mr. Kalmes to fax any suggestions for a
positive solution to the committee.
Number 2883
CAROL COMEAU, Superintendent, Anchorage School District,
testified on HB 259 and answered questions from the members.
She told the committee the district is very concerned about this
bill and the governor's proposed cuts to pupil transportation.
The district is as efficient as possible based on the large and
growing number of students. Not all the new subdivisions have
safe roads, and there are heavy traffic patterns which are
changing all the time, so the district is required to provide
transportation on those hazardous routes. She pointed out that
Anchorage is the hub for the vast majority of special education
students who have serious medical or behavioral problems.
Number 2826
MS. COMEAU said all of those students who receive education
services receive transportation as part of their IEP [individual
education program], and the district is required to provide that
transportation to them. In some cases, it becomes very
expensive and very individualized. For example, the district
has a contract to provide education for the Alaska State School
for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. Because that is a state
contract, there are a number of students who live in the Mat-Su
area. The Mat-Su does not provide the educational program, so
the Anchorage School District is required by the department to
provide pupil transportation from Mat-Su into Anchorage for that
program. Ms. Comeau said she believes the district is being
penalized in this bill or by the governor's proposed cuts. She
said the district worked very closely with the department two
years ago to become as lean and efficient as possible and to
bring in a new contractor.
Number 2774
MS. COMEAU said they would like to be part of the solution and
asked the committee to look at putting together a group of
people from different parts of the state, where there are
different-sized districts, and different complexities of
transportation. She believes this bill would not allow for any
growth in student population, particularly in the special
education population. There needs to be a factor included that
provides for that complexity of student transportation that the
district must individually provide to those students. The NCLB
is going to be another complicating factor if the district has
to reduce transportation routes for students; that will most
directly impact the lowest socioeconomic-base students, who
oftentimes are the lowest-achieving students. They may or may
not be showing adequate yearly progress in NCLB, and if the
students are not even in school, the district will be penalized
because the district will not have 95 percent of each subgroup
attending school to be tested.
Number 2730
CHAIR GATTO, sponsor of HB 259, told the committee that one of
the solutions proposed by the governor is an enormous percentage
cut in student transportation. If the districts experience a
cut without a resolution in favor of some other method, would
not the district be much worse off?
MS. COMEAU responded that the Anchorage School District is very
concerned about the portion of the bill that only looks at
average daily membership (ADM), rather than some kind of way to
factor in the special education and hazardous routes. No one
wants any child killed or seriously injured because a district
has taken away transportation and made him or her walk on a very
hazardous street. There needs to be a way to factor in some of
those situations beyond just the ADM factor.
CHAIR GATTO replied that since there is only one available pot
of money for pupil transportation, if the legislature factors in
special education and hazardous routes for one district, it must
be factored into all districts. How will the districts be
better off?
MS. COMEAU said that she believes it is essential to look at the
kids that are being transported, and it is more than just
numbers of students. The district is required by federal and
state law to provide transportation for certain numbers of kids,
those [covered by the] Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA). Ms. Comeau said she believes it would not be fair
for the district to take away transportation for other kids
because those children have as much right to safe transportation
to school as the special education kids, who simply have more
protection under federal law.
Number 2652
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked Ms. Comeau to explain how this
legislation does not factor in special education kids.
MS. COMEAU said she will speak to this question but will ask
Steve [Kalmes] to also address the question. She posed a
hypothetical example where five special education students who
have wheelchairs moved into Anchorage. That is the only way the
students can get around. So the district must transport them
with a bus that has a lift. Most of the time these kids do not
live anywhere close to each other, so there is an elaborate
shuttle system that is as efficient as it can be. So the
transportation for five special education students is very
different from the transportation of five non-special education
students that are just added to existing routes.
Number 2580
MR. KALMES told the committee that 40 percent of the district's
buses transport 5 percent of the students. That is the
district's handicapped population. Because of the low density
and the fact that program locations are spread all across the
district, it is more expensive to transport these students.
Many of the kids need additional services and specialized
training because they have medical needs. There are kids that
need short ride times so it reduces the length of time they can
be on the bus. Mr. Kalmes told the committee that the district
cannot transport a medically fragile kid for $300 per year.
Number 2537
CAROL ENZLER, Superintendent, Petersburg City School District,
testified on HB 259. She commented that as she was listening to
Carol Comeau's testimony on special education transportation,
she noted that it is likely that Anchorage has more than its
fair share of special education students. One thing that was
not mentioned is that many of those students must be transported
door to door. These students are not required to go to a main
pickup location, as other students are required to do. Ms.
Enzler asked the committee to give the districts an opportunity
to review the bill to determine what impact it might have. She
said it does not look as though it will be a great impact for
Petersburg next year, but the district needs to have a chance to
look at what it will do in the future. She told the committee
she will fax the members the district's comments on the impact
of the bill.
Number 2477
VICE CHAIR SEATON announced that the committee plans on holding
the bill and asked all the districts to send suggestions on ways
of improving this bill or any other ideas in addressing this
issue.
Number 2442
REPRESENTATIVE OGG said that he will be leaving to attend
another meeting, but will listen to the testimony later on Gavel
to Gavel.
Number 2413
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER mentioned that Version V is not available
on line yet, but that Chair Gatto's office could provide copies
to those that request it.
VICE CHAIR SEATON agreed with Representative Kapsner and
announced that any one wishing to have a copy of Version V of HB
259 should contract Chair Gatto's office.
Number 2362
JANELL PRIVETT, President, School Board, Wrangell City School
District, testified on HB 259 and answered questions from the
committee. She said communities have not had an opportunity to
look at the bill to determine the intentions and impact it may
have. She encouraged the members to talk with the contractors
who provide busing for the districts. Mr. Jeans can give the
members their names. She said she believes it is very important
to invite them to the table. She said they are experiencing the
same kinds of increases in costs that all private businesses
face with increased liability and insurance costs. She pointed
out that when Wrangell and Petersburg numbers are being quoted,
it is important to keep in mind that Wrangell's contract is new
this year and Petersburg has no idea what its contract will look
like next year. She asked that the legislators remember their
responsibility under the state constitution to ensure that
Alaska's children have an opportunity for an adequate education.
The kids will not be at school without appropriate busing.
Number 2240
MS. PRIVETT told the committee that she cannot support any bill
the brings more reductions to her community when the community
is demanding excellence in education. The community is paying
for that as best they can. Wrangell has the highest sales tax
in the state of Alaska; they contribute the largest amount
possible to education; they are responsible in funding
education; however, they cannot sustain what the legislature
keeps reducing in a fair and equitable manner. This year alone,
29 percent of their staff will be terminated. She said there
are many great ideas, but those ideas cost more and more money.
Number 2210
MS. PRIVETT reminded the members that they are walking in the
same footsteps as many other legislators, and are continuing to
do the same things and will continue to fail as a legislature.
She told the committee they are not bringing forth a responsible
fiscal plan, or a plan that has a future. One of the great
governor's of this state made a statement and she said she
believed he was wiser than all of us understood at the time:
Governor Hickel said that "when there is no vision, there is no
hope, and there is no future, no agenda for Alaska, if your only
ideology or only philosophy, if your only cause is to cut the
budget." She asked the committee to look toward developing a
fiscal plan. One positive note in the bill is the inflation
proofing of bus driver's salaries. She asked that the committee
look to inflation proofing costs of education as well.
Number 2134
VICE CHAIR SEATON asked her to please contact Chair Gatto's
office to get a copy of Version V of the bill.
CHAIR GATTO commented that some districts are gaining
enrollment, some districts are losing enrollment, and some
districts' enrollment is steady, but what is noteworthy is that
in every single one of those cases the districts are asking the
legislature to increase pupil transportation. This is something
that does not seem possible for the legislature to do when the
governor is suggesting that there be reductions. If the
legislature responds to only those districts that are losing
students, as in Wrangell, and ignores those that are gaining
students and those that are staying steady in enrollment, how is
that fair to anyone?
Number 2086
MS. PRIVETT suggested that the committee sit down with the
providers and find out why there is so much inconsistency. She
said she believes that will provide some of the answers. The
Anchorage School District superintendent spoke eloquently on the
different services the districts are required to provide, Ms.
Privett said. In the community of Wrangell there is only one
bus provider. There will not be competition.
Number 2058
CHAIR GATTO said this is far from the question he'd asked.
MS. PRIVETT pointed out that Wrangell's current busing contract
is less than that of the previous five years. Wrangell has also
reduced their bus routes.
CHAIR GATTO asked how it is fair to take money away from
districts that are gaining enrollment or those whose enrollment
is the same and give it to districts that are losing enrollment.
How can it not be fair to treat everyone the same by saying a
district will get a certain amount of money for each student?
Is not that a fair way to do it?
MS. PRIVETT said she believes Chair Gatto is putting her in an
unfair position. She said if she had adequate information to
answer that question, she would, but she can only speak to her
district's position. Those questions should be asked of each
district, but she will be happy to provide the answer on behalf
of her own district. There are people within the Department of
Education and Early Development, specifically, Eddie Jeans, who
should be able to answer that question for Chair Gatto.
Number 1986
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER told Ms. Privett that Version V of the
bill does not provide for inflation proofing of bus drivers
salaries.
Number 1958
VICE CHAIR SEATON agreed with Representative Kapsner's comment.
He asked Ms. Privett to get a copy of Version U or V from Chair
Gatto's office.
Number 1910
DEBBIE OSSIANDER, President, Association of Alaska School
Boards, testified and answered questions from the committee.
She told the committee the association consists of school board
members from across Alaska and they are extremely concerned
about the current discussions going on a number of fronts with
respect to education. Districts are really feeling the pinch,
and the talk of reductions in pupil transportation and other
areas is extremely alarming.
MS. OSSIANDER said there were four areas of discussion she
wanted to bring up on this bill. First, school boards are
concerned about linking payments to 2003 standards if there is
no inflationary index in the bill. As the costs to contractors
go up, the districts have to meet those costs. She said the
second item of concern is the lack of regard for changed or
hazardous conditions, or special student populations. Third,
she said she was concerned with the administration's testimony
[implying] that school boards could have children walk longer
than one and half miles and that it would be perfectly safe and
acceptable thing to ask communities to do. Fourth, there is
also concern that federal mandates require that schools have a
95 percent attendance or the school will be placed in a failing
category. How that will factor in with new discussions on
tightening pupil transportation or not fully funding pupil
transportation is a serious question.
Number 1796
MS. OSSIANDER expressed the belief from the members of the
association that school boards and school districts have been
working extremely hard to contain their costs in pupil
transportation. She said she is amazed that there is the belief
by some that there would be some willingness by private
contractors to open up a contract and renegotiate the terms when
there is a reversal in revenues from the public entity that
entered into the contract. Ms. Ossiander concluded her remarks
by saying pupil transportation funding affects a majority of
districts in the state of Alaska profoundly. If the funding
does not meet the fixed contract costs, then the funds will have
to come from somewhere. The passion the members are hearing in
testimony reflects districts' deep concern that these funds will
come from the classroom. She urged the committee to tread
carefully and told the committee the association believes in
fully funding transportation costs according to need.
Number 1728
CHAIR GATTO commented that he and Ms. Ossiander have been on the
same side for a lot of years, and he wanted her to know that
they are still on the same side. He said his biggest concern is
the $10.7 million reduction in pupil transportation. He said he
thinks that if these reductions were to go ahead, the districts
would wonder how the legislature could have let this happen. He
said what he is trying to do with this bill is to reverse the
$10.7 million in a way that is acceptable to the governor's
office and to the legislature. This may be a way to do that.
It does put the responsibility back on the districts. That is
what he has been asked to do by districts, instead of their
making efficiencies for which the district gets no benefit,
because every time a district makes an efficiency, the money
goes back into the general fund. This is a way that if
efficiencies can be found, the district can keep the money
saved.
CHAIR GATTO told Ms. Ossiander this bill is a result of
conversations he has had with school districts who said if they
were given a fixed amount of money, they know where they could
make some efficiencies and would apply them if the money were
the districts' to keep. That is the reason for the bill. It is
not simply a desire to cut into education, but rather an effort
to restore education funding. Chair Gatto said he knows that
the $10.7 million will come right out of the classroom and he
does not believe there is room to take it out of the classroom.
He told Ms. Ossiander that he is trying his best to keep the
money in the classroom. It appears this bill might be on the
right track. He does not have a different solution unless Ms.
Ossiander might have one. He said if the districts face this
big a cut, he knows where it will be coming from, and that is
why he is here trying to resolve this problem. He said it is an
imperfect system and imperfect people are dealing with it. He
does not know where to get the funds for fully funding student
transportation. He said he will be listening to Ms. Ossiander's
comments because he knows she has been involved in student
education for many years.
Number 1566
MS. OSSIANDER expressed her thanks for Chair Gatto's intent in
putting forth this bill because she knows the concern and care
he has about this issue. She said if she had to decide between
the two choices, she would go with Chair Gatto's. She does not
have the understanding yet that she must step away from what she
believes is right, and that is fully funding the costs for pupil
transportation. If it is necessary to go with HB 259, there are
some ways the bill could be improved. One thing might be to get
people from various-sized districts to serve as auditors or a
specific group of experts that could suggest some changes that
would work. Another thing that would help is if there were a
little bit of flexibility from ADM to accord for special
circumstances such as special education populations or hazardous
conditions that have cropped up. Ms. Ossiander said she hopes
her suggestions help.
CHAIR GATTO replied that her suggestions do help. However,
every time there is a suggestion, there is a new problem
associated with it. He reiterated that the amount of money that
will be appropriated is fixed and any kind of flexibility from
ADM will come from within the districts. The group of experts'
idea is wonderful. Chair Gatto said he believes Ms. Ossiander
is well positioned to come up with one, two, or three people who
would have good input. He said he needs the information pretty
quickly, and he said he is more than willing to make changes to
the bill if it would result in an improvement. Any changes that
suggest the legislature increase the amount of money above the
$10.7 million will have to have a method to produce those funds.
If there can be a system developed to implement the idea, that
would be really welcome. Chair Gatto explained that it needs to
be done somewhat quickly and that suggestions are welcome,
whether they are from experts or not. CHAIR GATTO said
currently the administration is cooperating, but if that is
lost, he said he is fearful of what will happen. He said he
hopes to get the bill to where it is acceptable and pass it on.
It may not make it all the way, but at least the committee did
the best they could at the time.
Number 1389
MS. OSSIANDER said she would send Chair Gatto a couple of names
of people who are transportation folks.
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER said the House is not in lockstep on this
issue. She said she does not believe this is the best that can
be done with what the state has. She believes there is a lot
more money than what is being said. Just because the governor
did not want to fulfill his promises on education does not mean
she does not want to fulfill her promises. Representative
Kapsner said she does not believe the legislature is beholden to
the governor and it is not necessary to be in lockstep with him.
She said in the previous eight years the legislature was not arm
in arm with the governor's office, so there is no need to be
now. The legislature is an independent body, and she said she
believes members should be thinking for themselves. This is not
a route she wants to take. Representative Kapsner reiterated
that the legislature is not in 100 percent agreement on this
issue.
Number 1313
VICE CHAIR SEATON asked for clarification of Representative
Kapsner's comments. He asked if she has problems with specific
parts of the bill or just is in favor of full funding of pupil
transportation.
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER responded that the school districts are
not bound legally to provide student transportation, but the
state is. She asked Mr. Jeans if her assumption is correct.
MR. JEANS replied that the state is not required by law to
provide pupil transportation.
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER commented that she worries when the
legislature saddles school districts with having to turn their
backs on special-needs kids or having a first grader walking
over a mile and a half to meet the bus. She said that thought
makes her shudder. The education community is the last place
she believes the legislature should be looking for cuts.
Number 1217
JOHN STEINER, Member, Anchorage School Board, testified on HB
259 and answered questions from the committee. He told the
committee that the transportation costs are not discretionary
for the school districts. They are driven by contracts,
competition for drivers, route distances, geographic extent and
scope of the district, student residents' density within the
district, weather and climate within the district, fuel costs,
road and traffic conditions, hazardous routes, community growth
patterns, and the degree of federally protected special
education students. He pointed out that none of the factors he
mentioned are related to ADM.
Number 1130
MR. STEINER said he very much appreciates Chair Gatto's efforts
to make some sense of the fact that whether the numbers are
driving the amount of transportation dollars when districts are
growing or shrinking, it is an imperfect or flawed solution.
For example, if there is a compact community with relatively
mild weather and no heavy traffic highways that make hazardous
routes, they may need to transport virtually none of their
children, since they may all be within walking distance.
However, for a community that is geographically widespread with
a lot of highways, such as Anchorage and Mat-Su and Kenai, there
will be a very different picture. Within that the question is
not how many students are in the district, but how many will
need transportation. In one dense neighborhood in Anchorage it
may be that virtually all the children walk to school. In
another, it may be that all of them have to ride because of the
highway conditions around the school and the distance from where
the students live. If 100 students are added for a
redevelopment in a community that is close to a school, there is
no additional cost for transportation. If it is a new
subdivision that is far away from a school, those children may
require an entirely new bus route, which will be substantially
more expensive for the school district than if the children live
next to the school. All of this suggests that in order to have
a fair and workable solution it will be necessary to look at
factors other than ADM.
Number 1015
MR. STEINER told the committee that his fundamental concern is
that the 20 percent cut is not possible. It is a flawed
situation, particularly when a large portion of the cost is in a
district where transportation is very efficient. To put a cap
on all those issues mentioned earlier, including changes in
growth patterns and special education, does make it come out of
the classroom because there is nowhere else to take it.
Number 0940
VICE CHAIR SEATON told Mr. Steiner that he should contact Chair
Gatto's office for a copy of the bill and the fiscal note. He
said the idea of this bill is that most of the factors Mr.
Steiner mentioned are taken into account by going to last year's
2003 costs to the districts. So whether a district is rural or
not, the attempt was made to look at its actual costs right now.
He said the figures in the fiscal note will show a vast
difference in the cost of pupil transportation from district to
district. The attempt is to use that as baseline data and then
only look at the changes to ADM. The legislature will need Mr.
Steiner's input on how the legislature might address other
factors that need to be considered. Part of the hope is that if
schools are being built along highways, the district will be
lobbying very hard with the boroughs and municipalities for
adequate bike paths or adequate ways of accessing those schools
so that they are not in hazardous conditions.
Number 0748
CHAIR GATTO said the members are familiar with the funding
formula and many of the items he mentioned are included in that.
He said he can only imagine if the legislature tried to develop
a formula that included densities, fuel costs, traffic patterns
and routes, community growth, and locations for special
education students, all of which would change the very next
year, which would mean more adjustments. It would be dynamite.
Number 0570
CHAIR GATTO reminded Mr. Steiner that Mr. Jeans said that pupil
transportation is permissive. It is conceivable that everyone
in the House and Senate will agree to restore the $10.7 million
in funding, and the governor has the ability to cut that. He
said he is not sure that the governor will not because he is
looking for a CBR [Constitutional Budget Reserve] draw limited
to $395 million; if the legislature ends up above that figure,
he will be looking for places to cut the budget.
CHAIR GATTO said that the only thing he would like to do is make
it [less] difficult for the districts to at least be able to
depend upon a certain amount of money. The districts do well
with predictable numbers and knowing the student enrollment
gives a predictable number for student transportation. Chair
Gatto said he knows the costs are going up and believes all the
members know that, but he does not want to see money coming out
of the classroom to fund pupil transportation. If there is a
cut, that is the only place he knows of where it will come from.
He said the population in the Bush is stable to slightly
growing; in Southeast it is shrinking; and in Anchorage and Mat-
Su it is slightly growing, some areas more than others. Those
are trends that may not continue, but may reverse; however, he
said he is trying to look at a way to get this written in stone
in a way that will help districts with predictable amounts of
money. That is his goal.
CHAIR GATTO said he does not know how to make a formula taking
into account all the things Mr. Steiner mentioned. Even if he
did come up with a formula, it would probably be changed over
and over again each year, trying to make it correct, and it
would never get there.
Number 0515
MR. STEINER responded that he fully respects those concerns and
considerations. He told the members that he has a copy of the
fiscal note and sees the various amounts that are spent in
different districts. The current fiscal year does consider some
of those factors already. Some of those factors do change from
year to year, as Chair Gatto had mentioned. The changes in
growth patterns and where new highways are built change where
hazardous routes are located, as Vice Chair Seaton had
mentioned. He said his concern in using an ADM, with no
adjustment factors that allow for an efficient district to have
a way to address those cost increases, is that the funds will
wind up coming directly out of the classroom. There may be
other districts where there are efficiencies that could be
gained, but he said he does not believe those savings should
stay in the school district. There should be some system that
requires districts to be efficient and for those funds to be
used to help those other districts that are already efficient,
if that is the case.
Number 0353
MR. STEINER shared the concern that the governor may simply
"line item veto" pupil transportation. However, if the
legislature has gone to the public, has carefully looked at what
has been touted as a cost-plus financing system, and has
determined that although there may be some inefficiencies, the
vast majorities of these monies are being spent extremely
efficiently, the governor would listen if the legislature told
the governor that there is no way to get this reduction from the
program because of the extreme importance of student safety and
the fact that the only place reductions can come is from the
classroom.
Number 0261
CARL ROSE, Executive Director, Association of Alaska School
Boards, testified on HB 259 and answered questions from the
members. He told the committee that he has been listening very
carefully to the testimony this morning and in the Senate
Finance Committee last evening, as well as the discussion that
took place in the House with regard to the operating budget. He
told the committee that these are the challenges of the times.
Much of what the committee has heard today is a result of
frustration, and people clinging to principle and wanting to be
treated fairly. On the other hand, the state is facing serious
economic and political challenges.
MR. ROSE said he comes to the committee today, as he is looking
at this budget and trying to come up with a plan that addresses
districts' needs, in part, the $10.7 million, and that presents
"us" with one opportunity. Things start to look bleak when
looking at the next fiscal year and on down the road. He said
he is very concerned and alarmed. The state is operating from a
point of scarcity right now and looking to squeeze every area.
He told the committee he testified last evening and much of the
focus was on economic development [oil and gas in Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge] that is anticipated in 10 years. So
if looking at the future in 10 years, that says that the sixth
graders today will be the [people with bachelor's degrees] 10
years from now. If Alaska is going to be developed, education
is going to be an important element from [kindergarten] through
university. The best possible education that the state can
provide in its schools is going to be limited by access, so that
is why transportation is so important.
Number 0052
MR. ROSE said he lends his support in saying that this is an
issue that needs to be addressed. "We" are trying to look at
what the short-term benefit might be and the long-term impact.
He said he is hearing that the districts would like the
committee to move slowly. However, Mr. Rose said that he feels
urgency, that there needs to be something done, and that it is
important not to sit back and wait. He commended the committee
and the sponsor for putting this bill forward. The bill will
not be settled in this committee; it has to go through the
entire House, the committee process in the Senate, and the
Senate. This bill needs to get moving. No one wants to
compromise. The governor has many options available to him; he
not only has the line-item-veto authority, but he can reduce the
appropriations. That is not something districts have
experienced in the last eight years.
TAPE 03-18, SIDE A
Number 0033
MR. ROSE said in the past the districts have had a governor who
was willing to add money to the budget; therefore, the districts
were fearless of any veto of additional funds. This is a
different set of circumstances today. He told the committee he
wants to lend his support to this legislation. He thanked the
committee and the sponsor for bringing this issue forward, for
looking for solutions, and said he knows there will be numerous
opportunities for districts to bring concerns to the
legislature. He said he really appreciates the sponsor's
efforts in restoring the $10.7 million in the short term. Mr.
Rose told the committee he is really concerned about what the
budget battle will be next year and in subsequent years. The
state has a lot of work to do. He said he hopes the Special
Committee on Ways and Means will come up with some brighter
outlook, as Janell Privett from Wrangell had mentioned earlier.
There needs to be some kind of fiscal plan that gives everyone
some hope. In the short term, however, everyone is compelled to
look at the realities and challenged of the times. Mr. Rose
summarized his comments by saying that he supports the
committee's efforts, but that there is a sense of urgency and
there is a need to get moving.
Number 0132
VICE CHAIR SEATON agreed that this committee has the same sense
of urgency that Mr. Rose expressed. The legislature is working
on the budget and trying to restore funds and identify where
those monies will come from. He said there are a number of
different issues that members are putting forward to try to
identify revenues that can pay for these things. Vice Chair
Seaton applauded the sponsor for coming forward to try to take
the pupil transportation off the table as a major item of budget
cutting because the members have seen the priorities listed by
the governor. Vice Chair Seaton said the legislature should not
ignore those priorities, because the governor has the ultimate
authority and unless the legislature addresses those in some
way, it is possible transportation will be cut.
Number 0256
CHAIR GATTO agreed with the comments made to the committee.
There is the short-term and long term view; the long-term which
is about ten years off. He said he is currently working on some
way that will do something for education and that will enhance
the revenue stream for education. It is hard to do. There has
to be support from the House, the Senate, the governor, and
sometimes the public. In the short term the legislature has to
deal with this budget now. It does not matter that in two,
three, five, or ten years the state will be better off.
Something has to be done today with the budget that is before
the legislature. That is why this conversation is happening
now. What does the legislature do now? It is important to
restore funds to education, and everyone is in agreement [on
that]. How does legislature make that happen? Where does the
money come from? Those are the questions that need to be
answered. [HB 259 was held over.]
Number 0484
CHAIR GATTO announced that the following all deal with the same
issue: 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."; HOUSE BILL NO.
220, "An Act relating to the base student allocation used in the
formula for state funding of public education; and providing for
an effective date."; HOUSE BILL NO. 222, "An Act requiring an
annual inflation adjustment of the base student allocation used
in the formula for state funding of public education; and
providing for an effective date."; and HOUSE BILL NO. 233, "An
Act relating to the base student allocation used in the formula
for state funding of public education; and providing for an
effective date." A subcommittee will look at all of these bills
that deal with money for education funding and will bring one
bill back to the full committee to deal with. That subcommittee
will be composed of Representative Seaton, chair; Representative
Wilson; and Representative Gara. Chair Gatto said that he hopes
the funding formula can get an increase in funds. He said the
members are concerned about kids and education and want a
foundation formula bill to move though the process quickly
before the legislative session is over. He hopes the
subcommittee will come back to the full committee at the next
meeting with a bill to address the formula. [End of discussion
of HB 26, HB 220, HB 222, and HB 233, all of which were sent to
a subcommittee.]
CHAIR GATTO briefly returned attention to HOUSE BILL NO. 259,
"An Act relating to public school transportation, and to the
minimum wages for school bus drivers; and providing for an
effective date." He said that he hopes to have changes to HB
259 after consulting with some of the committee members and
individuals whom Ms. Ossiander said would assist in making
revisions to the bill. [HB 259 was held over.]
ADJOURNMENT
Number 0583
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Education meeting was adjourned at 8:54
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|