Legislature(1993 - 1994)
03/25/1993 03:00 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES
STANDING COMMITTEE
March 25, 1993
3:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Rep. Cynthia Toohey, Co-Chair
Rep. Con Bunde, Co-Chair
Rep. Gary Davis, Vice Chair
Rep. Al Vezey
Rep. Pete Kott
Rep. Harley Olberg
Rep. Bettye Davis
Rep. Irene Nicholia
Rep. Tom Brice
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HCR 10: Relating to certification of the Alaska State
Legislature's opposition to requiring suspension
of a driver's license for drug offenses.
PASSED WITH INDIVIDUAL RECOMMENDATIONS
*HB 244: "An Act making a special appropriation for
additional district support for kindergarten,
primary and secondary education programs; and
providing for an effective date."
PASSED WITH INDIVIDUAL RECOMMENDATIONS
HB 85: "An Act relating to the public school foundation
program; and providing for an effective date."
HEARD AND HELD TO TIME CERTAIN
(* First public hearing.)
WITNESS REGISTER
JEANNE SMITH
Aide to Rep. Richard Foster
Alaska State Legislature
Courthouse Room 611
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182
Phone: (907) 465-3789
Position Statement: Represented sponsor of HCR 10
REP. BILL WILLIAMS
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol, Room 128
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: (907) 465-3424
Position Statement: Sponsor of HB 244
BILL THOMAS
Indian Education Director
Ketchikan School District
President, Southeast Native Education Commission
2610 Fourth Ave.
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: (907) 225-1408
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 244
REVA SHIRCEL, Education Director
Tanana Chiefs Conference
122 First St.
Fairbanks, Alaska 99701
Phone: (907) 452-8251
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 244
JUDY JENKINSON
Ketchikan Education Association
1900 First Ave.
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: (907) 225-4741 work
Phone: (907) 225-5839 home
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 244
KENT DURAND
Association of Alaska School Boards
316 W. 11th St.
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: (907) 586-1083
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 244, HB 85
BOB ANDERSON, Chairman
Klawock City School Board
P.O. Box 9
Klawock, Alaska 99925
Phone: (907) 755-2228 work
Phone: (907) 755-2930 home
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 244
CLAUDIA DOUGLAS, President
National Education Association-Alaska
114 Second St.
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: (907) 586-3090
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 244
DUANE GUILEY, Director
Division of Education Finance and Support Services
Department of Education
801 W. 10th St., Suite 200
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1894
Phone: (907) 465-2891
Position Statement:
RICHARD M. SWARNER
Executive Director, Business Management
Kenai Peninsula Borough School District
44955 Ptarmigan Place
Soldotna, Alaska 99699
Phone: (907) 262-4056
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 85
MARY RUBADEAU
Assistant Superintendent for Instruction
Kenai Peninsula Borough School District
148 N. Binkley
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
Phone: (907) 262-5846
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 85
MARILYN DIMMICK
Kenai Peninsula Borough School District
148 N. Binkley
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
Phone: (907) 262-5846
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 85
BRUCE STANTON, Teacher
177 Shoup St.
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: (907) 225-5137 work
Phone: (907) 225-4436
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 85
MORRIS VERVERS, Superintendent
Klawock City School District
P.O. Box 9
Klawock, Alaska 99925
Phone: (907) 755-2917 work
Phone: (907) 755-2363 home
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 85
STEVE GIBSON
1622 Highland Dr.
Homer, Alaska 99603
Phone: (907) 235-6487
Position Statement: Parent; testified in support of HB 85
DEB GERMANO
P.O. Box 1511
Homer, Alaska 99603
Phone: (907) 235-2583
Position Statement: Parent; testified in support of HB 85
JACK CADIGAN
Centralized Correspondence School Education Association
3199 Pioneer Ave.
Juneau, Alaska 99801
Phone: (907) 586-2778 work
Phone: (907) 586-8332 home
Position Statement:
GREG MIDDAG, Member
Ketchikan Education Association
643 Sunset Drive
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: (907) 225-9815 work
Phone: (907) 225-2290 home
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 85
KATHI MCCORD
Communications Vice President
Anchorage Education Association
Board Member, NEA-Alaska
1601 Hidden Lane
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Phone: (907) 345-8100 work
Phone: (907) 272-8018 home
Position Statement: Favored accountability for TAG program
funding
DENNIS WETHERELL, President
Mat-Su Talented and Gifted Association
P.O. Box 876862
Wasilla, Alaska 99687
Phone: (907) 745-2007
Position Statement: Testified in opposition to changing
TAG funding
LARRY WIGET
Legislative Liaison
Anchorage School District
4600 DeBarr Road
Anchorage, Alaska 99508-3195
Phone: (907) 269-2255
Position Statement: Testified in opposition to HB 85
DIANA GREELY
P.O. Box 8684
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: (907) 247-8348
Position Statement: Parent; testified in opposition to
changing TAG funding
CATHERINE PLASENCIA
P.O. Box 5294
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: (907) 225-5294
Position Statement: Parent; testified in opposition to
changing TAG funding
MARYSIA OCHEJ, Business Manager
Southeast Islands School District
P.O. Box 8351
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: (907) 225-5949
Position Statement:
BETT JAKUBEK
P.O. Box 8194
Ketchikan, Alaska 99901
Phone: (907) 247-8716
Position Statement: Parent; testified in opposition to
changing TAG funding
MALCOLM FLEMING, Principal
Seward Junior-High School
P.O. Box 302
Seward, Alaska 99664
Position Statement: Testified in support of HB 85
MIKE SMITH
P.O. Box 302
Seward, Alaska 99664
Phone: (907) 224-3862
Position Statement: Parent; testified in support of HB 85
SUSAN WALLIN
Trapper Creek, Alaska
Phone: (907) 733-2298
Position Statement: Parent; testified in support of HB 85
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HCR 10
SHORT TITLE: FEDERAL-AID HY FUNDING/DRUG ENFORCEMENT
BILL VERSION: CSHCR 10(HES) AM
SPONSOR(S): TRANSPORTATION BY REQUEST
TITLE: Relating to allowing the state the right to determine
and impose sanctions on motor vehicle drivers.
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
02/24/93 433 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
02/24/93 433 (H) STATE AFFAIRS,HES,JUDICIARY
03/23/93 (H) STA AT 08:00 AM CAPITOL 102
03/23/93 (H) MINUTE(STA)
03/24/93 750 (H) STA RPT 6DP 1DNP
03/24/93 750 (H) DP: VEZEY, ULMER, B.DAVIS,
OLBERG
03/24/93 750 (H) DP: G.DAVIS, KOTT
03/24/93 750 (H) DNP: SANDERS
03/24/93 750 (H) -FISCAL NOTE (DOT) 3/24/93
03/24/93 750 (H) -ZERO FISCAL NOTE (DPS)
3/24/93
03/25/93 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 244
SHORT TITLE: APPROP: SINGLE/DUAL SITE SCHOOLS
BILL VERSION:
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S) WILLIAMS,Hudson,Olberg,
Kott,James,Mulder,Sanders,B.Davis,Foster,Porter,MacLean,
Menard
TITLE: "An Act making a special appropriation for additional
district support for kindergarten, primary, and secondary
education programs; and providing for an effective date."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
03/19/93 709 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
03/19/93 709 (H) HES, FINANCE
03/25/93 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 85
SHORT TITLE: PUBLIC SCHOOL FOUNDATION PROGRAM
BILL VERSION:
SPONSOR(S): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
TITLE: "An Act relating to the public school foundation
program; and providing for an effective date."
JRN-DATE JRN-PG ACTION
01/22/93 138 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME/REFERRAL(S)
01/22/93 138 (H) HES, FINANCE
01/22/93 138 (H) -FISCAL NOTE (DOE) 1/22/93
01/22/93 138 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
02/18/93 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
02/18/93 (H) MINUTE(HES)
02/23/93 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
02/23/93 (H) MINUTE(HES)
03/22/93 (H) MINUTE(HES)
03/25/93 (H) HES AT 03:00 PM CAPITOL 106
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 93-46, SIDE A
Number 000
CHAIR BUNDE called the meeting to order at 3:07 p.m. and
noted members present. He announced the calendar and noted
that the meeting was being teleconferenced to Anchorage,
Dillingham, Fairbanks, Galena, Homer, Hoonah, Ketchikan,
Yakutat, Kenai/Soldotna, Seward, Sitka, Tanana, Tok, Trapper
Creek and Valdez. He brought HCR 10 to the table. He
stated that testimony would be limited to two minutes. He
announced his intention to move HB 244 out of committee that
day.
HCR 10: FEDERAL AID-HIGHWAY FUNDING/DRUG ENFORCEMENT
Number 061
JEANNE SMITH, AIDE TO REP. RICHARD FOSTER, PRIME SPONSOR OF
HCR 10, testified on his behalf. She read a sponsor
statement, which is on file in the committee room. In
summary, the statement said that the federal government
would begin withholding federal highway funds if the state
did not by April 1, 1993, either adopt laws requiring a six
month driver's license revocation for persons convicted of
drug offenses, or have both the governor and legislature
certify and resolve to be opposed to the federal requirement
for such state laws. The amount at risk was $9.6 million
for FY94 and FY95, which would increase to $19.2 million in
each year thereafter. She said the Alaska House and Senate
had several pieces of comprehensive legislation to address
local problems. She noted a committee substitute (CS) had
the approval of both bodies.
Number 110
REP. BUNDE stated that it was the first time the House
Health, Education and Social Services (HESS) Committee had
seen the CS version of the resolution. He invited Ms. Smith
to begin a section-by-section discussion of a CSHCR 10.
Number 115
MS. SMITH said the title had been changed to reflect the
state's right to determine and impose sanctions on drivers,
but to delete elements of the title dealing with
certification of the legislature's opposition to the federal
requirement.
Number 123
CHAIR TOOHEY asked if the bill required the state to impose
sanctions.
Number 125
MS. SMITH answered no, but it allowed the state to retain
that option. She proceeded with the discussion of the
changes, saying that the second change deleted a section
indicating that revocation of driver's licenses has not
shown to be a successful deterrent. She said the deletion
was acceptable to the federal government. She said the
third difference was in language to indicate that the state
opposed the federal requirement to revoke driver's licenses
and not necessarily such laws themselves.
Number 149
REP. BUNDE invited further public testimony and, hearing
none, closed public testimony. He invited comments and
discussion from the committee.
REP. BRICE moved passage of HCR 10 with individual
recommendations.
REP. KOTT objected.
REP. OLBERG asked whether it would not be better to adopt
the CS version of the bill first.
REP. KOTT withdrew his objection.
REP. BRICE moved passage of CSHCR 10 with individual
recommendations.
Number 174
CHAIR TOOHEY said the committee would be remiss in forgoing
$20 million in federal highway funds, as long as the state
cold protect its rights.
Number 180
REP. BUNDE said the state wanted both to encourage people to
face their drug problems and to allow the state to maintain
its ability to function.
MS. SMITH said the legislature was not against considering a
license suspension law, but it would be in its own best
interest to do that at the state level so that the federal
government could not later say the state was not in
compliance.
Number 195
REP. BUNDE asked for objections to the motion and, hearing
none, declared CSHCR 10 passed with individual
recommendations.
REP. BUNDE brought HB 244 to the table.
HB 244: APPROP:SINGLE-DUAL SCHOOL SITES
REP. BILL WILLIAMS testified as PRIME SPONSOR of HB 244. He
read a sponsor statement (which is on file in the committee
room) which said, in summary, that the bill was an effort to
restore funding to nine single-site school districts which
had seen their supplemental funding cut from the FY94 budget
earlier in the 1993 legislative session. He said the goal
of HB 244 was to ensure that all single-site school
districts would be dealt with in the same manner.
Number 237
REP. BUNDE observed that there were no fiscal notes in the
bill packets, but then commented that the special
appropriations were included in the bill and that there
would be no fiscal notes.
Number 244
BILL THOMAS, INDIAN EDUCATION DIRECTOR, KETCHIKAN SCHOOL
DISTRICT and PRESIDENT, SOUTHEAST NATIVE EDUCATION
COMMISSION, testified via teleconference from Ketchikan in
support of HB 244. He said he was distressed with the state
Senate for making arbitrary cuts in single-site school
districts' budgets. He said investing in education for
youth was cheaper than trying to repair them later in life.
He encouraged legislators to put politics aside and support
HB 244.
Number 285
REVA SHIRCEL, EDUCATION DIRECTOR, TANANA CHIEFS CONFERENCE,
testified via teleconference from in support of HB 244. She
said the bill would provide needed supplementary funding for
the nine rural single-site school districts.
Number 314
JUDY JENKINSON, KETCHIKAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, testified
in Juneau in support of HB 244. She said it was criminal to
balance the budget on the backs of children. She said
children are at the mercy of their parents and cannot choose
where they attend school.
Number 330
REP. BUNDE stated his opposition to the idea of single-site
school districts because he favors children and believes
money spent on small single-site districts is poorly spent.
Number 338
KENT DURAND, ASSOCIATION OF ALASKA SCHOOL BOARDS, testified
in Juneau in support of HB 244. He said the state
legislature has since 1986 provided supplemental funding for
small single-site school districts. At its 1992 conference,
the association resolved to support adjusting the foundation
formula to eliminate the disparities in single-site school
district funding. He said cuts in supplementary funding
before such adjustment was made were unfair.
REP. BUNDE asked if the association supported single-site
schools.
MR. DURAND responded that the association supported HB 244.
Number 345
REP. BUNDE repeated his question.
MR. DURAND stated, "At this time, yes we do, unless there's
another alt...(unintelligible)."
REP. BUNDE said, "Even if they have an enrollment of three?"
MR. DURAND responded, "Yes, that's correct."
Number 357
CHAIR TOOHEY noted that Mr. Durand had qualified his answer,
saying that the association supported single-site school
districts "at this time," pending a better solution.
REP. BUNDE noted that Anchorage had 40 percent of the
state's school children, but nowhere near 40 percent of the
state's educational operating budget.
Number 369
BOB ANDERSON, CHAIRMAN, KLAWOCK CITY SCHOOL BOARD, testified
in Juneau in support of HB 244. He said Klawock, a single-
site school district, saw $147,010 cut from its budget
through HB 45, representing a catastrophic cut of 10.67
percent of the district's FY94 budget. He said the district
did not have a highly paid superintendent, or a private
plane, but was devoted to teaching 207 students from
kindergarten through 12th grade. He urged the committee to
rectify the state Senate's error in making the cuts by
passing HB 244.
Number 379
CLAUDIA DOUGLAS, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION-
ALASKA (NEA), testified in Juneau in support of HB 244. She
said children should not be punished through politics, and
while HB 244 addressed the issue of equity, children were
injured by discrimination in supplemental funding.
REP. BUNDE asked if the NEA supported single-site schools.
MS. DOUGLAS asked if he meant single-site schools or single-
site school districts.
REP. BUNDE answered single-site school districts.
Number 385
MS. DOUGLAS said that NEA supported supplemental funding for
single-site school sites needing extra money, at least until
the issue of equity had been addressed. She said NEA also
supported changes in policy if necessary.
REP. BUNDE asked if NEA had a position on school district
consolidation.
MS. DOUGLAS answered that she would prepare a position, but
she did not want to comment at that time.
Number 410
REP. BUNDE called for more public testimony on HB 244 and,
hearing none, closed public testimony.
Number 412
REP. BETTYE DAVIS, a CO-SPONSOR of the bill, stated her
support for the bill, saying it was better to provide
funding for single-site school districts later than never,
and if any of such districts were funded, all should be.
She asked Rep. Williams why he thought the legislature would
approve funding for districts which had been removed from
HB 45.
Number 420
REP. WILLIAMS answered that he did not know what happened in
the Senate, but he hoped his bill would pass the House. He
said HB 244 provided a vehicle for the nine single-site
school districts that had seen their supplementary budgets
cut to discover the reason why.
Number 428
REP. B. DAVIS asked if Chair Bunde planned to pass the bill
out of committee that day.
REP. BUNDE answered that he did intend to do so.
Number 433
REP. NICHOLIA stated her support for HB 244. She said
single-site school districts deserved financial support, and
they allowed local control. She said the existing
foundation funding formula did not address their budget
problems and there should be no cuts in supplemental funding
until the inequities had been addressed.
Number 445
REP. VEZEY moved for passage of HB 244 with individual
recommendations.
Hearing no objections, REP. BUNDE declared HB 244 passed
with individual recommendations. He also commented that the
vote should not be taken as encouragement or endorsement of
single-site school districts. He encouraged people to work
for different solutions to their financial problems, and to
look toward consolidation, as the issue would probably be
before the committee again in 1994.
CHAIR BUNDE then brought HB 85 to the table.
HB 85: PUBLIC SCHOOL FOUNDATION PROGRAM
REP. BUNDE noted that there had been much communication and
concern from the public concerning the bill. He said he
would like to address those questions.
Number 455
DUANE GUILEY, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF EDUCATION FINANCE AND
SUPPORT SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (DOE), testified
in Juneau in support of HB 85. He briefly described the
five major portions of the bill:
1) Creation of an Alaska School Price Index, which
would use information from FY89 and FY92 to update and
replace the Area Cost Differential established in 1985.
2) Changes in the vocational and gifted education
programs to provide a flat rate of funding per student. The
talented and gifted (TAG) educational programming would be
based on 4.5 percent of the school population, multiplied by
a weighting factor.
3) Inclusion of a hold-harmless clause so that for
three years no district would receive less money under the
proposed new formula than it did under the existing formula.
4) Amendments in the school enrollment projection
process to allow the count to come after the current year
count to improve districts' projecting and budgeting
processes.
5) Inclusion of a forward-funding mechanism to allow
districts to use current or previous year student enrollment
data for funding, whichever would bring it more money, thus
allowing districts to phase out expenses as they lost
students.
Number 499
REP. VEZEY asked when the DOE would produce its final plan
for the Alaska School Price Index (ASPI).
MR. GUILEY said the department was currently building up
that index, had sent out and was receiving back completed
data confirmation worksheets from districts, and was trying
to resolve discrepancies to produce another list. He said
the department had a draft of the index, but not a final
index.
Number 505
REP. VEZEY asked why medical (insurance) premiums were one
of the factors considered in the ASPI.
Number 506
MR. GUILEY said the index was an attempt to measure the
differing costs of providing education at schools across the
state, and insurance premiums were among the varying
factors.
Number 509
REP. VEZEY interrupted, saying that medical insurance
premiums were the same across the state.
Number 512
MR. GUILEY disagreed, saying that school employees were not
covered by a uniform health plan; each school district
provided its own medical plan and costs differed
significantly. He said the index did not assess TRS
(Teachers Retirement System), which is assessed uniformly
across all 54 school districts.
Number 525
REP. BRICE asked how money from the mental health trust fund
was used under the current foundation formula and how it
would be used under the ASPI.
Number 529
MR. GUILEY said that the use of revenue in funding the
foundation formula was not anticipated to change under ASPI.
Any use of mental health trust fund money in funding the
foundation formula would not change under the ASPI, he said.
Number 534
REP. BRICE asked whether it was true that the mental health
trust fund paid for TAG programs because the TAG programs
could not be broken out of other special needs programs.
Number 538
MR. GUILEY responded, "Not exactly. The gifted and talented
program does generate separate educational units now. They
are lumped together with special education and they're
reported to the state, but they do have a separate weight
factor and do generate revenue separately. The mental
health trust fund severely under-funds the special education
program in total, and we more than utilize the mental health
trust fund within the handicapped student component, and do
not have to assess any to the gifted and talented
component."
Number 543
REP. BRICE said he believed that all children deserved
educations, whether or not they are beneficiaries of the
mental health trust fund; and using the fund for educational
proposes undermines the ideas upon which the trust was
established. He encouraged removing the mental health fund
from educational funding entirely and to use general funds
instead.
Number 550
REP. B. DAVIS asked Mr. Guiley to go through the rest of the
bill's features and outline the changes.
MR. GUILEY said the DOE had provided a sectional analysis at
earlier meetings. He described the ASPI, which would
replace the Area Cost Differential for state educational
funding. He said the DOE had an amendment that would allow
the state to use the secondary school funding formula,
instead of the elementary school formula, to fund the
secondary school elements of the centralized correspondence
school. He said the bill updates the sections that apply to
the Mt. Edgecumbe school in relation to the ASPI. He said
the bill updates the TAG program by establishing separate
units for calculating both the TAG program and the
vocational education programs in section 5 and section 6.
Number 565
REP. B. DAVIS asked for a more detailed explanation of
sections 5 and section 6. She asked how much money the
talented and gifted programs, once separated from vocational
education, would receive under the ASPI. She also asked
what the funding cap would be for TAG programs.
Number 567
MR. GUILEY said that the current practice saw special
education units include TAG as a type of special education
unit. The proposal was to remove TAG from special education
units, and create new separate educational units for them.
As TAG students were included in the current law, they
generated 0.025 units per student identified as gifted.
Districts are required to write service plans and
Individualized Education Plans (IEP) for each TAG child, he
said. The students are figured into the minimum level of
funding by each funding community and for the minimum
funding levels for special education by each district. The
proposal would create separate educational units, based upon
a revenue weight factor defined by regulation. So far, the
DOE had approved a weight factor of 0.012 units, multiplied
by 4.5 percent of the student population, without requiring
an IEP or plan of service. The hope was to eliminate the
administrative burden of the program and to provide a flat
rate of funding, 4.5 percent of the student population.
Number 588
REP. B. DAVIS said that, if each gifted student earned a
school district 0.025 educational units, then it would take
40 students to generate one instructional unit, or $61,000.
She said that under the new formula it would take 80
students to generate one instructional unit. She commented
that this was a drastic change, resulting in immediate
funding cuts.
MR. GUILEY stated, "The section above that generated the
vocational education instruction units again, a revenue
weight factor as defined by the board. The board has
currently approved .006 units for vocational education
weight factor. The fiscal note, if you will, on that
separate section was slightly in excess of $4 million. The
fiscal savings on section 6 was approximately $4 million,
so the two tend to wash themselves out with no fiscal impact
on the state."
Number 595
REP. B. DAVIS said, "So you're saying $4 million would have
been saved from gifted and then added into this, the voc-ed.
What is the cap on the voc-ed, I mean, on the special ed?
At this time, every school district identified their
children, they're turning that in, then you take that.
Under the new plan that wouldn't be true."
MR. GUILEY stated, "Under the new plan there would be no
requirement to identify the children and turn them in.
There would be simply a revenue weight factor that would
assign a weight to 4.5 percent of the current average daily
membership."
Number 600
REP. B. DAVIS asked if it were not true that some districts
had identified up to 12 percent or 14 percent of their
students as gifted.
MR. GUILEY said yes, and one district had identified 18
percent of its student population as gifted, while other
districts claimed no gifted students. Since 1981, the state
has never identified more than 4.3 percent of the entire
student population as gifted. He said the national standard
ranges between 4.5 percent and 5 percent, most years
averaging 4.6 percent.
TAPE 93-46, SIDE B
Number 000
REP. BUNDE said he understood that some school districts
identified their entire bands as gifted in an attempt to get
more state funding. He suggested that the state might want
to examine the definition of gifted student. He noted that
the suggested separation of TAG from the special education
program had generated large amounts of constituent action
from an active lobby. He asked Mr. Guiley if he believed
gifted students would not be as well served under HB 85.
Number 020
MR. GUILEY said the state Board of Education intended that
TAG students would continue to be served, and that more
money targeted at them would go directly to the classroom
programs addressing their needs. He said comparisons
between expenditures compared to revenue generation by the
program showed that 39 of 54 districts short-fund their TAG
programs, some school districts short-fund by more than 30
percent, and some short-fund by from 50 percent to 60
percent. He said the DOE hoped there would be no changes in
the delivery model for gifted students, and that the
standards being developed would raise the standards for all
students, such that some students now identified as gifted
would be arriving at the normal outcomes and standards the
DOE was developing.
Number 054
REP. BUNDE said that the element of hopefulness Mr. Guiley
had expressed, and not certainty, would be a concern.
REP. B. DAVIS asked if there was not a national trend to
include TAG programs under special education programs.
Number 060
MR. GUILEY said he could not say. He did say, however, that
the Governor's Council on the Handicapped and Gifted said 38
states do not fund TAG as part of special education
programs, that there is no federal mandate to fund TAG
programs, and that more than half the states do not do so.
He said Alaska's $760 annual per-student funding for TAG
showed state concern for the programs. He said some school
districts charge the entire cost of TAG programs to TAG
funds, whereas the Board of Education believed it was
providing enough money to fund just the incremental
additional cost of such programs.
Number 084
REP. B. DAVIS asked if the new foundation funding formula
would not address the issue of equitable funding for single-
site school districts.
MR. GUILEY said the ASPI included a table for additional
resources for certificated and classified school staffers as
a district got smaller. He said that does address and
resolve the single-site school district issue.
Number 101
REP. B. DAVIS recalled that a representative of the Alaska
School Board Association had testified at a previous meeting
that he had provided some suggested changes to HB 85 to Mr.
Guiley. She asked if the state Board of Education had
adopted those changes.
MR. GUILEY answered that the school board did adopt those
changes, but he had not brought them to the HESS Committee
for its review.
Number 110
REP. OLBERG asked if the state would lose any federal
revenue if it ceased to fund TAG programs.
MR. GUILEY answered no.
Number 115
REP. NICHOLIA asked if the changes that the state Board of
Education had adopted would be included into HB 85 by
amendment in the House Finance Committee. She asked why the
changes had not been provided to the HESS Committee.
Number 120
MR. GUILEY said he thought HB 85 was scheduled for another
hearing in the HESS Committee the following week next, and
he hoped to have final numbers, with all changes to the
bill, ready for the committee at that time.
Number 127
REP. BUNDE said he wanted to hear the bill again the
following Thursday, April 1, 1993. He invited public
testimony via teleconference.
Number 130
RICHARD M. SWARNER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BUSINESS MANAGEMENT,
KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, testified via
teleconference from Kenai in support of HB 85. He referred
to a letter he had sent to the committee stating his
position on the bill. He noted that his district's 9,700
students represented 8 percent of Alaska's student
population. He said something was wrong with the funding
system when such a major district had reached its funding
cap and had the lowest administrative cost in the state, but
still faced severe financial problems, including high pupil-
teacher ratios, low salaries and no raises, no equipment
money and an inability to buy books. He said HB 85 would go
a long way toward fixing state school financing.
Number 164
REP. G. DAVIS cited the DOE's efforts to finalize the ASPI,
and asked whether the Kenai Peninsula Borough School
District had submitted its final numbers in response to DOE
queries for the ASPI.
Number 170
MR. SWARNER answered that the district had, and he believed
the district's funding rate would not change under the new
funding formula.
Number 175
MARY RUBADEAU, ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT FOR INSTRUCTION,
KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, testified via
teleconference from Kenai in support of HB 85. She said the
district had good community support, but in the last five
years, when the district had been at the funding cap, she
had seen erosion in the instructional programs, even though
the district had been thrifty with raises, hiring, benefits,
and equipment purchases. She said the cost differential for
Kenai needed to be addressed. Regarding the elements of
HB 85 dealing with the TAG program, she said the district
puts more money into its TAG programs than does the state.
She said she wanted HB 85 to maintain a steady formula
funding mechanism for TAG funding. She said 5 percent of
the district's students were gifted, and the current funding
level was proper.
REP. BUNDE asked a clarifying question whether Ms. Rubadeau
supported HB 85's provisions for TAG programs.
Number 212
MS. RUBADEAU stated, "We support the bill in its entirety.
I was just speaking in terms of that one section that we do
put in the current amount of money that we generate from
state in terms of gifted programs and probably would
continue even if this bill went through as written. Thank
you."
Number 218
MARILYN DIMMICK, KENAI PENINSULA BOROUGH SCHOOL DISTRICT,
testified briefly via teleconference from Kenai in support
of HB 85.
Number 277
BRUCE STANTON, A TEACHER and VICE PRESIDENT, KETCHIKAN
EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, testified via teleconference from
Ketchikan, representing himself, in support of HB 85. He
referred to a letter he had written to the committee, which
is on file in the committee room. In summary, he said that
Ketchikan, like Kenai, had long been at its funding cap and
it could only seek funding solutions from the state. He
suggested raising the local contribution cap from the
current 4 mill rate to six mills, which could save the state
$40 million and fund $64,000 instructional units at no cost
to the state. He noted that Alaska is third in the nation
in percentage of education funds coming from the federal
government, but the state ranks 46th in percentage of local
contribution to education funding. He said it might be the
time in Alaska to turn to local governments for more
education funding.
REP. BUNDE observed that Mr. Stanton might find resistance
to his ideas in Ketchikan, but not in Juneau. He asked if
Mr. Stanton was speaking for the Ketchikan Education
Association (KEA), and if so, whether the KEA supported
breaking the TAG program away from special education.
Number 290
MR. STANTON said KEA did not object to splitting the two
programs. He said there was a very small TAG program in
Ketchikan, with possibly one class each in the elementary
and high school levels and none in the middle school.
REP. VEZEY said he admired Mr. Stanton's bravery in
advocating a local tax increase for education. He asked why
people would want to raise their taxes to increase school
funding when other areas of the state did not pay taxes for
their schools.
Number 305
MR. STANTON said that was part of the complication of the
issue. He said there was a need to consider what REAAs
(Rural Education Attendance Areas) actually could do
contribute to state educational funding and how much they
might be asked to contribute. He repeated that the
Ketchikan school district, facing a state funding cap, faced
the need to continue cutting expenses or imposing more local
taxes.
REP. NICHOLIA asked who Mr. Stanton represented.
MR. STANTON answered that he represented the KEA.
Number 320
REP. NICHOLIA asked if the KEA had given him a letter
identifying him as the association's representative.
MR. STANTON answered no, and said the KEA had not taken a
vote to support HB 85. He said the KEA was interested in
$474,000 that would go to the district.
REP. NICHOLIA observed that, in the absence of any
authorizing vote, Mr. Stanton did not really officially
represent the KEA.
MR. STANTON said, "You could say it that way, yes."
Number 334
REP. NICHOLIA noted Mr. Staton's comment that REAAs should
contribute to their educational funding and asked how, in
the absence of any funding base or property of value, they
could be expected to do so.
MR. STANTON said that was a good question. He said he had
not said they should have to contribute the same way other
districts did.
Number 345
REP. NICHOLIA said anyone who asserted that the REAAs should
contribute to educational funding should also offer
suggestions as to how they could do that.
CHAIR TOOHEY applauded Mr. Stanton's heroism in taking an
unpopular position, but said he probably had more leeway to
do so as he was representing himself and not the KEA.
Number 363
REP. B. DAVIS noted that the state general fund received
money from the federal government on behalf of REAAs and
single-site school districts. She said the committee would
be surprised at the amount of money that came in from the
federal government, which she said showed the REAAs and
single-site school districts did not have a free ride.
REP. BUNDE asked Mr. Stanton to ask the KEA to formulate a
position on school consolidation and the single-site issue
for later submission.
Number 380
MORRIS VERVERS, SUPERINTENDENT, KLAWOCK CITY SCHOOL
DISTRICT, testified in Juneau in support of HB 85. He said
the new formula had gone through a year and a half of
intense work, including input from many people, which was a
highly credible process. He added that the bill would end
the practice of holding school children hostage in political
budget battles each legislative session.
Number 395
REP. G. DAVIS asked if the state should establish a regular
time frame in which to review and adjust school funding
numbers every few years.
MR. VERVERS observed that equity in school funding was a
goal aimed for but not usually attained. He repeated that
the 18 months of work on the new funding formula lent it
credibility.
Number 404
STEVE GIBSON, A PARENT, testified via teleconference from
Homer in support of the ASPI in HB 85. He asked for a more
precise definition of what constituted a TAG student. He
said some TAG students are liable to become bored in school
and to drop out, wasting their abilities. He said that the
TAG programs also enrich students not enrolled in the
programs. He encouraged the legislature not to diminish the
TAG program.
Number 422
DEB GERMANO, A PARENT, testified via teleconference from
Homer in support of HB 85. She expressed concern that the
TAG program might be damaged by efforts to address problems
in other programs. She said money spent on TAG programs was
well spent.
REP. BUNDE invited those testifying to submit written
testimony as well.
Number 449
JACK CADIGAN, a TEACHER and MEMBER of the CENTRALIZED
CORRESPONDENCE SCHOOL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION (CCSEA),
testified in Juneau on behalf of the CCSEA in support of
HB 85. He said the 23-member association was concerned with
section 2, which changes the funding formula for the
Centralized Correspondence School (CCS) from that applied to
elementary schools to 65 percent of that applied to regular
schools. He said it was in one sense a question of equity
for the CCS, a fully accredited school which about 1,200
students in both urban and rural areas, and both elementary
and secondary students. He said the school had been
adequately funded for years when the state paid all costs
for it, and when summer school was added, other funding
sources were found to pay. He said the FY94 budget left the
CCS short by between $100,000 to $300,000.
Number 477
CHAIR TOOHEY asked what percentage of the 1,200 students
attended summer school.
MR. CADIGAN said the CCS actually made money from the summer
school, as all of the services necessary for summer school
were already available from the regular school year,
including some staff, the warehouses, books and equipment.
Therefore, being funded under the elementary school formula
would not have much negative impact, as funding was
sufficient, he said. But when summer school was taken away,
as it was last year, the issue of what formula CCS is funded
under became critical, he said. He noted CCS was originally
just for elementary grades, but 12 or 14 years ago expanded
to a full K-12 school.
Number 490
GREG MIDDAG, MEMBER, KETCHIKAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION'S
EXECUTIVE BOARD, testified in Juneau in support of HB 85.
He said some in his district were concerned about TAG
students, though there was not much of a TAG program in
Ketchikan. He said Ketchikan had been at its funding cap
for the past five or six years and there were no other
sources of funding for education. He expressed the hope
that Ketchikan could maintain some of its programs. He said
the district has cut school nurses, daytime janitors and
special needs aides, and the district has had to raise money
from the community for special needs students. He voiced
support for the district administration and its efforts to
maintain funding, but said the district needed someplace
else to go for funding. He encouraged passage of HB 85 and
asked the committee to help local governments find some more
money.
Number 521
REP. BUNDE asked if White Cliff School were still operating
in Ketchikan and commented that his wife had attended the
school in the past.
MR. MIDDAG said that the school would probably have to keep
operating for the next 20 years, if it stood.
Number 521
KATHI MCCORD, VICE PRESIDENT, COMMUNICATIONS, ANCHORAGE
EDUCATION ASSOCIATION and MEMBER of the BOARD OF NEA-ALASKA,
testified in Juneau on HB 85. She expressed concerns that
HB 85, by separating the TAG programs from special
education, would remove accountability from the TAG
programs. She said she had been told that schools could
spend money allocated for TAG programs on other unrelated
programs.
Number 533
CHAIR TOOHEY stated she needed to have someone from the
school district present to answer such questions. She said
that issue had been addressed the previous day and such
diversion of funds was not possible under HB 85.
Number 538
REP. BUNDE corrected Chair Toohey, saying that the committee
had dealt the previous day with HB 235, which required IEPs,
but not the three-year evaluation.
Number 545
DENNIS WETHERELL, PRESIDENT, MAT-SU TALENTED AND GIFTED
ASSOCIATION, testified via teleconference from Anchorage in
opposition to HB 85. He addressed what he perceived to be
the committee's misunderstandings that TAG education had
been coupled with special education in the first place
because TAG students were at risk of dropping out of school
and of life. He listed problems TAG students had in
succeeding in school and in life. He said HB 85 cut funding
in four ways. He stated the bill would result in the Mat-Su
district receiving $4 million less than it would have under
the existing foundation formula in effect. He said HB 85
did not mandate funding for TAG education, while special and
voc-ed programs had guaranteed or minimum funding levels.
He stated that independent analysis by the district showed
that HB 85 would cut TAG funding for the district by 40
percent. He commented that districts were not bound to
spend TAG money on TAG programs.
Number 573
LARRY WIGET, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON, ANCHORAGE SCHOOL DISTRICT
(ASD), testified via teleconference from Anchorage in
opposition to HB 85. He repeated the district's position
that HB 85 would cost the district money. According to Mr.
Wiget, Anchorage has 37.73 percent of the state's school
population, and while it receives 30.27 percent of the state
educational funding under the existing system, it would
receive 29.69 percent under the proposed formula. He
favored leaving TAG under special education funding and
opposed changing the funding weight factor for TAG.
REP. BUNDE asked a clarifying question whether the ASD
opposed separating TAG and special education program
funding.
MR. WIGET answered yes.
TAPE 93-47, SIDE A
Number 000
KENT DURAND, ASSOCIATION OF ALASKA SCHOOL BOARDS (AASB),
testified in Juneau in support of HB 85. He said the ASPI
would level the playing field for almost all state school
districts, and with a few minor adjustments to the ASPI, it
will provide equity in funding. He said rural districts had
higher non-personnel costs, often due to extremes in weather
and geography. He said some school districts were also
concerned about how inflation would affect school funding.
He said the AASB asked for a statutory inflation-proofing
mechanism to be added to the ASPI, and language directing
the DOE to submit an annual recommended unit value
adjustment. The association hoped the ASPI would address
single-sites and recommended the state consider district
size and enrollment in making funding adjustments for school
funding. He also encouraged de-politicizing funding of
single-site school districts.
REP. BUNDE encouraged the AASB to consider the capital
budget, showing that some school districts had 22 schools
with fewer than 12 students. He encouraged the association
to prepare to provide testimony to the committee on that
topic.
(Rep. Brice left at 4:39 p.m.)
Number 062
DIANA GREELY, PARENT OF A CHILD IN KETCHIKAN SCHOOLS,
testified via teleconference from Ketchikan in opposition to
HB 85. She spoke against changes in the TAG program funding
plan and in favor of maintaining the program in Ketchikan,
where 62 elementary schools had been identified as TAG. She
said that, as a parent of a sixth grader, she would work to
help establish a TAG program in Ketchikan's middle school.
Number 080
CATHERINE PLASENCIA, PARENT OF A CHILD IN KETCHIKAN SCHOOLS,
testified via teleconference from Ketchikan in opposition to
HB 85. She spoke against changing funding for TAG programs
in the absence of other legislative mandates concerning TAG
funding. She wanted TAG funding left under mandated special
education funding.
Number 090
MARYSIA OCHEJ, BUSINESS MANAGER, SOUTHEAST ISLANDS SCHOOL
DISTRICT, testified via teleconference from in Ketchikan
support of HB 85. She agreed with the price differential,
saying she had worked around the state and had experienced
the inequities of the existing price differential system.
As a parent, however, she said it was important not to
reduce services to TAG children. She said the DOE needed to
address funding of TAG programs as part of its mission to
address all students' learning needs.
Number 125
REP. G. DAVIS asked what was the differential with which Ms.
Ochej had expressed satisfaction.
MS. OCHEJ replied, "One point two-two (1.22). It's
currently one point 0-four(1.04)."
Number 133
REP. VEZEY asked her where she got her figures.
MS. OCHEJ said the foundation formula currently assigned the
Ketchikan district a price differential factor of 1.04 and
the proposed new formula would increase that factor to 1.22.
Number 140
REP. VEZEY said he had been trying for a month, without
success, to get a copy of the ASPI, but he had heard from
Ms. Ochej and others that they already had the information.
Number 146
BETT JAKUBEK, PARENT OF TAG CHILDREN, testified via
teleconference from Ketchikan in opposition to HB 85. She
said she wanted her children to be able to enjoy the
benefits of a TAG program when they advanced to middle
school. She said some teachers see TAG programs as a frill,
and potential targets for budget cuts. She wanted her
children to get the kind of education they needed and the
latitude allowed for TAG funding under HB 85 did not ensure
that TAG programs would be properly funded. Ms. Jakubek
acknowledged the need to eliminate paperwork and encouraged
the committee to find new ways to protect the current system
and not remove TAG from special education.
Number 189
REP. BUNDE invited her and others to fax in written
testimony.
Number 210
MALCOLM FLEMING, PRINCIPAL, SEWARD JUNIOR-HIGH SCHOOL,
testified via teleconference from Seward in support of
HB 85. He said the Seward school budget was inadequate and
student-teacher ratios were too high. He said the Kenai
school district needed special adjustments and HB 85
appeared to help by replacing the Area Cost Differential
with the ASPI. He said Kenai's education costs were higher
than those of Anchorage; the district was at its funding
cap; and school fund-raising was paying as much as the
school district for some supplies and activities.
REP. BUNDE asked Mr. Fleming his opinion about breaking TAG
students out of special education funding.
MR. FLEMING said he had no problem with the break-out as the
4.5 percent level matched his school's needs.
Number 240
MIKE SMITH, A PARENT, testified via teleconference from
Seward in support of HB 85. He said he agreed with the
testimony from Mr. Swarner and Mr. Fleming that Kenai's
educational costs were higher than those of Anchorage's
district.
Number 250
SUSAN WALLIN, A PARENT, testified via teleconference from
Trapper Creek in support of HB 85. Her written testimony is
on file in the committee room. In summary, her testimony
praised the ASPI and encouraged even closer consideration of
small rural districts in the Mat-Su Borough. She opposed
removing TAG funding from special education, and also
expressed concern about the bill's adjustment of the
enrollment estimate date, saying it might slow budgeting.
REP. BUNDE provided the committee's fax number, 465-6790, so
that others in Trapper Creek and elsewhere could submit
written testimony. He announced that the committee would
hear HB 85 again the following Thursday, April 1, 1993.
REP. B. DAVIS asked permission to pass out amendments to
HB 85 for the committee members' examination before the
members next considered the bill.
REP. BUNDE assented, then ADJOURNED the meeting at 4:55 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|