03/05/2025 03:30 PM Senate EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB13 | |
| SB46 | |
| Presentation(s): Special Education in Alaska | |
| SB93 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 13 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 46 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| = | SB 93 | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
March 5, 2025
3:30 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Löki Tobin, Chair
Senator Jesse Bjorkman
Senator Jesse Kiehl
Senator Mike Cronk
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Gary Stevens, Vice Chair
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 13
"An Act relating to the summer electronic benefits transfer
program for children."
- HEARD & HELD
SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE BILL NO. 46
"An Act relating to education funding; relating to the public
education fund; relating to the base student allocation; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PRESENTATION(S): SPECIAL EDUCATION IN ALASKA
- HEARD
SENATE BILL NO. 93
"An Act relating to district-wide early education programs; and
providing for an effective date."
- MOVED SB 93 OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 13
SHORT TITLE: SUMMER EBT BENEFITS FOR CHILDREN
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) DUNBAR
01/10/25 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/10/25
01/22/25 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/25 (S) EDC, FIN
03/05/25 (S) EDC AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: SB 46
SHORT TITLE: EDUCATION FUNDING
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) CLAMAN
01/17/25 (S) PREFILE RELEASED 1/17/25
01/22/25 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/22/25 (S) EDC, FIN
02/28/25 (S) SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE INTRODUCED-REFERRALS
02/28/25 (S) EDC, FIN
03/05/25 (S) EDC AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
BILL: SB 93
SHORT TITLE: EARLY EDUCATION PROGRAMS
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) TOBIN
02/12/25 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/12/25 (S) EDC, FIN
02/26/25 (S) EDC AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
02/26/25 (S) Heard & Held
02/26/25 (S) MINUTE(EDC)
03/05/25 (S) EDC AT 3:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
SENATOR FORREST DUNBAR, District J
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 13.
GAVIN NORTHEY, Manager
Child Nutrition Programs
Department of Education and Early Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an overview of the fiscal note for
SB 13.
RACHEL LORD, Advocacy and Policy Director
Alaska Food Policy Council
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified by invitation on SB 13.
KELSEY BOON, Senior Child Policy Analyst
Food Research Action Center
Washington, District of Columbia
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified by invitation on SB 13.
JEN GRIFFIS, Vice President
Policy and Advocacy
Alaska Children's Trust
Homer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified by invitation on SB 13.
ALAN BUDAHL, Executive Director
Lutheran Social Services of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 13.
VANESSA THOMPSON, Board President
Helping Hands Food Bank
Tok, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of SB 13.
SENATOR MATT CLAMAN, District H
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 46.
SARENA HACKENMILLER, Staff
Senator Matt Claman
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a sectional analysis for SB 46.
REBECCA EMERSON, representing self
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified with concerns on SB 46.
TOM KLAAMEYER, President
National Education Association Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented Special Education in Alaska.
KIM WARD-MASSEY, Speech and Language Pathologist
Anchorage Education Association
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on Special Education.
JOSH GIRARD, Special Education Paraprofessional
Kenai Peninsula Educational Support Association
Seward, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on special education.
JADA KAHL, Occupational Therapist
Juneau Education Association (JEA)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on special education.
ACTION NARRATIVE
3:30:32 PM
CHAIR TOBIN called the Senate Education Standing Committee
meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Present at the call to order were
Senators Kiehl, Cronk, Bjorkman, and Chair Tobin.
SB 13-SUMMER EBT BENEFITS FOR CHILDREN
3:32:46 PM
CHAIR TOBIN announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 13
"An Act relating to the summer electronic benefits transfer
program for children."
3:33:03 PM
SENATOR FORREST DUNBAR, District J, Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska, sponsor of SB 13 paraphrased the following
statement:
[Original punctuation provided.]
SPONSOR STATEMENT SB 13: SUMMER EBT BENEFITS FOR
CHILDREN
Version N
February 5, 2025
"An Act relating to the summer electronic benefits
transfer program for children."
When the school year comes to an end each summer,
children from low-income households lose access to the
consistent and reliable school meals that they rely
on. The Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer
EBT) for children program is a federal program that
was designed in order address summer hunger throughout
the country by providing $40 per summer month per
child in low-income families to be used for food
assistance.
Beyond simply ensuring that Alaskan children have
access to food, an analysis by the USDA looking at
SNAP benefits shows that every dollar that is spent
during an economic downturn on SNAP actually generates
between $1.50 and $1.80 in local economic activity.
For our state, that would be an expected economic
impact between $10,440,000 and $12,528,000 from Summer
EBT benefits for the summer of 2025.
This program would go especially far in serving urban
Alaskans. Last year, the State of Alaska declined to
participate in the federal Summer EBT program, leaving
the estimated 58,000 children who would be eligible to
receive these benefits without this option.
USDA evaluations have shown that Summer EBT decreased
the number of kids with very low food security by one-
third; increased whole grain, dairy, fruit, and
vegetable consumption; and decreased sugar-sweetened
beverage consumption.
To help assure that at-risk children have food on the
table, the Department of Education should take the
opportunity to apply for the federal funds that are
available for the Summer EBT program. Through SB 13,
we can provide hunger relief for children from food
insecure families across the state and ensure the
health and well-being of the young people of Alaska.
CHAIR DUNBAR emphasized that SB 13 proposes using federal funds,
when they are available, to feed students. It does not propose
using state funds.
3:35:54 PM
CHAIR TOBIN chose to skip the short sectional analysis of SB 13.
3:36:32 PM
GAVIN NORTHEY, Manager, Child Nutrition Programs, Department of
Education and Early Development (DEED), Juneau, Alaska,
paraphrased the analysis of SB 13 fiscal note OMB component
1955, dated March 4, 2025:
[Original punctuation provided.]
The Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) program,
established under the federal Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2023, provides crucial benefits to
Alaskan families and communities. While its
implementation would bring significant financial
assistance, it imposes a substantial administrative
burden on the Department.
For the summer of 2024, the program could have
delivered between $156 and $240 per eligible child,
benefiting an estimated 53,000 to 58,000 children in
Alaska. These figures, derived from data from DEED and
the Food Research Action Center, translate to a
potential total benefit of up to $10.5 million
statewide. The benefit structure mirrors the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),
ensuring higher benefits for children in remote rural
communities where grocery prices are significantly
higher.
3:37:42 PM
MR. NORTHEY continued paraphrasing the sectional analysis of SB
13:
[Original punctuation provided.]
The total benefit amount of $10,472.0 will be fully
funded by the USDA.
Staffing Needs $413.2
The program requires four full-time positions to
ensure compliance and effective administration:
Program Coordinator I: Responsible for overseeing the
program, including training, contract management,
verification, and reviews.
Education Associate II: Focused on eligibility
determination and maintenance of contracts, including
EBT card management.
Education Associate I (2 positions): Primarily
responsible for eligibility processing and potential
support for card-related issues.
One-Time Costs $491.0
Regulations Development: $6.0
Office Supplies and Equipment for New Staff: $20.0
Contracted EBT and Eligibility Platform Development:
$465.0
Ongoing Administrative Costs $1.8M annually
Federal assistance will provide a 50 percent match for
ongoing administrative expenses, leaving $902.7 to be
funded by nonfederal sources. Key costs include:
Travel: $15.0 for federal compliance training for
staff and training for grantees.
Department Administrative Support: $70.4
Contracts and Maintenance: $1,096.3 for EBT card
management and eligibility platform maintenance, as
well as postage.
Participant Communication Commodities: $210.5
The Summer EBT program represents a significant
opportunity to address food insecurity for children
across Alaska, particularly in remote areas. However,
implementing and maintaining the program comes with
considerable administrative and financial challenges.
To sustain the program, additional non-federal funding
of $902.7 annually will be required to match federal
assistance and ensure compliance with program
requirements
MR. NORTHEY stated that cities in Alaska are defined into three
categories: Urban, Rural I, and Rural II. The category Rule II
receives the highest benefit level. He said in the first year
the state could expect $296,000. The coordinator position is a
Range 13. The Education Associate II position is a Range 15,
with a fiscal impact of $106,200. He said the two Education
Associate I positions are Range 13, with a total fiscal impact
of $190,500. He provided a breakdown on the costs for items such
as travel, training, and contracting.
3:41:31 PM
MR. NORTHEY said the total fiscal impact for 2026 is
$12,768,400; the federal government would provide $11,620,200
and $1,148,200 from the general fund match. From FY27 onward the
expected impact is $12,277,400; the federal government would
provide $11,374,700 and $902,700.
3:42:24 PM
SENATOR CRONK asked what will happen to the positions and the
UGF match of nearly $1 million if no federal funds are
available.
3:42:48 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR stated that the fiscal note was received late the
previous day and had not yet been discussed with the department.
He expressed concern that the administrative costs appeared high
and expressed his intent to work with the department to reduce
the amount. He noted internal debate over whether the Department
of Health (DOH), Division of Children and Family Services
(DCFS), or Department of Education and Early Development (DEED)
should administer the funds. He recognized the state's existing
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) infrastructure and expressed
hope that the summer program could piggyback on existing
infrastructure to reduce costs. He added that SB 13 might
require an amendment since it currently assigns responsibility
to DCFS instead of DEED.
SENATOR DUNBAR acknowledged the possibility of layoffs if the
federal government discontinues the program, noting similar
funding uncertainties affecting Medicaid, education, and rural
internet. He emphasized that these federal funds have been
available to states for years and expressed hope they will
continue, citing the program's success in other states. He
mentioned that invited testifiers could speak about the
program's impact. He reiterated his concerns about the fiscal
note.
3:44:38 PM
SENATOR KIEHL stated that the narrative in the fiscal note did
not align with the figures presented. He suggested asking the
department to provide a breakdown clarifying what expenses fall
into each category and which are eligible for matching funds. He
expressed interest in the bill, noting the appeal of providing
over $10 million in food for needy children. However, he
questioned the department's cost estimate and emphasized the
need for further analysis.
CHAIR TOBIN expressed significant concerns about the fiscal note
and requested a more detailed and thorough explanation. She
questioned why the contributions of tribal partners, who also
support Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) programs in the state,
were not reflected in the fiscal note. She said the bill appears
to focus on adopting regulation and is curious why an entire
division is propped up instead of trying to work within the
existing structure.
3:46:30 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN said he is unsure why additional investigation
to support the program is needed. He asked how many students
would benefit from the program who are not already in families
receiving Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
benefits. He questioned the need for additional employees to
manage what appears to be a simple increase in benefits for
students who already qualify for free and reduced lunch. He
asked for the difference in the number of households receiving
free and reduced lunch compared to those receiving SNAP
benefits.
3:47:52 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR shared from personal experience that he received
reduced-price lunches as a child while his parents did not
receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
benefits. He suggested some families may not qualify for both or
another possibility was the program could function as an
increase to an existing benefit during a different month. He
deferred the question.
3:48:19 PM
SENATOR TOBIN stated that she also received free and reduced
lunch, but her family did not participate in SNAP benefits.
3:48:29 PM
CHAIR TOBIN announced invited testimony on SB 13.
3:48:34 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR thanked the members of the committee for their
comments regarding the fiscal note.
3:49:03 PM
RACHEL LORD, Advocacy and Policy Director, Alaska Food Policy
Council, Homer, Alaska, testified by invitation on SB 13. She
stated that the Alaska Food Policy Council is a nonpartisan
statewide organization focused on strengthening Alaska's food
systems through cross-sector collaboration. She emphasized that
Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) is an effective tool in
reducing childhood food insecurity, which affects one in six
Alaskan children. She supported the program for its dual impact:
relieving pressure on overburdened food banks and injecting
funds into local food systems, including grocery stores, farmers
markets, and agricultural businesses.
MS. LORD noted that her own children qualified for free and
reduced lunch but not Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP) benefits, highlighting a gap the program could address.
She emphasized the need for serious consideration of program
administration, including interdepartmental coordination between
the Department of Health, Division of Public Assistance, and the
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED) Child
Nutrition Program. She stated that improved staffing and
coordination should be a legislative and administrative
priority, and pointed to the governor's proposed budget, which
includes additional eligibility technicians.
3:51:54 PM
MS. LORD explained that families already receiving SNAP benefits
could have summer EBT funds added to existing cards, and
flexibility exists with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
Food and Nutrition Service (USDA FNS) regarding program
implementation. She stressed that understanding the difference
between students eligible for free and reduced lunch and those
not enrolled in SNAP is crucial for planning. With proper
staffing and coordination, she believes Alaska can successfully
manage the program and capture significant economic and social
benefits that outweigh the state's 50 percent administrative
cost share.
MS. LORD responded to Senator Cronk's concern about federal
uncertainty, stating that the application deadline to enroll in
Summer EBT is typically January 1 or February 1, meaning that
even after the bill passes, implementation would be delayed
until the following year. She added that the bill appears to
require state participation only when funding is available,
allowing for ample preparation time.
3:54:19 PM
KELSEY BOON, Senior Child Policy Analyst, Food Research Action
Center, Washington, District of Columbia, testified by
invitation on SB 13. She stated that the Food Research and
Action Center is a national nonprofit focused on ending hunger
and undernutrition through improved public policy. She
highlighted the organization's long-term work on federal child
nutrition programs and its recent collaboration with states and
anti-hunger advocates to implement the Summer Electronic Benefit
Transfer (EBT) program. She stressed that childhood hunger leads
to negative health outcomes, making programs like Summer EBT
essential.
MS. BOON reported that in 2024, 37 states, Washington, D.C., two
tribal organizations, and all five U.S. territories participated
in Summer EBT, providing $2.5 billion in benefits to over 21
million children. She explained that traditional summer meal
programs face access challenges due to transportation and site
limitations, which Summer EBT helps address by providing grocery
benefits directly to families.
MS. BOON stated that approximately 58,000 Alaskan children could
qualify for Summer EBT, which would bring in $7 million in
benefits and create an estimated $12.5 million in economic
impact. She clarified that SNAP eligibility requires family
income below 130 percent of the federal poverty level, while
free and reduced-price meal eligibility extends up to 185
percentmeaning many children qualify for Summer EBT without
receiving SNAP. She urged support for SB 13 to close the summer
nutrition gap and invest in the well-being of Alaska's children.
3:57:40 PM
JEN GRIFFIS, Vice President, Policy and Advocacy, Alaska
Childrens Trust, Homer, Alaska, testified by invitation on SB
13. She stated that as the statewide lead organization focused
on preventing child abuse and neglect, Alaska Children's Trust
(ACT) supports policies that help families access the resources
they need to thrive. She said Alaska's participation in the
federal Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) program would
strengthen families by improving children's health, education,
and overall family economic well-being.
MS. GRIFFIS cited Kids Count data from the Annie E. Casey
Foundation indicating that nearly 20 percent of Alaskan children
live in food-insecure homes. She noted that while many of these
children receive free or reduced-price lunches during the school
year, those supports often do not extend into summer. She said
Summer EBT could provide nutrition assistance to approximately
58,000 children, helping them return to school nourished and
ready to learn.
MS. GRIFFIS emphasized that the program would support healthy
child development by improving access to nutritious food and
would also reduce financial stress on families. She concluded
that SB 13 would positively impact the health, education, and
economic stability of families throughout Alaska.
3:59:41 PM
CHAIR TOBIN opened public testimony on SB 13.
4:00:08 PM
ALAN BUDAHL, Executive Director, Lutheran Social Services of
Alaska, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in support of SB 13. He
said he operates one of the largest food pantries in the state.
He expressed strong support for SB 13, which would establish the
Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) program to help
families and school-age children access food when schools are
closed. He noted that summer is the busiest time for their
pantry due to increased food insecurity caused by the absence of
school-provided meals. He emphasized that SB 13 offers a
sustainable solution by providing direct support to families,
reducing reliance on emergency food assistance, and helping
children remain healthy and prepared for the next school year.
4:02:31 PM
VANESSA THOMPSON, Board President, Helping Hands Food Bank, Tok,
Alaska, testified in support of SB 13 on behalf of the board and
clients of Helping Hands Food Bank. She stated that the food
bank serves an average of 90 families each month, including 40
families with one or more school-aged children, and highlighted
the gap left when school meals are unavailable. She noted that
while younger children may qualify for the Women, Infants, and
Children (WIC) program, there are no alternatives that replace
school meal nutrition for older children. She emphasized that
implementing the Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT)
program at the Tok School would help keep children nourished and
engaged during the summer months.
4:03:59 PM
CHAIR TOBIN closed public testimony on SB 13.
4:04:11 PM
SENATOR DUNBAR thanked the committee for hearing SB 13 and
acknowledged concerns raised about the fiscal note. He stated
his intention to work with the department and reach out to
committee members, particularly Senator Kiel of the Finance
Committee, where the bill is headed next. He encouraged
collaboration on any needed changes and emphasized that
testimony had shown the bill would help children across Alaska.
He noted that while $40 per student is not a complete solution,
it would make a meaningful difference in addressing child
hunger.
4:05:12 PM
CHAIR TOBIN held SB 13 in committee.
SB 46-EDUCATION FUNDING
4:05:28 PM
CHAIR TOBIN announced the consideration of SPONSOR SUBSTITUTE
FOR SENATE BILL NO. 46 "An Act relating to education funding;
relating to the public education fund; relating to the base
student allocation; and providing for an effective date."
4:06:00 PM
SENATOR MATT CLAMAN, District H, Alaska State Legislature,
Juneau, Alaska, sponsor of SB 46 provided the following
statement:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Senate Bill 46
Sponsor Statement Version N
"An Act relating to education funding; relating to the
public education fund; relating to the base student
allocation; and providing for an effective date."
Senate Bill 46 will help address the public education
funding crisis in Alaska. Public education funding is
a significant topic for the state legislature.
Currently, Alaska faces challenges with school
closures and increasing class sizes coupled with the
loss of experienced teachers and staff due to budget
constraints. The legislature is constitutionally
mandated to establish and maintain a system of public
schools open to all children of the State. Currently,
a key component of funding this constitutional mandate
is the Base Student Allocation (BSA).
The legislature established the BSA in 1998 and it is
one part of a calculation that establishes the Basic
Need of funding per student. But the BSA has been
consistently underfunded and does not keep up with
inflation. Since FY 11, the legislature has increased
the BSA on four occasions totaling $230. According to
the Anchorage School District, we would need to
increase the FY 26 BSA by $1,963 to match the buying
power of the FY 11 BSA. In the same 15-year period,
we've added Outside-the-Formula (OTF) funding 11
times. The BSA structure with multiple OTF
appropriations is confusing and ineffective. Schools,
parents, and teachers are unable to effectively plan
or budget for the next school year.
Instead of trying to use the BSA, this bill proposes a
single, direct appropriation for public education,
similar to the funding process used for all other
state departments. This bill will shift the focus of
the funding discussion from the BSA to a well-defined
total appropriation for public education. It will
streamline the funding process from two steps to one.
The funding formula considers factors such as the
number of students, school size, cost of living,
special education needs, and career and technical
education will remain in place. In addition, the bill
mandates increased transparency by requiring the
governor to publish prior year education expenditures,
adjusted for inflation, to serve as a baseline for the
upcoming budget.
Public education is our best investment in Alaska's
future. This bill will establish a more transparent
mechanism for funding public education that keeps pace
with inflation and contributes to improved student
performance.
4:09:10 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN gave a presentation on SB 46. He moved to slide
2, FY25 Education Funding, a graph showing the percentage of
funding from three main sources: State (62 percent), Local (25
percent), Federal (11 percent), and other (2 percent). He then
moved to slide 3 and described how basic need and state aid are
determined currently and the changes under SB 46:
[Original punctuation provided.]
The current structure starts with the statutory Base
Student Allocation multiplied by the Adjusted Average
Daily Membership to get the District Basic Need. From
this total, deductions are made where appropriate for
the required District Local Contribution and District
Federal Impact Aid. This equation provides the
District State Aid and the total for all 53 districts
is the Total State Aid appropriated by the
Legislature. One-time funding is added after this
initial calculation.
Under Senate Bill 46, we start with the Total State
Aid appropriated by the Legislature and add in the
Total Required Local Contributions and the Total
Federal Impact Aid to determine the Total Statewide
Basic Need. We then adjust the Total Statewide Basic
Need for inflation as a starting point.
Then multiply the inflation-adjusted Total Statewide
Basic Need by the district AADM percentage of the
total AADM to get the District Basic Need. And from
each District Basic Need, make deductions for the
required District Local Contribution and the District
Federal Impact Aid to get the District State Aid.
4:10:36 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN moved to slide 4, Current Structure - District
State Aid, a chart showing FY25 Projected AADM, FY25 Basic Need,
FY 25 District Required Local Contribution, FY25 District
Deductible Federal Impact Aid, FY25 One-Time Funding and FY25
District State Aid for four Alaskan Schools. He compared the
funding of the four schools
[Original punctuation provided.]
This slide illustrates the current structure for
district state aid. We chose four school districts
that illustrate different funding sources. The
Anchorage district has both a required local
contribution and federal impact aid. The Lower Yukon
district has federal impact aid and no required local
contribution. The Mat-Su district has a required local
contribution and no federal impact aid. And the
Southeast Island district has no required local
contribution and no federal impact aid. The FY25
District State Aid in Column G includes last year's
one-time funding.
4:11:16 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN moved to slide 5, Senate Bill 46 - Statewide
Basic Need. He said:
[Original punctuation provided.]
This slide illustrates the FY 26 Statewide Basic Need
calculations using Senate Bill 46. We add the total FY
25 Appropriation for State Aid, the total Required
Local Contribution, and the total Federal Impact Aid.
This total for FY 25 Statewide Basic Need in Column E
is then adjusted for inflation, shown in Column F.
This may be the starting point for funding.
4:11:47 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN moved to slide 6, Senate Bill 46 District AADM, a
chart showing the FY26 Projected Statewide AADM, FY26 Projected
District AADM, and FY26 District's Percentage of Statewide AADM
of the four areas and said:
[Original punctuation provided.]
This slide illustrates the FY 26 calculation of each
district's percentage of the statewide AADM by simply
dividing each district's AADM by the statewide AADM.
This percentage is then used to determine District
State Aid, in the next slide.
4:12:04 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN moved to slide 7, Senate Bill 46 - District State
Aid, a chart showing FY26 Projected Statewide AADM, FY26
Projected District AADM and FY26 District's Percentage of
Statewide AADM. He said:
[Original punctuation provided.]
This slide illustrates the FY 26 calculation of each
district's percentage of the statewide AADM by simply
dividing each district's AADM by the statewide AADM.
This percentage is then used to determine District
State Aid, in the next slide.
4:12:36 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN moved to slide 8 Comparison - District State Aid,
a chart showing FY25 District State Aid Current Structure (AADM
x $5,960), FY25 District State Aid Current Structure (with one-
time funding: AADM x $680), and FY26 District State Aid Senate
Bill 46. He said:
[Original punctuation provided.]
This slide compares the FY 25 District State Aid under
the current structure and the FY 26 District State Aid
using Senate Bill 46. These calculations reflect the
inflation adjustment from FY 25 to FY 26.
These calculations are also set forth on the
spreadsheet that we distributed to the committee.
One of the key differences between the current
structure and the Senate Bill 46 structure is how
school districts will budget moving forward each year.
Take the Anchorage School District as an example. The
current proposed budget in the news is based on the
statutory BSA, and many of the proposed cuts are based
on an appropriation that does not include any one-time
funding or any increase in the BSA. For Anchorage,
that base amount is $49.1 million less than the amount
they would use if the FY 25 one-time funding was part
of their calculation. In contrast, under Senate Bill
46, Anchorage would probably start with flat-funding
based on FY 2025-a total state appropriation for the
district of $351 million. This starting point is $49.1
million greater than they are using today. And if the
governor's initial budget started with a 3 percent cut
to education statewide, then Anchorage could lower
their total school budget by 3 percent starting with
$341 million instead of $351 million. This starting
point is still a substantially greater number that the
starting point today- $302 million - and a more
transparent approach for the public. Finally, if the
governor's initial budget started with a 3 percent
increase to education statewide, then the Anchorage
School District could make an appropriate adjustment.
4:14:49 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN concluded the presentation on SB 46 by saying:
[Original punctuation provided.]
In summary, the straight-forward, one-step approach of
Senate Bill 46 will be more transparent for the public
and more reliable for our public-school districts and
Alaska's children.
4:15:10 PM
SARENA HACKENMILLER, Staff, Senator Matt Claman, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, provided a sectional analysis of SB
46.
[Original punctuation provided.]
Senate Bill 46
Sectional Analysis Version I
Section 1
AS 14.03.150(c). Property insurance required. Updates
a statutory reference to conform with
Section 2
Section 2 AS 14.17.410(b)(1). Public school funding.
Modifies paragraph (1) reconfiguring the three funding
sources of public education funding and removes the
base student allocation (BSA). Redefines basic need as
the amount of state aid calculated under new
subsection (g) plus required local contribution and 90
percent of the district's eligible federal impact aid
for that fiscal year.
4:15:55 PM
MS. HACKENMILLER continued the sectional analysis of SB 46:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Section 3
AS 14.17.410. Public school funding. Adds a new
subsection (g) outlining the calculations that the
department shall use to determine state aid for each
district.
Section 4
AS 14.17.430. State funding for correspondence study.
Replaces the public education fund with legislative
appropriation as the funding source of state
correspondence study programs.
Section 5
AS 14.17.440(a). State funding for state boarding
schools. Replaces the public education fund with
legislative appropriation as the funding source of
state boarding schools.
Section 6
AS 14.17.500(a). Student count estimate. Updates a
statutory reference to conform with Section 2.
Section 7
AS 14.17.610(b). Distribution of student aid. Amends
statute to remit any unused funds to the general fund
rather than the public education fund.
Section 8
AS 14.17.900(b). Construction and implementation of
chapter. Removes requirement to appropriate funds to
the public education fund.
Section 9
AS 37.07.020(b). Responsibilities of the governor.
Amends statute to remove the public education fund
from the list of significant funds of which the
governor must include projected balances each year.
Section 10
AS 37.07.020. Responsibilities of the governor. Adds
new subsection (h) requiring that the governor publish
two reports per year in December and March, showing
education expenses adjusted for inflation in prior
year and current year.
4:17:03 PM
MS. HACKENMILLER continued the sectional analysis for SB 46:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Section 11
Repeals the following sections and subsections in
conformance with new language.
1. AS 14.17.300. Public education fund.
2. AS 14.17.400. State aid for districts.
3. AS 14.17.410(a). Public school funding.
4. AS 14.17.470. Base student allocation.
5. AS 14.17.480(b). Quality school funding.
6. AS 14.17.490(c). Public school funding
adjustments.
Section 12
Adds a new section to uncodified law stating that this
Act applies to a contract that becomes legally binding
on or after the effective date of this Act.
Section 13
Effective date Provides an effective date of July 1,
2025.
4:17:37 PM
SENATOR KIEHL thanked the presenters for a thought-provoking
approach to addressing education funding. He asked whether SB 46
essentially reverses the current process by starting with the
total desired spending amount and then dividing by the adjusted
number of students, rather than starting with a per-student
amount and adjusting it through various calculations.
4:18:23 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN responded that broadly, yes, SB 46 shifts the
approach. He explained that because districts rely on the base
student allocation (BSA) as the starting point for budgetingand
because one-time funding is not included in that basethey often
present budgets based on a much lower figure than what the
legislature ultimately approves. He stated that this leads to a
lack of transparency and makes it difficult to discuss real
increases or decreases in funding. He emphasized that while the
change might appear to be a math exercise, it actually allows
districts to more accurately communicate their financial
realities.
4:19:44 PM
SENATOR KIEHL expressed concern about the structure of SB 46,
noting that it does not create a dedicated fund or limit the
Legislature's appropriation power or the Governor's veto
authority. He stated that, in practice, the true starting point
for funding is whatever the Governor includes in the December 15
budget proposal, not what was allocated the previous year.
4:20:14 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN responded that the starting point is partly what
the Governor proposes but not entirely. He explained that while
the Governor's December 15 proposal initiates the budget
process, the Legislature retains appropriation authority and can
shift the discussion. He noted that, for example, if the
Governor proposed a $175 million cut from the prior year's
spending, public reaction would be substantially different than
current discussions. He concluded that although the Governor
sets the initial figure, the Legislature can present an
alternative starting point, and SB 46 would help create a more
transparent dialogue with the public about education funding.
4:21:19 PM
SENATOR KIEHL said that, based on his reading, SB 46 pools
required local contribution with state aid and federal impact
aid to calculate a total funding amount, which is then divided
into a per-student flow to the district. Each district's
required local contribution is then subtracted from the check it
receives. He asked if his understanding of this portion of SB 46
was correct.
4:22:27 PM
SENATOR CLAMAN responded that SB 46 does not function as
described and clarified that he does not interpret the required
local contributions as being pooled and then subtracted from a
statewide total. He explained that each district's local
contribution is accounted for individually when calculating that
district's funding, similar to the current method based on per-
student allocations. He stated that the state appropriation
figure does not include the local contributions and used
Anchorage, Juneau, and Fairbanks as examples where the local
share is applied at the district level rather than from a pooled
amount.
4:23:51 PM
SENATOR KIEHL thanked the sponsor for clarifying his intent and
noted that there may be a discrepancy between the bill's
drafting and the sponsor's stated goals. He acknowledged that
the explanation provided aligns more closely with current
funding practices, which he found helpful.
4:24:53 PM
CHAIR TOBIN opened public testimony on SB 46.
4:25:13 PM
REBECCA EMERSON, representing self, Palmer, Alaska, testified
with concerns on SB 46. She said she is a parent of a child with
Down syndrome enrolled in special education in the Mat-Su
Borough. She expressed concern about how special needs funding
is allocated and whether it adequately follows the student. She
observed limited resources, including insufficient staffing of
teachers, paraprofessionals, and related service providers. She
requested greater transparency and a focused effort to ensure
special education students receive the resources they need.
4:25:54 PM
CHAIR TOBIN closed public testimony on SB 46.
4:25:57 PM
CHAIR TOBIN held SB 46 in committee.
^PRESENTATION(S): SPECIAL EDUCATION IN ALASKA
PRESENTATION(S): SPECIAL EDUCATION IN ALASKA
4:26:10 PM
CHAIR TOBIN announced the presentation Special Education in
Alaska.
4:26:5PM
TOM KLAAMEYER, Alaska President, National Education Association
(NEA), Anchorage, Alaska, moved to slide 3 and stated he was
pleased to highlight the vital role of Alaska's special
education professionals, including teachers, support staff, and
related service providers such as occupational and physical
therapists, nurses, speech pathologists, and school
psychologists. He emphasized their integral contributions to
student support. He identified himself as a high school social
studies teacher and representative of 10,000 education
professionals across various specialties. He noted he is not
certified in special education due to its complex laws and
requirements and commended special education staff for their
specialized and essential work:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Who serves our students?
Special Education Teachers
Special Education
Paraprofessionals
Related Service Providers
• Counselors
• School Psychologists
• Speech & Language Pathologists
• Occupational Therapists
• Physical Therapists
• School Nurses
• School Social Workers
• ?and more!
4:27:56 PM
MR. KLAAMEYER moved to slide 4, Alaska Teacher and Personnel,
showing a pie graph of current posting percentages for special
education, related services, and general education:
Alaska Teacher and Personnel
• Total postings 1653
• "Special Education"
• Positions 524
• Related Service
• Providers 113
MR. KLAAMEYER stated that nearly 40 percent of current vacancies
on Alaska's teacher and personnel recruitment website are for
special education positions, despite only about 15 percent of
students being identified for special education services. He
added that related service providers make up another 10 to 15
percent of vacancies. He emphasized that although special
education personnel represent a small portion of the overall
certified workforce, the state is failing to meet staffing
demands, and students deserve better. He highlighted Alaska's
unique challenges, including vast geography, diverse student
populations, and limited educational resources, and praised
existing educators for their dedication and resilience.
4:28:56 PM
MR. KLAAMEYER moved to slide 5, Background, and stated that the
provided packet includes background information on the legal
definitions and requirements related to special education under
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which
ensures all students receive a free and appropriate public
education in the least restrictive environment. He noted he
would not review the material in detail but offered it for
context and said additional information is available if needed.
He added that national trends show a growing number of students
qualifying for special education services:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Background
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
is the federal law that ensures students with
disabilities are provided with a free appropriate
public education (FAPE) that is tailored to their
individual needs.
Free & Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)
Students with disabilities have a legal right to a
free appropriate public education (FAPE). Each
qualified person with a disability who is in the
school district's jurisdiction, regardless of the
nature or severity of the person's disability, is
entitle to FAPE.
4:29:35 PM
MR. KLAAMEYER moved to slide 6, Background cont'd, and said
there are an increasing number of students that are identified
and receiving special education services. Alaska exceeds those
trends:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Background, cont'd
Individualized Education Plan (IEP)
An Individualized Education Program (IEP) is a written
plan developed for a student identified with a
disability by a team of education professionals, the
parent/guardian, and the child (when appropriate) that
describes the special education instruction, supports,
and services a student needs to receive free
appropriate public education (FAPE).
National Trends:
Students receiving SpEd services are going up nation-
wide. According to the U.S. Department of Education,
EdFacts Data Warehouse, from FY22 to FY23, students
qualifying for services based on the following
disabilities have increased in the US. Alaska is
seeing similar trends.
Speech/Lang Impairment
PreK - 10.3 percent
School Age - 2.9 percent
Total increase in students = 51,653
Developmental Delay
PreK 11.5 percent
School Age 3.7 percent
Total increase in students = 34,916
Autism Spectrum Disorder
PreK 33 percent
School Age 9.7 percent
Total increase in students = 100,782
4:29:49 PM
MR. KLAAMEYER moved to slide 7, Background, cont'd - Qualifying,
and said there's a very specific and extensive process for
qualifying a student for special education, including a
collaborative team consisting of parents, general education
teachers, special education teachers and others within the
district:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Background cont'd
Qualifying
Qualifying Teams (including parents and educators)
must determine eligibility for Special Education
services by considering if their disability adversely
affects their educational performance, whether the
student requires services, and the specific
educational needs of the student. This is an intensive
process that requires a diagnosis, clearly identified
needs, parent and teacher input, and a variety of
testing done by professionals.
4:30:10 PM
MR. KLAAMEYER moved to slide 8, Background, cont'd - Intensive
Needs and said designating a student as intensive needs is a
more complex and specialized system:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Background, cont'd
Intensive Needs
4 AAC 52.700 (c) A student is eligible for funding as
an intensive student if the student has been
identified for special education and the student needs
and receives individual attention and services that
are significantly more complex and frequent, and
require significantly more resources to provide, than
the services received by other special education
students. The services received by an intensive
student will include services necessary to meet a
critical medical need, services necessary to provide
for the student's health, safety, and educational
needs, and special education and related services
provided by qualified staff for the entire school day
both in and out of the classroom setting. A student
who is able to function independently, with limited or
no supervision, for a substantial period of time,
inside or outside the classroom setting, is not an
intensive student.
4:30:24 PM
CHAIR TOBIN referenced a question raised earlier in a House
hearing regarding how funding for special education students is
tracked and whether it is effectively used to provide required
services. She expressed a desire to reassure the public that
intensive needs funding is being used appropriately. She noted
concerns she has heard that in some cases, the funding allocated
is not sufficient to meet a student's needs, requiring schools
to draw from general education funds to fill the gap. She asked
Mr. Klaameyer to discuss in more detail how intensive needs
special education funds are dispersed and used.
4:31:10 PM
MR. KLAAMEYER stated he did not have district-specific funding
details due to the complexity of the issue but agreed that
special education funding is often inadequate to meet service
requirements. He noted this shortfall exists at both the state
and federal levels, pointing out that federal funding under the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) currently
covers only about 17 percent of what it should. He shared that
the National Education Association (NEA) aims to raise this to
40 percent, though he called that goal unacceptably low and
emphasized it should be fully funded. He added that the state
must compensate for the gap, but strained budgets make this
difficult, and high vacancy rates in these challenging positions
further burden remaining staff and hinder service delivery.
4:32:16 PM
CHAIR TOBIN stated that the National Conference of State
Legislatures' (NCSL) standing education resolution continues to
urge federal partners to fulfill their longstanding commitment
to fund 40 percent of special education costs. She noted that
although this level of support has often been promised, it has
not been delivered.
4:32:32 PM
MR. KLAAMEYER moved to slide 9, which states "All Alaskan
students need champions!" He emphasized that providing special
education services is not optional, it is a legal obligation
that must be met. He noted that Alaska faces unique challenges
due to its geography, with many students living in remote
villages, requiring educators to travel long distances, adapt to
limited technology, and work with families facing economic
hardship and higher rates of disability. He highlighted fetal
alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD) as one example, citing
research from the University of Alaska Anchorage and the Alaska
Mental Health Trust Authority showing the need for specialized
interventions. He further described the impact of critical
staffing shortages, rising workload stress, and on-the-job
injuries. Some special education teachers are choosing to remove
special education from their certifications to avoid these
roles, and related service providers are leaving for better-
paying opportunities in private practice or healthcare, as the
demands of the work continue to grow.
4:34:17 PM
MR. KLAAMEYER stated that special education is not only about
fulfilling legal requirements but also about recognizing the
immense potential of every student. He emphasized that educators
are driven by a passion to provide meaningful support and to
demonstrate the transformative impact of effective special
education services. He described special education students as
truly special, noting their unique strengths and contributions
to classrooms and communities. He concluded by affirming that
these students represent the futureartists, scientists, and
leaders who embody resilience and human potential.
4:34:48 PM
MR. KLAAMEYER moved to slide 10, Critical Actions for Stronger
Public Schools, and stated that in order to support students
with special needs, the state must also support special
educators through competitive salaries and benefits that help
attract and retain qualified professionals. He advocated for
increased investment in the Base Student Allocation (BSA) or
another permanent funding mechanism, noting that one-time
funding is insufficient. He recommended establishing retirement
security and setting manageable class sizes and caseloads in
state statute to ensure resources are directed where they will
have the greatest impacton high-quality educators and
individualized student support. He thanked the Chair and the
majority caucus for their attention to these critical needs and
emphasized the urgent crisis facing special education students.
He concluded by calling for a collective commitment to ensure
every Alaskan student has the opportunity to thrive and
recognized special education professionals as lifelines,
advocates, and beacons of hope.
4:36:46 PM
KIM WARD-MASSEY, Speech and Language Pathologist, Anchorage
Education Association, Anchorage, Alaska, testified on Special
Education. She provided the following testimony:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Madame Chairperson and members of the committee, thank
you for the opportunity to speak today. I have been a
school-based Speech-Language Pathologist for over 20
years across 12 districts in this great state. I am
here to implore you to increase the Base Student
Allocation (BSA). Adequate funding is critical to
ensure that ALL students, especially our most impacted
students, receive the services they need to access
their curriculum. You can do this by helping districts
recruit and retain qualified Speech-Language
Pathologists or SLPs.
You may know someone who has benefited from speech
therapy; you may be someone who has benefited from
speech therapy. In our schools, SLPs play a critical
role in the success of students with disabilities. So,
what does that look like? On any given day, you can
see an SLP teaching a 1st grader how to move their
mouth for the /s/ sound, supporting a kindergartener
with using a voice-output device to say "red markers
please" or breaking down a passage about Benny Benson
so a 5th grader can answer comprehension questions.
SLPs support the communication skills necessary for
literacy, social development, and academic
achievement. However, Alaskalike much of the nation
is facing a severe shortage of school-based SLPs. I am
the Lead SLP in the Anchorage School District. We
currently have 76 SLPs. Since we cannot find qualified
in-person SLPs, almost a third of our therapists are
tele therapists. Tele therapists are contractors who
live in the Lower 48 and provide these services
through an online platform. These virtual contractors
require an on- site paraprofessional. The additional
cost to our district of the 21 paraprofessionals and
technology is approximately 1.2 million dollars. Our
district must use these virtual contractors to provide
these federally mandated services. Without competitive
salaries or a desirable retirement plan, our district
struggles to attract and retain these hard-to-fill
positions, forcing schools to rely on costly contract
services.
The incidence of disabilities is only increasing.
According to the U.S. Department of Education, EdFacts
Data Warehouse, in the U.S. from the 21-22 school year
to the 22-23 school year, preschoolers diagnosed with
a Speech Language Impairment increased by 10 percent.
Preschoolers diagnosed with a developmental delay
increased by 11 percent and preschoolers diagnosed
with autism increased 33 percent. The needs of
students aren't going away.
4:40:31 PM
CHAIR TOBIN stated that a hearing earlier in the week addressed
correspondence programs and raised questions about students with
intensive needs. She asked for clarification on how
correspondence students with intensive needs receive services.
4:40:52 PM
MS. WARD-MASSEY clarified that she is a speech-language
pathologist and not a budget expert. She relayed information
from Anchorage School District Chief Financial Officer Andy
Ratliff, stating that the district receives funding for
intensive needs students in correspondence programs, but those
funds typically do not go to the correspondence programs
directly since services are delivered through neighborhood
schools. She noted that correspondence students do not receive
the general 20 percent special services multiplier. She added
that, according to Mr. Ratliff, the funding mechanism is
consistent statewide, though service delivery may vary by
district.
4:41:43 PM
MR. KLAAMEYER introduced Mr. Girard, a paraprofessional in an
intensive needs and resource special education classroom at
Seward Middle School. He noted that the school has lacked a
full-time regular teacher in that classroom for the past two
years.
4:42:03 PM
JOSH GIRARD, Special Education Paraprofessional, Kenai Peninsula
Educational Support Association, Seward, Alaska, testified on
special education providing the following testimony:
[Original punctuation provided.]
My name is Joshua Girard. I am a paraprofessional, or
Intensive Needs Special Education Aide, at Seward
Middle School. I've worked in Special Education for
six years now, with four years in an Intensive
Needs/Behavior elementary room. I'm here today to ask
you to please vote for an increase to the base student
allocation.
In my school, I am currently the only full-time
permanent special education educator. The other
positions are filled by long-term subs and a
contracted half-time special education teacher. All
three will be leaving after this school year. Without
an increase to the BSA, which will allow districts to
create competitive wages to fill open positions, there
is little chance of hiring key educators in areas with
a high cost of living, such as Seward. As you are
aware, many districts are operating at a severe budget
deficit.
Due to these shortfalls, my daily schedule includes
supporting students in four different subjects, as
well as working with an intensive needs student. I
have to be knowledgeable in all these courses to help
assist my students with their needs, as well as
keeping track of each student's work. Last semester,
when we didn't have a special education teacher, I was
teaching five classes with the help of a virtual SPED
teacher located four hours away and a substitute with
no specialized training in special ed. They were the
only SPED teachers working with me and my students for
almost five months. Our itinerant special education
teacher was already supporting five or more schools,
with several over-the-water sites, and a high
caseload. They added up to eighteen more students to
their caseload with our school. We had to constantly
coordinate in order to meet the needs of our students,
and I was often working past contract hours to prepare
work and update schedules.
We try our best to meet the needs of all students, but
these students deserve access to a full-time, in-
person teacher that is there long enough to get to
know them, their needs, and their potential. This is
not happening because we cannot find anyone to fill
this position and STAY. Seward is increasingly
expensive to live in, with the demand for housing far
outpacing the availability. Teachers and
paraprofessionals like me should be able to afford to
live in the community where we work. Special Education
workload is at an all-time high. We are consistently
being asked to do more with less time and resources.
These vacancies are only increasing the work on
everyone else that is taking positions, making it
unsustainable to stay. A meaningful and permanent
increase to the BSA would allow our districts to
address these things, getting qualified educators to
come here, work here, and stay here. It's what ALL
Alaskan students deserve.
4:44:58 PM
MR. KLAAMEYER introduced Ms. Kahl, an occupational therapist
working with students in Juneau. He noted that over her 13 years
in the district, she has observed a drastic increase in the use
of contracted virtual providers, which has reduced students'
access to services.
4:45:17 PM
JADA KAHL, Occupational Therapist, Juneau Education Association
(JEA), Juneau, Alaska, testified on special education providing
the following testimony:
[Original punctuation provided.]
My name is Jada Kahl and I work as an Occupational
Therapist for the Juneau School District. In the
schools, OT is a related service to special education,
so all serviced students must be identified with a
disability with significant sensorimotor delays along
with unmet needs. An OT helps students develop,
improve, and maintain the skills needed for daily
activities that are essential for learning and
participation such as fine motor skills, interpreting
sensory information, and even self-cares (like getting
dressed or using the restroom). Required job duties
include supporting students and staff. Support ranges
from direct student support to school-wide or program
support to indirect collaboration support. Therapists
must assess, write, and update eligibility reports and
Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) for every
student on their caseload (mine currently sits over 40
students), write treatment encounter notes for each
session (therapists average 610 students per day),
write progress reports, attend weekly special
education meetings for all covered school sites (I
attend 3), attend student-specific meetings, mandatory
trainings, complete modifications to assignments, and
not to mention supporting students in crisis.
These past two weeks alone, I spent over 7 hours
supporting a student due to an unfilled vacancy. I
also spent over 3 hours in collaboration and
modification of assignments for 1 student and spent
time supporting a student in crisis who isn't even in
my caseload. So while yes, a portion of my role is to
provide direct therapy services to around 40 students,
that is only part of my job duties. You see, my job is
more than just a caseload number, it is a workload
that is very multifaceted and can be a bit
unpredictable. In order to support my students with
their learning, they require access to a variety of
resources. Resources including tangible objects,
equipment, and space. But most importantly, our
students require the resource of adequate staffing
highly trained and educated staff who are able to
support their needs. Staff who have the time to work
together, to collaborate, to modify assignments, to
observe and provide feedback, and to support the whole
student.
Understaffing is a major concern in our state,
especially in my district. We have emergency
certificated staff in numerous buildings, all with
various levels of experience or education themselves.
This year alone, we have gone through countless
vacancies in regular education, special education, and
related service providers alike. My own daughter has
had 3 different social studies teachers just this
year. JSD has gone through 3 different OTs and
continues to have vacancies among related service
providers. I continue to get asked to do "just this
one," or to "just take a look and let us know what you
think." Who do you think suffers when staffing
positions are unfilled? The student.
In the words of my daughter, "The switching,
switching, switching just brings so much stress to the
already stressed out teen of today." These staffing
issues are not a "this year's" problem. They ARE the
problem. Year after year we lose staff, and year after
year our districts begin to outsource our Alaskan jobs
to contractors who don't even live in our state or our
communities. Why do people keep leaving? Why can't we
retain the high-quality educators? Because our jobs
have become unsustainable. Understaffed districts keep
pushing a higher and higher caseload onto the special
education teachers and related service providers,
while not seeming to even consider the WORKLOAD that
it takes to support the student. The workload we are
asked to do with fewer and fewer resources is mind-
blowing. The number of students we are asked to
support continues to grow, yet the support of
resources does not. Students' needs are being unmet.
So now you tell mehow are we supposed to support our
students without having a cap on the workload that
each educator and related service provider is asked to
do? How do our students get the resources they need?
And how are any of these resources possible without
FUNDING? How are we supposed to attract, retain, and
compensate our staff without funding? We CAN'T. I urge
you to appropriately fund education, to cap caseloads
by using tools such as a workload calculator, and to
do better by our students. They are our future. If we
continue to do what we are doing, we will continue to
lose high-quality educators and fail our AK students.
4:50:28 PM
MR. KLAAMEYER stated that districts are making various efforts
to address special education vacancies, including signing
bonuses, tuition reimbursement, and training general education
teachers for special education roles. He emphasized that these
measures are not sufficient to meet the scale of the problem,
noting that bonuses are often unsustainable and do little for
long-term retention due to high burnout rates. He described
special education and related services recruitment and retention
as the most acute challenges in education. He concluded by
stressing the critical need for adequate school funding,
retirement benefits, and competitive salaries to attract and
retain high-quality educators for all students.
4:52:08 PM
CHAIR TOBIN thanked the testifiers for sharing their
experiences.
SB 93-EARLY EDUCATION PROGRAMS
4:52:12 PM
CHAIR TOBIN announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 93
"An Act relating to district-wide early education programs; and
providing for an effective date."
4:52:30 PM
CHAIR TOBIN solicited the will of the committee.
4:52:31 PM
SENATOR KIEHL moved to report SB 93, work order 34-LS0430\I,
from committee with individual recommendations and attached
fiscal note(s).
4:52:47 PM
CHAIR TOBIN found no objection and SB 93 was reported from the
Senate Education Standing Committee.
4:53:45 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Tobin adjourned the Senate Education Standing Committee
meeting at 4:53 p.m.