03/27/2008 03:00 PM House HEALTH, EDUCATION & SOCIAL SERVICES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB285 | |
| HB386 | |
| HB306 | |
| HB358 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 285 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 386 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 358 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 306 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE
March 27, 2008
3:05 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Peggy Wilson, Chair
Representative Bob Roses, Vice Chair
Representative Anna Fairclough
Representative Wes Keller
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative Sharon Cissna
Representative Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 285(FIN)
"An Act relating to the power and duties of the Department of
Education and Early Development for improving instructional
practices in school districts; and providing for an effective
date."
- HEARD AND HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 386
"An Act relating to an energy subsidy for public schools."
- MOVED CSHB 386(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 306
"An Act relating to providing a voluntary pre-elementary program
within a school district; and providing for the establishment
and implementation of a statewide early childhood education
plan."
- MOVED CSSSHB 306(HES) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 358
"An Act relating to continuing the public education of a
homeless student, to the purpose of certain laws as they relate
to children, to the determination of costs of maintenance of
certain children in foster care, and to the salaries and
benefits of certain social workers employed by the state; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 285
SHORT TITLE: STATE INTERVENTION IN SCHOOL DISTRICT
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) STEVENS
02/19/08 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/19/08 (S) SED, FIN
02/27/08 (S) SED AT 8:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
02/27/08 (S) Heard & Held
02/27/08 (S) MINUTE(SED)
02/29/08 (S) SED RPT CS 1DP 2NR 1AM SAME TITLE
02/29/08 (S) DP: STEVENS
02/29/08 (S) NR: DAVIS, OLSON
02/29/08 (S) AM: HUGGINS
02/29/08 (S) SED AT 8:00 AM BUTROVICH 205
02/29/08 (S) Moved CSSB 285(SED) Out of Committee
02/29/08 (S) MINUTE(SED)
03/01/08 (S) SED AT 10:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/01/08 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/10/08 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/10/08 (S) Heard & Held
03/10/08 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/15/08 (H) HES AT 9:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/15/08 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
03/19/08 (S) FIN RPT CS 2DP 3NR 1AM SAME TITLE
03/19/08 (S) LETTER OF INTENT WITH FIN REPORT
03/19/08 (S) DP: ELTON, THOMAS
03/19/08 (S) NR: STEDMAN, HOFFMAN, OLSON
03/19/08 (S) AM: DYSON
03/19/08 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/19/08 (S) Moved CSSB 285(FIN) Out of Committee
03/19/08 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/24/08 (S) FIN LETTER OF INTENT AMENDED
03/24/08 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/24/08 (S) VERSION: CSSB 285(FIN)
03/25/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/25/08 (H) HES, FIN
03/27/08 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 386
SHORT TITLE: ENERGY SUBSIDY FOR SCHOOLS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) LEDOUX
02/19/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/19/08 (H) HES, FIN
03/15/08 (H) HES AT 9:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/15/08 (H) Heard & Held
03/15/08 (H) MINUTE(HES)
03/27/08 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 306
SHORT TITLE: PRE-ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROGRAMS/PLANS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) GARA, KAWASAKI, NELSON, KERTTULA,
GRUENBERG
01/11/08 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/11/08
01/15/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/15/08 (H) HES, FIN
01/31/08 (H) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED
01/31/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/31/08 (H) HES, FIN
03/18/08 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/18/08 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/25/08 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/25/08 (H) Heard & Held
03/25/08 (H) MINUTE(HES)
03/27/08 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 358
SHORT TITLE: NEEDY CHILDREN: EDUC./ SOCIAL WORKERS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) GARA
02/08/08 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/08/08 (H) HES, FIN
03/18/08 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/18/08 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/27/08 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
TIM LAMKIN, Staff
to Senator Gary Stevens
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced SB 285 on behalf of Senator
Stevens, sponsor.
EDDY JEANS, Director
School Finance and Facilities Section
Department of Education and Early Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearings on
SB 285, HB 386, and HB 306.
LES MORSE, Director
Assessment and Accountability
Department of Education and Early Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on
SB 285.
SENATOR GARY STEVENS
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered a question during the hearing on
SB 285 as the sponsor.
NORMAN ECK, PhD; Superintendent
Northwest Arctic Borough School District
Kotzebue, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Speaking as an individual, testified in
support of SB 285.
THOMAS BROWN, Intern
to Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 386, on behalf of
Representative LeDoux, sponsor.
JIM LANGTON, Superintendent
Denali Borough School District
Healy, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 386.
BRUCE JOHNSON, Director
Alaska Association of School Boards
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 386.
REPRESENTATIVE LES GARA
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the changes to HB 306, as the
sponsor, and introduced HB 358, as the sponsor.
ACTION NARRATIVE
CHAIR PEGGY WILSON called the House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee meeting to order at 3:05:49 PM.
Representatives Wilson, Roses, Gardner, and Keller were present
at the call to order. Representatives Seaton, Cissna, and
Fairclough arrived as the meeting was in progress.
SB 285-STATE INTERVENTION IN SCHOOL DISTRICT
3:06:36 PM
CHAIR WILSON announced that the first order of business would be
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 285(FIN), "An Act relating to the power
and duties of the Department of Education and Early Development
for improving instructional practices in school districts; and
providing for an effective date."
3:07:38 PM
TIM LAMKIN, Staff to Senator Gary Stevens, Alaska State
Legislature, informed the committee that SB 285 was a direct
result of the Moore v. State court case that clarified that the
legislature has a constitutional obligation to establish and
maintain a system of public schools. The judge ruled that the
legislature has met its requirement to fund schools, but has
failed to maintain those schools. Further, where schools have
failed to meet adequate yearly progress, local control must give
way to legislative oversight that is delegated to the Department
of Education and Early Development (EED). Mr. Lamkin, reading
from the court case, remarked:
The court finds that the education clause requires the
state to take ultimate responsibility for ensuring
that each child in the state is accorded a meaningful
opportunity to achieve proficiency in writing, math,
reading, and science. ... The evidence at trial
clearly established that considerably greater
oversight by the state over the education of Alaska's
children, at least at the state's most seriously
underperforming schools is critically needed. ... In
order to achieve compliance with the education clause
requirements, to maintain a system of public schools,
the state must do, at a minimum, two things. First,
it must establish clear standards for school districts
that are necessary for the districts to retain full
local control. Second, the state must exercise
considerably more oversight and provide considerably
more assistance and direction to those schools that
are identified as failing to meet the state's
constitutional obligation. Finally, this court has
found that the state has violated the education clause
in one significant respect; although the state may
delegate its responsibility to maintain public schools
to local school districts as it has done, it has
failed to exercise adequate supervision and oversight.
MR. LAMKIN concluded that this bill would provide the means for
the EED to exercise the required supervision when needed.
3:11:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER clarified that Version L was before the
committee.
3:11:24 PM
MR. LAMKIN explained each section of the bill. He pointed out
that page 3 of the bill provides clear guidelines as to when an
intervention by the EED into a local district school district
would occur. Mr. Lamkin called the committee's attention to
page 5, line 1, that specified "employees that are in a
supervisory capacity over instructional practices." This
identified principals and superintendents. Further, throughout
the bill, the word "withhold" was replaced by "redirect."
Finally, on page 3, there was a minor oversight of a correction.
3:13:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES observed that one of the points from the
court case states that when a school is deficient, an
intervention occurs throughout the school district based on the
performance of one school in the district.
3:14:47 PM
MR. LAMKIN responded that it was not the purpose of the bill to
affect an entire school district. The language of the bill
allows the EED to intervene specifically at the school, or
schools, that are deficient.
3:15:03 PM
CHAIR WILSON asked how the EED would determine an intervention
was necessary.
3:15:31 PM
EDDY JEANS, Director, School Finance and Facilities Section,
Department of Education and Early Development, spoke first to
Representative Roses' question and stated that on page 5,
[subparagraph] (A), the language allows for "supervisory
authority for instructional practices in the district or in a
specified school."
3:16:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES asked, "Who determines the or?"
3:16:07 PM
MR. JEANS answered that the EED would make the determination.
3:16:20 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES further asked what guidelines would be
used.
3:16:27 PM
MR. JEANS explained that this legislation was to allow the EED
to supervise at the individual school level, as requested by the
court. The district as a whole would still be accounted for by
the standards under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB).
3:17:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES gave an example in which a school is deemed
deficient and intervention begins. He asked whether the EED
advisors would address the concerns only to the personnel of the
deficient school or to the entire district.
3:17:46 PM
MR. JEANS reminded the committee that proposed regulations
allow for a school level component that focuses on individual
schools. This would direct the EED to work with the district
administration and school board to develop a school improvement
plan for a single school, or multiple schools, as necessary.
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES opined that the language in the bill did
not make that distinction.
MR. JEANS affirmed that the EED does have a desk audit and
intervention strategy for districts in separate regulations.
3:19:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES observed that this discussion is to clarify
the distinction and intent of the bill. He noted that there is
concern from school districts on this issue.
3:19:22 PM
MR. LAMKIN pointed out the letter of intent provided in the
committee packet.
3:19:53 PM
CHAIR WILSON recalled that the committee previously used the
tests scores from NCLB assessments to determine failing schools.
She asked what the procedure would be after the passage of SB
285.
MR. JEANS explained that the common thread between state
intervention and NCLB is the use of the same data. However, the
state intervention is guided by regulations from the State Board
of Education. First, the school must meet its annual yearly
progress (AYP); second, 50 percent of the students must be
proficient; third, the students must show growth. If there is
no growth, the intervention process begins.
3:22:15 PM
CHAIR WILSON surmised that, in the first year, a school might be
put on notice.
3:22:31 PM
MR. JEANS indicated that, if decreases were apparent in student
proficiencies in one year, there would not be any hesitancy on
the part of the EED to contact the school and begin a school
level improvement plan, including training and possibly the
assignment of a school coach.
3:24:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER referred to page 3, line 25, that directs
the EED to inform the legislature before intervention. She
asked how this requirement would affect the timing of an
intervention.
3:24:56 PM
LES MORSE, Director, Assessment and Accountability, Department
of Education and Early Development, informed the committee that
assessments take place in April and school progress
determinations would be final, and are analyzed, in August. He
pointed out that analysis is not solely based on annual AYP, but
on other data also.
3:25:47 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER further asked whether a decision made in
August would be delayed until the legislature convenes in
January.
3:26:02 PM
MR. JEANS said no. The bill does not require approval by the
legislature to intervene, but that the legislature would be
provided notice of any action.
3:26:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER advised that the bill states [page 3,
line 26] that the legislature would receive notification before
intervention.
3:27:16 PM
SENATOR GARY STEVENS, Alaska State Legislature, stressed that
the legislature can not abandon its responsibility; even during
interim, meetings would be held by committees to shoulder this
responsibility and to maintain the legislature's involvement.
3:28:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER expressed her concern that establishing
in statute that the legislature must be informed before an
intervention, may be an impediment to the EED.
3:29:01 PM
MR. JEANS opined that this requirement would not be an
impediment, but would simply require written notice to the
committee chair of each body that an intervention was necessary.
CHAIR WILSON indicated the propriety of notification.
3:29:39 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER referred to the transcript of the Moore v
State case and read:
Mr. Slotnick said, speaking to the judge, "As far as
the legislature taking action, the legislature is
going to do what it does. We don't know if it will
take any action or not, but as far as what the state
Department of Education is doing, that's in progress,
that's not going to change, and even if there were
action taken by the legislature that wouldn't change
the improvement plans that we have in place that we're
implementing right now.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER then questioned whether SB 285 was
necessary.
3:31:09 PM
MR. JEANS assured the committee that SB 285 clarifies that the
legislature supports interventions by the EED in schools. When
the EED intervenes through NCLB, the first question from the
local district is whether it has the authority to act; this
legislation will remove the question of local control.
3:31:53 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA opined that the state should support
schools in a constructive way. She then referred to page 3,
line 27, that read "withholding public school funding" and asked
whether "redirecting public school funding" would be more
appropriate.
3:33:44 PM
MR. LAMKIN agreed and indicated that the language would be
changed in the forthcoming committee substitute (CS).
3:34:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA asked whether the school coaches are
adequately trained to assist schools in rural communities such
as South Naknek, in a supportive and cooperative effort.
3:35:42 PM
MR. JEANS acknowledged that South Naknek is unique; however, its
situation is not new. The high school students have been flying
across the river for many years, and now the population has
declined and the decision was made at the local level to close
the grade school. Previous legislation dictated that a school
must have ten students to receive funding at a separate site.
On the other hand, this legislation was to help improve student
achievement at schools that are not making progress in
instructional practices. Mr. Eddy stated that past
interventions have resulted in increases in student achievement
in all of the districts affected.
3:37:54 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER referred to the gains that schools have
made after intervention and asked Mr. Jeans whether, in some
cases, outside factors can not be overcome.
3:38:26 PM
MR. JEANS accepted that possibility; however, the state would
need to be able to demonstrate to the courts that the EED has
made every effort within the confines of the school to increase
achievement.
3:38:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES stated his support for the concept of the
bill. Furthermore, the state has taken steps beyond this
legislation to prove to the court that adequate and equitable
adjustments across the state are being made by the
implementation of area cost differentials to ensure equitable
opportunities for education. Also, the state is making
adjustments in school transportation costs. Addressing the
concerns of intensive needs students is another prescriptive
measure taken. He stressed that the problem will not be solved
immediately, however, the state has demonstrated its
understanding of the problem and prescriptive measures toward
solutions are underway. Representative Roses pointed out that
the court's decision covered K through 12 education, which
includes charter, home, and correspondence schools. Thus, the
Joint Legislative Education Funding Task Force began the work
required, and he indicated that the court should acknowledge
this first step. Representative Roses warned that one bill will
not provide all of the strategies needed.
3:43:02 PM
MR. JEANS reminded the committee that the state won the lawsuit
in the area concerning whether the state provides adequate funds
for education. The point that the judge made was that
sufficient oversight was not being provided in areas where
students are not meeting proficiencies. He opined that this
legislation responds to the ruling by the judge by giving the
EED the clear authority to intervene in individual schools.
3:44:12 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES gave the example of the intervention of the
Northwest Arctic School District. He expressed his
understanding that three of the twelve schools were identified
by the instructional audit, but the intervention was district
wide.
3:44:45 PM
MR. JEANS disagreed.
3:45:14 PM
MR. MORSE explained that an instructional audit was done in
three schools for data on the school district. In addition,
data from 2005 was compared and indicated that eight of the
twelve schools had declined in performance. Furthermore, ten of
the schools had not made AYP for several years. Mr. Morse
pointed out that site visits are representative of what is
happening in the district. In response to a question, he
indicated that sites are picked for their ability to represent
the district.
3:46:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES related his experience with irrelevant in-
services. He questioned the wisdom of redirecting funds that
are needed for programs. On the other hand, perhaps effective
districts should be rewarded. He then asked for an explanation
of what the long range impact is to a school that must redirect
funding from programs due to an intervention.
3:49:32 PM
MR. MORSE explained how a lack of efficiency was identified in
another school district. The EED assisted the district with
changes in curriculum and funding redirection resulted in gains
within a short period of time.
3:51:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES reminded the committee that every
department in the state has a supplemental budget, except for
the school districts. He expressed his concern that the
redirection of funds, without a mechanism to recapture those
funds, could have a negative impact on schools.
3:52:10 PM
CHAIR WILSON asked for the funding source that pays coaches who
go to the schools.
3:52:28 PM
MR. JEANS stated that the fiscal note includes over $200,000
that would be used to hire the coaches, as well as the
redirected funds. He cautioned against requiring the districts
to pay for the coaches.
3:53:12 PM
CHAIR WILSON agreed that there is a negative impact of
redirecting money from a district's instructional budget to
provide funds for a coach. She supported the fiscal note
accompanying the bill. Chair Wilson then invited public
testimony.
3:54:32 PM
NORMAN ECK, PhD; Superintendent, Northwest Arctic Borough School
District, stated that he was speaking as an individual and
indicated his support for SB 285 and the improvements that have
been made to the original bill. He agreed that this bill is a
first step in acknowledging the constitutional right of all
children to be successful academically. Dr. Eck described how
the intervention occurred in his district, and explained that
prior to that action, a district wide improvement plan was in
progress. His school district was pleased to partner with the
EED in the intervention and expects to continue to see student
growth. The three schools in his district that were subject to
intervention had flat line performances over a period of time
and they are now experiencing growth. However, he said that a
more focused approach would be superior as teachers in
successful schools are unnecessarily included in intervention
strategies. Furthermore, the fiscal note accompanying SB 285
is inadequate as schools in rural areas do not have the
infrastructure, such as school psychologists and speech
pathologists, to make a difference. He suggested a pool of $5
million that would be available to the five school districts
identified for intervention. Dr. Eck summarized that the EED
has been communicative with his district on the issues of the
intervention; nevertheless, there were errors and flaws in the
execution of the task. In fact, there were some harmful aspects
to the intervention, and he cited a 50 percent turnover in staff
that has occurred as a consequence. Dr. Eck advised the
committee that SB 285 was legislation that was necessary for an
in-depth examination of all of the issues.
4:03:08 PM
CHAIR WILSON closed public testimony, and stated her intent to
hold the bill.
4:03:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH recalled the statement made by the
superintendent that "the department should have been ready."
She expressed her belief that the school district should have
been ready and pointed out that the EED communicated with the
school district on the program and analysis of the intervention.
Additionally, she agreed that an intervention by the state
should do no harm. Representative Fairclough then opined that
the state should establish best teaching practices statewide and
intervention is necessary when progress is not being made. She
remarked:
We do listen and we cogitate, and we re-think and we
debate, but it doesn't mean that it's a statement of
fact, just because it's said on the record.
4:05:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked Mr. Morse for the definition of
proficiency as used in the language of the bill to determine the
end date of an intervention and to measure growth.
4:06:33 PM
MR. MORSE explained that there are four levels of proficiency;
far below, below, proficient, and advanced. The EED looks at
how many students are proficient and advanced, not just whether
there has been an improvement from far below to below.
Therefore, there must be a two percent increase in groups of
students moving into proficiency in each of the content areas of
reading, writing, and math, for three consecutive years.
4:07:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON clarified that the percentage of students
moving from proficient to advanced, or from far below to below,
has no effect.
4:08:29 PM
MR. MORSE said that is correct. The ultimate goal is for every
child to be proficient, at the minimum.
4:08:54 PM
CHAIR WILSON observed that a below proficient student would
increase by two percent.
MR. MORSE stated that that is the group that would need to make
gains.
4:09:14 PM
CHAIR WILSON opined that the language of the bill differs from
Mr. Morse's statement.
MR. MORSE assured the committee of the intent of the bill.
4:10:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked whether "proficiency" is the
measure, or is it the two percent student growth. He surmised
that the two percent increase is in the number of students that
pass the line from below proficient to above proficient.
Measurements of students that move from proficient to advanced
would not yield an increase in proficiency.
4:11:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES warned about the type of assessment that
focuses all of the energy and resources on bringing below
proficient percentages up, at the expense of maintaining a
steady percentage of advanced students.
4:12:32 PM
MR. MORSE responded that the growth of all the students in a
school is monitored. In finding an exit strategy to end an
intervention, an attempt was made to create a line that would be
clear enough to indicate a means for proficiency. He assured
the committee that growth factors are always measured in the
accountability systems.
4:13:52 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES stated that teaching to mediocrity is his
concern. It should not be the intent, or the goal, to focus on
the students who need to attain proficiency; the intent should
be for every student to increase and individual growth should be
measured.
4:14:43 PM
MR. MORSE said that is correct.
4:14:46 PM
CHAIR WILSON announced that SB 285 would be held.
HB 386-ENERGY SUBSIDY FOR SCHOOLS
4:15:14 PM
CHAIR WILSON announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 386, "An Act relating to an energy subsidy for
public schools."
THOMAS BROWN, Intern to Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Alaska
State Legislature, speaking on behalf of the sponsor,
Representative LeDoux, informed the committee that HB 386 was
drafted in response to requests made by school districts
throughout the state. He noted that gas prices have increased
110 percent in the last 13 months and, even with the recent
passage of funding for education, school districts will have
difficulties maintaining budgets. Mr. Brown referred to budget
reports submitted by Carl Rose, the Executive Director of the
Association of Alaska School Boards, indicating the increase in
energy costs involved in operating a school from January to
March, 2007. He further described a variety of conservation
measures taken at schools across the state.
4:18:01 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES recalled that one of the factors of the
area cost differential is the difference in the price of fuel
for the different areas of the state. He stated his opposition
to the bill, as it is written, based on the language that
directs the state to pay 50 percent of the cost of fuel, as
opposed to 50 percent of the increase in the cost of fuel. With
appropriate amendments, he stated, he could support the concept.
4:20:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON questioned the inclusion of FY 06 budgeted
energy costs.
4:21:31 PM
MR. BROWN explained that many school districts have attempted to
mitigate their own cost issues prior to requesting additional
funding. However, these schools are in immediate need.
4:22:54 PM
JIM LANGTON, Superintendent, Denali Borough School District,
described the increases in utility costs for his school
district. With the nearby Usibelli Coal mine one of the schools
in his district is equipped to heat with coal under certain
conditions. Although it is not possible to predict accurately,
he estimated an increase of 10 to 15 percent for next year. Dr.
Langton stated that energy costs are eating into his budget and
instructional cuts are still being made in spite of the
additional base student allocation (BSA) funding to his
district.
4:25:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES asked what was budgeted last year versus
next year.
DR. LANGTON answered that the FY 06-07 actual cost was $167,000
for electricity and $260,000 for fuel. This year's budget
request will be $170,000 [for electricity] and $277,000 [for
fuel]. He anticipated exceeding those predictions.
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES observed that there was a $30,000 increase
in total costs.
DR. LANGTON said that the increase is closer to $40,000.
4:26:38 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES remarked:
Are you aware that this particular bill would not even
pick up the increase, but would give you half of
everything that you spent. So if you are projecting
an increase of $40,000 this bill, as it is written,
would actually give you $256,000.
4:26:52 PM
DR. LANGTON stated that he is not aware of the specific language
of the bill. Nevertheless, a majority of the $100 BSA increase
in funds is going to replace school improvement grants in his
district.
4:27:42 PM
BRUCE JOHNSON, Director, Alaska Association of School Boards,
stated his organization's support for school districts receiving
assistance for the extraordinary costs related to energy.
4:28:38 PM
CHAIR WILSON closed public testimony.
4:28:44 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES moved that the committee adopt Conceptual
Amendment 1, such that [language relating that] the state shall
pay 50 percent of the increase in energy costs for the previous
fiscal year [will be inserted].
There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted.
4:29:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH clarified that the subsidy would only
be for the previous year.
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES confirmed that this would pick up 50
percent of the cost of the increase from FY07 to FY08 and then
from FY08 to FY09.
4:30:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER noted that the bill was written for the
fiscal year 2007, but the intent of the amendment was not to
include the increase from 2006 to 2007.
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES re-stated the intent of the amendment that
was adopted.
CHAIR WILSON confirmed that the subsidy was for two years.
4:31:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked the EED to comment on the
implementation of the amendment.
EDDY JEANS, Director, School Finance and Facilities Section,
Department of Education and Early Education, explained that the
amount for FY07 is known, and there is an estimate of FY08, so
an appropriation could be made for FY09. The financial
statements would be available in FY09, thus the amount could be
calculated and distributed, and supplemental funds requested, if
necessary.
4:32:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON surmised that the appropriation would be a
capital budget item this year and the FY09 budget would be
immediately paid to the school districts for the past fiscal
year.
4:32:51 PM
MR. JEANS stated that the funding would be allocated to the
school districts in FY09 based on 50 percent of the increase
from FY07 to FY08. Another appropriation in FY10 would be
provided for the increase from FY08 to FY09.
4:33:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked what effect this would have on the
requirement that a school district spend 70 percent of its
budget on instruction.
4:33:51 PM
MR. JEANS answered that these funds would free up money that
schools are now spending on non-instructional items. For
example, funds spent on fuel could be re-directed back into the
instructional component.
4:34:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES asked what a $100 increase to the BSA would
cost.
4:34:49 PM
MR. JEANS responded that a $100 increase to the BSA costs
roughly $22 million.
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES compared the estimated FY08 energy costs
and stated that the amount of $19,542,000 is just short of the
amount of the cost of the increased BSA. Also, this action
would bring the total funding to the amount requested by the
governor for education.
4:35:30 PM
MR. JEANS pointed out that the $19,542,000 remains to be reduced
by 50 percent, as directed by the amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES agreed.
4:35:57 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 4:36:21 PM to 4:37:02 PM.
4:37:13 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER stated his opposition to the bill as it
does not appear that the money appropriated to the school
districts would be used for instructional purposes.
4:37:53 PM
CHAIR WILSON opined that this money would go to instruction, as
schools are currently redirecting funds to pay fuel bills.
4:38:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved that the committee adopt Amendment
2, such that the language "50 percent" is deleted and new
language inserted specifying that the subsidy would be for the
increase in fuel cost.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER objected. She then asked whether the
adoption of the amendment would be the equivalent of the passage
of a $200 increase to the BSA [by the legislature].
4:39:20 PM
There followed a brief discussion, and members agreed.
4:39:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH stated her opposition to the bill if
Amendment 2 is adopted. She stressed that cost increases must
be shared.
4:40:41 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Seaton, Gardner,
Roses, and Wilson voted in favor of Amendment 2.
Representatives Fairclough and Keller voted against it.
Therefore, Amendment 2 was adopted by a vote of 4-2.
4:41:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to report HB 386, as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH objected.
4:41:40 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON withdrew his motion. He then moved to
report HB 386 as amended, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the updated forthcoming fiscal note.
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH objected.
4:42:30 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Seaton, Gardner,
Roses, Wilson voted in favor of HB 386, as amended.
Representatives Keller and Fairclough voted against it.
Therefore, HB 386 was reported out of the House Health,
Education and Social Services Standing Committee by a vote of 4-
2.
HB 306-PRE-ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROGRAMS/PLANS
4:48:08 PM
CHAIR WILSON announced that the next order of business would be
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 306, "An Act relating to
providing a voluntary pre-elementary program within a school
district; and providing for the establishment and implementation
of a statewide early childhood education plan."
4:44:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LES GARA, Alaska State Legislature, speaking as
the sponsor, spoke to the recommendations made by the committee
during the first hearing. He stated that the committee
substitute directs that the Department of Education and Early
Development shall devise a plan for early education.
Representative Gara related that the EED is supportive of the
changes to HB 306. In addition, a revision of the title of the
bill is necessary in order to delete "and implementation."
4:46:30 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES moved to adopt CSSSHB 306, Version 25-
LS1228\W, Mischel, 3/26/08, as the working document. There
being no objection, Version W was before the committee.
4:47:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES offered Amendment 1, as follows:
Page 1, line 1;
Delete "and implementation"
There being no objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
4:47:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER recalled the previous discussion of the
bill.
4:48:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked for comments from the Department of
Education and Early Development.
4:48:28 PM
EDDY JEANS, Director, School Finance and Facilities Section,
Department of Education and Early Development (EED), assured the
committee that the committee substitute (CS) for HB 306 was
exactly what was expected. Furthermore, the EED has attached a
revised zero fiscal note for the development of the plan and its
presentation to the legislature.
4:48:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ROSES asked whether the language on page 3, line
17, that includes Head Start, remains acceptable.
MR. JEANS indicated that the language was appropriate.
4:49:21 PM
The committee took an at-ease from 4:49:30 PM to 4:51:34 PM.
4:51:38 PM
CHAIR WILSON explained the reason for the at-ease.
4:51:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE FAIRCLOUGH stated that she had been contacted by
citizens who served on the Best Beginnings task force. She
voiced their concerns that the standards set by the Best
Beginnings task force should be incorporated in the bill. She
pointed out that a component of the working draft includes early
learning guidelines as follows: incorporates the early learning
guidelines adopted by the board under AS 14.07.165(6); and
provides for the most effective and efficient coordination with
or expansion of pre-elementary programs operating in the state,
including Head Start, to the extent permitted by law. She then
stated that she would not try to hold the bill.
4:53:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to report CSSSHB 306, Version 25-
LS1228\W, Mischel, 3/26/08, as amended, out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying revised zero
fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSSSHB 306(HES) was
reported from the House Health, Education and Social Services
Standing Committee.
HB 358-NEEDY CHILDREN: EDUC./ SOCIAL WORKERS
4:54:55 PM
CHAIR WILSON announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 358, "An Act relating to continuing the public
education of a homeless student, to the purpose of certain laws
as they relate to children, to the determination of costs of
maintenance of certain children in foster care, and to the
salaries and benefits of certain social workers employed by the
state; and providing for an effective date."
4:54:57 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LES GARA, Alaska State Legislature, introduced
HB 358 as the sponsor. He informed the committee that the bill
was an attempt to address some of the solvable problems within
the state's foster care system. Two thousand of Alaska's
children are in foster care. Alaska, like many states, has a
shortage of social workers which results in delays in the
investigation of abuse cases. There are also delays when foster
parents need help, or need to contact the state, thus
contributing to the shortage of foster families. He opined that
the shortage of foster families can not be addressed without
first providing more social workers; HB 358 authorizes an
increase in salary for social workers. Moreover, the shortage
of social workers includes vacancies for funded positions and
additional positions that need to be added to the Office of
Children's Services (OCS), Department of Health & Social
Services (DHSS). Furthermore, the Foster Parent Base Rate is
not updated on a timely basis and the bill requires an annual
adjustment of the reimbursement rate. Another problem is that
foster children who must move between schools experience more
academic and social losses. Representative Gara noted that the
bill provides additional support to fund transportation in order
to keep permanently placed foster children in their schools of
origin, and requires schools to transfer their records within
ten days when there is a change in schools. Representative Gara
summarized that the bill solves these four problems.
4:59:39 PM
CHAIR WILSON stated that HB 358 would be held.
5:00:10 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Health, Education and Social Services Standing Committee meeting
was adjourned at 5:00:15 PM.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|