Legislature(2025 - 2026)ADAMS 519
05/15/2025 10:00 AM House FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB90 | |
| HB28 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 90 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 156 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 28 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
May 15, 2025
10:15 a.m.
10:15:08 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Foster called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 10:15 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Neal Foster, Co-Chair
Representative Andy Josephson, Co-Chair
Representative Calvin Schrage, Co-Chair
Representative Jamie Allard
Representative Jeremy Bynum
Representative Alyse Galvin
Representative Sara Hannan
Representative Nellie Unangiq Jimmie
Representative DeLena Johnson
Representative Will Stapp
Representative Frank Tomaszewski
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Ted Eischeid, Sponsor; Meredith Trainor,
Staff, Representative Ted Eischeid; Representative Andi
Story, Sponsor.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Kerry Thomas, Acting Executive Director, Alaska Commission
on Post Secondary Education, Department of Education and
Early Development.
SUMMARY
HB 28 TEACHER/STATE EMPLOYEE STUDENT LOAN PRGRM
CSHB 28(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with
two "do pass" recommendations, two "do not pass"
recommendations, two "no recommendation"
recommendations, and four "amend" recommendations
and with one previously published fiscal impact
note: FN1 (EED).
HB 90 FINANCIAL LITERACY PROGRAM IN SCHOOLS
HB 90 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Foster reviewed the meeting agenda.
HOUSE BILL NO. 90
"An Act establishing a financial literacy education
program for public schools; and providing for an
effective date."
10:16:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TED EISCHEID, SPONSOR, thanked the committee
for hearing the bill creating financial literacy
requirements for high school graduation. The bill required
school districts to create a financial literacy program. He
clarified that it was not necessarily a standalone course.
10:17:19 AM
MEREDITH TRAINOR, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE TED EISCHEID, did
not have any remarks at the time.
Representative Johnson thought back to her high school
days. She was not necessarily opposed to the idea, but she
wondered why a new requirement was needed. She did not want
to get into piece meal-ing 100 different programs that
was part of general education for schools.
Representative Eischeid replied that as they looked at
different education priorities in the state, for example,
the Alaska Reads Act by the governor. He felt that it came
down to equity. If they were important skills for
individuals, everyone should have it.
Representative Johnson stated it did not get to the point
of why they should have a separate requirement.
10:22:50 AM
Representative Eischeid clarified that the bill did not
require a standalone course; it could be integrated into
another lesson. There were many people who could calculate
but they did not necessarily have financial literacy. He
knew many people who had math skills but had not managed
their financial lives well.
Representative Johnson asked about the reason for the
legislation.
Representative Eischeid answered that if a person knew how
to manage their money, they might be more successful in
society. He remarked that the average credit card debt in
Alaska was over $8,000, so with the education, he thought
people would take action to avoid those kinds of financial
pitfalls. When he had been empowered with the skills and
knowledge he usually took appropriate actions.
10:26:09 AM
Representative Tomaszewski liked the bill. He shared that
he had been required to take an economics course. He did
not want to take the class when he had been told he was
required to; however, it ended up being his favorite and
memorable class. He was happy to have taken the class and
thought perhaps it was why he had been self-employed in his
career.
Representative Eischeid replied that the Anchorage School
District provided the program for freshman and it was up to
the school district how to deliver financial literacy. The
equivalent of half a course over four years.
Representative Tomaszewski did not want to put so much
burden on school districts to have to do it annually.
10:29:35 AM
Representative Hannan asked how many districts in Alaska
already required a financial class for graduation.
Representative Eischeid replied that he did not know.
Representative Hannan clarified she thought it was
overreach to tell a district it had to teach financial
literacy. Her concern was having it be a requirement to
graduate.
10:31:54 AM
Representative Eischeid clarified that he had stated there
were financial literacy issues in Anchorage and Fairbanks,
and rural districts that may or may not have the ability to
implement.
Representative Hannan stated that he kept saying to the
amount practicable.
Representative Eischeid stated that kids who had
transferred were not subject to the requirement.
Representative Hannan thought it was an unfunded mandate on
school districts.
10:36:19 AM
Co-Chair Foster noted he would set an amendment deadline
for Friday at 5:00 p.m.
Representative Allard thanked her colleague from Juneau who
was an expert as she had been a teacher for many years. She
had addressed her concerns.
Representative Eischeid answered that AML was not
supportive of the bill, but other entities had supported
it. He felt that one would assume with math education that
people would understand financial literacy, but it was not
the case.
Ms. Trainor spoke to the fiscal note from the Department of
Education and Early Development (DEED) with a cost of
$76,000.
10:44:12 AM
Representative Allard thought everyone should be treated
the same and standards should be the same across the state.
Representative Bynum asked Co-Chair Foster to repeat the
amendment deadline.
Co-Chair Foster replied that the deadline was Friday, May
16 at 5:00 p.m.
Representative Bynum believed the topic was particularly
important and he thought kids needed a better idea on what
it meant to balance a checkbook and other issues.
10:48:39 AM
Representative Eischeid clarified there was nothing in the
bill that talked about checkbooks. He believed financial
literacy was a priority and putting it in a bill reflected
that.
Ms. Trainor added that the office took a look at
administrative code and the statute question.
10:51:39 AM
Representative Bynum wanted more elaboration on the issues
brought up by Representative Hannan about how to make a
school district comply.
Representative Eischeid stated he had been an educator for
25 years. He stated that change was hard. In each of the
situations he had become a better teacher because it had
forced him to change. He believed sometimes school
districts should be pushed if it was important.
10:55:36 AM
Representative Bynum stated his other concern related to
chapter 30, which gave direction to school districts about
how to apply the program.
Representative Eischeid deferred to Legislative Legal
Services.
Representative Stapp did not think the bill went far
enough. He thought it should be a three credit requirement.
11:00:37 AM
Representative Eischeid appreciated the comments. He
respected the sensitivity from other member comments and
his goal was to find a balance to get the bill forward.
Representative Stapp heard a lot about unfunded mandates,
and he thought it depended on the topic how people seemed
to feel.
Representative Eischeid stated that the legislature funded
schools and the bill would be a mandate; therefore, he
viewed it to be a funded mandate.
11:03:54 AM
Representative Jimmie was a little worried about the idea.
She stated the idea was relevant and she appreciated the
bill because she wanted children to succeed. She asked if
there was a way to make the bill requirement not impact a
student's grades.
Representative Eischeid stated that the bill specified the
topic should be taught, but he did not really know how to
answer the question pertaining to grades.
11:06:20 AM
Co-Chair Josephson asked if it was possible to do the class
requirement in a couple of weeks.
Representative Eischeid replied that he believed that the
requirement could be completed in an intensive.
Co-Chair Josephson found the number ludicrous, and stressed
that there was some frustration about the cost of the
program.
Representative Eischeid felt that there was no way to make
all parties happy.
Representative Tomaszewski stressed that the state was
supposed to be teaching kids to read. He outlined all the
aspects of participating as an adult in the economy, such
as opening bank accounts, holding an identification card,
and applying for loans.
11:12:48 AM
Representative Bynum thought that it would be an additional
burden on school districts to implement this requirement.
He asked about the reasoning for the department's
involvement in the proposal.
Representative Eischeid thought accountability was
essential to the success of the program.
Representative Bynum asked about any other items, besides
the Alaska Reads Act, with the same obligation of
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED).
Representative Eischeid was not aware of anything. He
deferred to Ms. Trainor.
Ms. Trainor asked for a repeat of the question.
Representative Bynum complied. He asked outside of the
Reads Act whether there were any other programs required to
be overseen by DEED.
Ms. Trainor answered that what was in the bill was a middle
ground between including it in AAC and statute.
11:18:46 AM
Representative Hannan addressed comments by other committee
members. She was consistent on education policies where
something was mandated for graduation. Her primary
objection to the bill was not about the content but about
mandating a specific requirement to graduate. She did not
think it was the legislature's role.
11:21:46 AM
Representative Johnson stated her concerns were about the
specifics of what would be taught in the class. She
remarked about the possibility of influencing a mindset.
She personally felt that teaching about managing debt took
on a social position.
Co-Chair Foster reiterated the amendment deadline.
Representative Eischeid remarked on the robust discussion.
He asked people to look at the bill again and explained
that it was not a standalone course. The bill was an effort
to teach about living within a person's means.
HB 90 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
11:25:47 AM
AT EASE
11:29:57 AM
RECONVENED
HOUSE BILL NO. 28
"An Act establishing a student loan repayment pilot
program; and providing for an effective date."
11:30:02 AM
Co-Chair Foster noted there was a meeting at noon so there
would be a hard stop then.
Co-Chair Foster noted the committee had heard public
testimony and reviewed the fiscal notes. The committee
would consider amendments to the bill. He asked for a brief
recap of the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE ANDI STORY, SPONSOR, relayed that the bill
was a student loan repayment program.
Representative Bynum thought there were some structural
issues with the bill. He did not want to hijack the bill
and make it his own so he had not offered any amendments.
11:34:31 AM
AT EASE
11:37:41 AM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Foster moved to the amendment process.
Representative Hannan MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1, 34-
LS0303\A.4 (Bergerud, 4/14/25) (copy on file):
Page 1, lines 8 - 9:
Delete "not later than October 31, 2025"
Insert "by a deadline established by the commission"
Page 3, lines 7 - 8:
Delete "December 31, 2025, December 31, 2026, and
December 31, 2027"
Insert "December 31, 2026, December 31, 2027, and
December 31, 2028"
Page 3, line 12:
Delete "2027"
Insert "2028"
Page 3, line 14:
Delete "2028"
Insert "2029"
Co-Chair Foster OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Hannan explained the amendment. She had
talked with the sponsor about the amendment. She MOVED to
ADOPT conceptual Amendment 1 to Amendment 1 that would
change the date on line 11 of the amendment from 2028 to
2029.
Representative Stapp WITHDREW the OBJECTION.
There being NO OBJECTION, conceptual Amendment 1 to
Amendment 1 was ADOPTED.
Representative Hannan spoke to the underlying amendment.
Representative Story appreciated the adjustments to the
date, and wanted to verify the conceptual amendment date.
11:40:52 AM
AT EASE
11:41:50 AM
RECONVENED
Representative Stapp WITHDREW the OBJECTION to Amendment 1
as amended.
There being NO OBJECTION, Amendment 1 was ADOPTED as
AMENDED.
Representative Stapp MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2, 34-
LS0303\A.5 (Bergerud, 5/6/25) (copy on file):
Page 1, line 11:
Delete "and"
Insert ", has completed a postsecondary degree or
certificate program, and has an outstanding student
loan as described in 26 U.S.C. 108(f)(2) incurred by
the person for the degree or certificate program."
Page 1, line 12, through page 2, line 6:
Delete all material.
Co-Chair Josephson OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Stapp explained the amendment.
Representative Story did not support the amendment, because
it changed the intent of the bill.
11:44:57 AM
Co-Chair Schrage stated that his concern with the bill as
structured, and his concern about the amendment pertained
to the fiscal impact.
Representative Stapp stated the grants were capped in the
bill, and that it did not have an impact on the financial
aspect.
Representative Story thought it could be another student
loan repayment.
Co-Chair Josephson MAINTAINED the OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Allard, Stapp, Johnson, Bynum, Tomaszewski,
Schrage
OPPOSED: Galvin, Jimmie, Hannan, Josephson, Foster
The MOTION PASSED (6/5). There being NO OBJECTION,
Amendment 2 was ADOPTED.
Representative Stapp WITHDREW Amendments 3 through 6
(copies on file).
11:48:01 AM
Representative Stapp MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 7, 34-
LS0303\A.11 (Bergerud, 5/7/25) (copy on file):
Page 2, line 13:
Delete "sec. 2"
Insert "sec. 3"
Page 3, following line 4:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 2. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska
is amended by adding a new section to read:
STUDENT LOAN REPAYMENT PILOT PROGRAM GRANT REPAYMENT.
The Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education shall
require a person who received a grant under the
student loan repayment pilot program, enacted by sec.
1 of this Act, to repay the grant to the commission if
the grant recipient is no longer employed as a full-
time employee of the state or as a full-time
certificated teacher in a public school within three
years after receiving the grant. The obligation to
repay a grant under this section does not apply to a
grant recipient who is not employed as a full-time
employee of the state or as a full-time certificated
teacher in a public school because the recipient has
died or has become totally disabled as certified by a
physician."
Page 3, line 14:
Delete "Sections 1 and 2"
Insert "Sections 1 and 3"
Co-Chair Josephson OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Stapp explained the amendment.
Representative Story opposed the amendment, and thought it
diluted the incentive.
11:50:32 AM
Representative Bynum wondered what would occur when a
worker did not meet their obligation.
Representative Story clarified that a student would not get
the money until after one year.
KERRY THOMAS, ACTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA COMMISSION
ON POST SECONDARY EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND
EARLY DEVELOPMENT (via teleconference), stated that a
participant would only receive the yearly payment after a
completion of a year of service.
11:53:52 AM
Representative Stapp clarified that it was how the
underlying bill read. The amendment specified that if a
person worked for a year there were conditions continue to
work for the state for three years. If the person left they
had to repay the amount to ACPE.
Representative Bynum asked what the mechanism was for
repayment if the amendment passed.
Representative Stapp stated it did not specify the
mechanics.
Representative Story referenced a handout from ACPE [dated
May 15, 2025] (copy on file), which outlined many different
programs.
11:56:43 AM
Representative Bynum stated that from his experience seeing
incentive programs, most required a staying requirement.
Representative Story deferred to Ms. Thomas.
Ms. Thomas responded that it was one structure for bonuses.
11:58:46 AM
Co-Chair Foster WITHDREW Amendment 7.
Representative Allard supported the amendment. She stressed
that there was a responsibility to taxpayers to ensure that
they were not covering a person's debt.
Representative Story understood what Representative Allard
was saying.
Representative Allard understood it was active the entire
year, but they would have to pay it back if they left.
Representative Hannan appreciated the amendment 7. She was
thinking of a floor amendment to stagger the amount where
there was a monetary incentive.
12:03:38 PM
Representative Bynum asked if someone were to apply and
qualify for the repayment.
Representative Story deferred to ACPE. She viewed the
scenario of allowable.
Ms. Thomas answered that the individual would continue to
be eligible, but the issue would be addressed in
regulation.
12:05:32 PM
Representative Galvin supported the concept of the bill and
thanked the sponsor. She was disappointed that the
committee diminished the intent of the bill. She thought
the intent should have been maintained in the process. She
thought it was a solid bill.
Representative Story viewed the student loan repayment
assistance as a benefit to the workforce because there was
a shortage of workers in the state.
Representative Tomaszewski did not support the bill. He
thought it was somewhat discriminatory in nature. He did
not believe the sponsor intended it that way.
12:09:15 PM
Representative Story thanked Representative Tomaszewski for
his comments.
Representative Bynum understood the bill used UGF funds
subject to appropriation. He asked what would happen if the
legislature did not fund the program.
Representative Story answered that it was through the
Higher Education Investment Fund.
Ms. Thomas agreed with the statement by Representative
Story.
12:11:53 PM
Representative Stapp thought what Representative Hannan had
stated was an interesting idea and he would likely support
it in that form.
12:14:45 PM
AT EASE
12:15:16 PM
RECONVENED
12:15:30 PM
Co-Chair Schrage MOVED to REPORT CSHB 28(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note.
Representative Johnson OBJECTED.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Hannan, Stapp, Bynum, Galvin, Schrage, Josephson,
Foster
OPPOSED: Allard, Tomaszewski, Johnson
The MOTION PASSED (7/3).
Representative Jimmie was absent from the vote.
There being NO further OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSHB 28(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with two "do
pass" recommendations, two "do not pass" recommendations,
two "no recommendation" recommendations, and four "amend"
recommendations and with one previously published fiscal
impact note: FN1 (EED).
Co-Chair Foster reviewed the schedule for the afternoon
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
12:17:21 PM
The meeting was adjourned at 12:17 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 28 Amendments 1-7 051425.pdf |
HFIN 5/15/2025 10:00:00 AM |
HB 28 |
| HB 28 Other_State_Loan_Repayment_Assistance_Programs051525.pdf |
HFIN 5/15/2025 10:00:00 AM |
HB 28 |