Legislature(1997 - 1998)
03/04/1998 05:30 PM Senate FIN
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
MINUTES
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
4 March 1998
5:30 p.m.
TAPES
SFC-98, #64, Sides A and B
CALL TO ORDER
Senator Bert Sharp, Co-chairman, reconvened the committee at
approximately 5:30 p.m.
PRESENT
In addition to Co-chairman Sharp, Senators Pearce, Phillips,
Donley, Torgerson, Parnell and Adams were present when the
meeting was reconvened.
Also Attending: Senator Gary Wilken; Representative Gene
Therriault; Representative Con Bunde; Deborah Vogt, Deputy
Commissioner, Department of Revenue; Richard Cross, Deputy
Commissioner, Department of Education, Karen Rehfeld,
Director, Education Support Services, Department of
Education; Eddy Jeans, Manager, School Finance Section,
Education Support Services, Department of Education; Dwight
Perkins, Special Assistant to the Commissioner, Department
of Labor; John Cyr, President, NEA-Alaska; Dave Tonkovich,
Fiscal Analyst, Division of Legislative Finance; and aides
to committee members and other legislative members.
SUMMARY INFORMATION
SENATE BILL NO. 36
"An Act relating to transportation of public school
students; relating to school construction grants;
relating to the public school foundation program and to
local aid for education; and providing for an effective
date."
Co-chair Sharp reconvened the committee. He noted that
there were plenty copies of the new CS on the back table for
public scrutiny. Spreadsheets were also available. Several
items needed to be discussed at this meeting. Among them
was the bilingual situation brought up earlier by Senator
Adams. Senator Torgerson also had some topics for
discussion. First topic for discussion would be the
bilingual issue.
Richard Cross, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Education
was invited to join the committee.
Senator Adams asked Mr. Cross to explain the runs as regards
to his amendment #15 if it were to be included in the bill.
Mr. Cross explained the runs done. He said Mr. Jeans would
walk the committee through them.
Eddy Jeans, Manager, School Finance Section, Education
Support Services, Department of Education was invited to
join the committee. He explained the department's
spreadsheet dated 4 March 1998. Page one listed the "A",
"B", "C" categories of the bilingual program and the number
of students projected in each of those categories. Criteria
to qualify for additional funding was that there was at
least fifty percent students in these categories when
compared to the average daily membership. He referred to
column "H" on page one. For the Lower Kuskokwim School to
come up with adjusted students plus special education, which
would have been added into the district's adjusted ADM in
column "T", the distribution was run based on the new
Statewide adjusted ADM. Because of the increases in Lower
Kuskokwim and Yupiit a redistribution of funds was required,
shown on page two. Lower Kuskokwim would now generate an
approximate additional $2.4 million over the current
foundation formula, as shown on page 2, column "F". Yupiit
School would have an additional $318,000 over the current
foundation program. In response to Senator Torgerson the
rest of the pages were the same calculations the committee
had been walked through previously.
Senator Torgerson asked for a brief description of
categories "A", "B", "C" and how students move from one
category to another. Were all three categories being
treated the same as far as per student dollar?
Mr. Jeans said the impact of this amendment there would be
no difference between the monetary value received for a
category "A", "B" or "C" student. An "A" student was
generally a student that did not speak English and there was
very little English spoken in the home. A "B" student spoke
some English, however was not the dominant language and it
could nor could not be spoken at home. A "C" student was a
lesser degree and there was still multiple language both in
the home and spoken by the student.
Senator Torgerson asked how SB 36 treated these students.
Mr. Cross said SB 36, without this amendment, would block
funds for all special needs at twenty percent. It basically
said all districts have equal needs in these categories.
Senator Torgerson asked, under current methods, what would
be the difference in the funding. Mr. Jeans said under the
current foundation program it would take twenty-four
students to generate one instructional unit for category "A"
or "B". Category "C" would take one hundred nineteen
students to generate one instructional unit.
Senator Phillips asked if there were Statewide criteria to
determine these categories and was it set at Federal, State
or local levels? Mr. Cross said in the application of the
Federal bilingual tests for these types of programs and
testing for language dominance the State of Alaska was very
different from California. There are no effective dominant
tests for some of the indigenous language within Alaska and
therefore the method of testing for categories "A", "B" and
"C" is done district by district through a program approved
by the department. There is some flexibility in the testing
due to the fact that some of the indigenous language tests
used in Alaska simply did not exist on the Federal level.
Senator Pearce asked what the schools receiving money for
the bilingual programs were doing. Were they offering
immersion English programs? Were they using it to teach the
language to the non-native? Mr. Cross said there were
different approaches used in different districts. It varied
from village to village depending on how the indigenous
language was used. Senator Pearce asked if the funds could
be used to save the native languages? Mr. Cross said this
was somewhat controversial in the bilingual programs. Some
argue that it is a legitimate use of funds and others follow
the Federal guidelines strictly which says that it isn't.
He would suggest that it was an area that Federal rules for
bilingual programs, which really were designed for
immigrants and foreign languages, simply did not apply to
the situation in rural Alaska.
Senator Phillips asked how one of the three categories was
determined for an individual. Mr. Cross explained. He said
there were tests for proficiency, however it was not as
straightforward as in testing for Spanish or French. The
determination as to what category the student will go to is
made in accordance with the structure as approved by the
Department of Education.
Senator Torgerson said he needed further explanation of the
formula. He referred specifically to page two of the
spreadsheet. Mr. Jeans explained the increased adjusted
ADM. Lower Kuskokwim School district has many schools which
go through the size adjustment tables. He referred to page
three, column "H". Senator Torgerson said he was dividing
the per student out to see what the students were actually
getting and to see if equitable fairness was being achieved.
He outlined for the committee that a student in Anchorage
would receive $4,023; Kenai would receive $4,202; Sitka
would receive $3,969; and Lower Kuskokwim would receive
$19,138. Mr. Jeans said these numbers could basically be
correct. Senator Torgerson said he would continue to check
the figures.
Senator Adams said the amendment for bilingual education
would help not only rural Alaska but also urban Alaska,
since Anchorage claims eighty-two different languages. He
noted for the benefit of his counterpart that the $19,138
for a student in Lower Kuskokwim was still cheaper than the
cost spent on the Alaskan Youth Corps.
Amendment #15 was MOVED by Senator Adams. Senator Torgerson
OBJECTED. Senator Adams said this was the same bilingual
amendment as discussed last night. He felt it was
worthwhile and that bilingual plays a great part in
education no matter where one is.
Senator Phillips commented on the disparity pointed out by
Senator Torgerson. There followed miscellaneous comments
by various committee members. Mr. Jeans said there were
many adjustments occurring in the formula. As one deals
with larger schools, going through the size adjustment
tables, they are not enjoying or possibly are enjoying the
size adjustment at the same level rural schools, which are
much smaller, are going to enjoy. Looking at Lower
Kuskokwim, the size adjustment factor is 1.49, whereas
Anchorage has 1.0. Each adjustment they go through
compounds the student count therefore generating more
additional dollars for that community or school district.
Senator Phillips advised that his aide identified the per
student cost figure for Lower Kuskokwim at $11,271 and
Senator Torgerson concurred. But even with this correction
he noted the cost was approximately triple.
(pause on record)
Senator Wilken with reference to amendment #15 said it was
not a small technical amendment but rather a big amendment.
It would put the State right back into the job of dealing
with categorical funding. One of the goals of the bill,
however, was fairness and simplicity. He noted a growth in
categorical funding that far exceeds the growth in students.
Special education had grown double; bilingual/biculture had
grown at four times the rate. That is money that does not
go into regular programs. SB 36 shows that the State
provides equal funding categorically across the State.
Through this bill school boards would get to decide what was
important and decide where they would like to spend their
money. Everyone would be provided a twenty percent
foundation upon which they build a categorical program and
they can put different priorities to whatever they wish.
Anymore than the twenty percent they get it will have to be
funded locally. If the amendment is accepted in ten years
they will be back with the same problem, which is inflated
dollars because of inflated definition. He believed the
concerns of Senator Adams could be addressed otherwise
rather than through the formula.
Senator Adams concurred that the local school boards should
have the options on how to spend money. However, in order
for them to be able to spend money they need money. There
is no fairness, particularly when the North Slope is getting
zero out of this. Senator Wilken responds. Education is
the responsibility of the State and the burden of that
responsibility must be spread fairly throughout the State.
Senator Adams reminded the committee that the North Slope
Borough has the second highest taxes even before Fairbanks.
There is a misconception the North Slope can support itself.
By a roll call vote of 1 - 6 (Adams - yea) (Sharp, Pearce,
Donley, Torgerson, Parnell, Phillips - nay) amendment #15
FAILED.
Amendment #22 was MOVED by Senator Torgerson. The amendment
would ensure no new REAA's. Senator Adams OBJECTED. By a
roll call vote of 6 - 1 (Sharp, Pearce, Donley, Torgerson,
Parnell, Phillips - yea) (Adams - nay) was ADOPTED.
Amendment #23 was MOVED by Senator Torgerson. The amendment
would clarify that any tax collected in a specific REAA
would be credited toward that REAA. Senator Adams OBJECTED.
By a roll call vote of 6 - 1 (Sharp, Pearce, Donley,
Torgerson, Parnell, Phillips - yea) (Adams - nay) was
ADOPTED.
Amendment #24 was MOVED by Senator Adams. Senator Sharp
OBJECTED. Senator Adams explained that the amendment
deletes the requirement for REAA's to contribute to the cost
of school construction. Presently they contribute two
percent. Senator Torgerson also OBJECTED. Senator Donley
felt the amendment was serious discrimination towards urban
areas. He said most of the urban areas when doing school
construction were fortunate enough to get State assistance
or a bond. They were also contributing at least thirty
percent locally. Now, he would like to see that gap closed.
Senator Adams responds. Going back three or four years,
those urban areas that could post bonds have received
approximately $203 million, whereas in areas such as REAA's
they have received only $7.3 million. There is inequity
there as regards to school construction.
Co-chair Sharp clarified that the amendment would insert
school construction and new sections regarding new school
construction. Senator Donley continued to feel there were
serious inequities now in the system that discriminates
against urban areas. The urban areas pay a tremendous
percentage as compared to rural areas. The department has
developed a system which continues to discriminate against
the urban areas by not counting students in "portables" as
"unhoused". He said it was very difficult to rise up on the
priority list of the Department of Education. It was so bad
that for many years the Anchorage school district did not
bother to submit projects because they felt they were being
discriminated against the way the formula was developed.
They felt they would not even be considered to get any
construction dollars. He said his district cared enough
about their children to tax themselves to construct schools.
Senator Adams said Senator Donley's district was lucky to
have "portable" classrooms. Most of his constituents do not
have "portables" and do not have State facilities. Most are
still located in old BIA schools buildings. If REAA's had
the ability they would also tax themselves. Most of their
dollars come from Federal funds under PL874.
Senator Donley noted that folks in REAA's had the
opportunity to form themselves into boroughs in order to
contribute towards their local expenses themselves. Senator
Adams asked that if some of the poorest districts did form a
borough what would they tax?
By a roll call vote of 1 - 6 (Adams - yea) (Sharp, Pearce,
Donley, Torgerson, Parnell, Phillips - nay) amendment #24
FAILED.
(Tape #64, Side A switched to Side B.)
Amendment #25 was MOVED by Senator Torgerson. Senator Adams
OBJECTED. Senator Torgerson explained the thrust of the
amendment would be to delay the starting date of the
employment tax for local contribution in unorganized Alaska
until the year 2001. He outlined several reasons for doing
that. One of the fiscal notes received from the Department
of Revenue outlined that it would be very difficult to
implement the local effort by 1 January 1999. They
recommended the effective date be changed to 1 January 2000.
For the benefit of those watching KTOO he read the amendment
into the record. Senator Adams said he opposed any tax on
any group, especially those in his district. He wanted a
definition from the sponsor of the amendment explaining
employment tax. Would it be the wages they earn? Or
perhaps the check a retired person gets on a monthly basis
would be taxed? Or one of the elders that receives only a
Permanent Fund Dividend would be taxed on that?
Senator Torgerson said those questions were already laid out
in the bill and he would not be changing that with the
amendment.
(pause on record)
Co-chair Sharp indicated that some of the problems cited by
the Departments of Labor and Revenue in their fiscal note
would also be addressed.
Senator Parnell asked if there would be any general fund
costs generated? Senator Torgerson said his main concern
was what the Department of Revenue was talking about with
regards to notification of employees as far as the fiscal
note was concerned. Co-chair Sharp again reiterated a
significant impact on fiscal notes. Senator Adams noted
that based on the fiscal note from the Department of Labor
new runs would have to be made.
In response to a question by Senator Pearce, Senator
Torgerson said that by the year 2001 they would begin to
collect the tax and by the year 2002 there would be full
implementation.
By a roll call vote of 6 - 1 (Sharp, Pearce, Donley,
Torgerson, Parnell, Phillips - yea) (Adams - nay) was
ADOPTED.
Senator Torgerson requested a brief at ease. Co-chair Sharp
concurred but asked no one leave the room.
(at ease)
Senator Donley MOVED to RESCIND committee action in adopting
amendment #14. Senator Adams OBJECTED. Senator Torgerson
indicated that he originally voted for the amendment,
however, since has been told that under indistrict costs the
district provides classroom space and provides additional
things that Statewide correspondence was not required to
provide. There is additional cost for the district versus
Statewide correspondence. He said he would be supporting
the motion. By a roll call vote of 6 - 1 (Sharp, Pearce,
Donley, Torgerson, Parnell, Phillips - yea) (Adams - nay)
committee action on amendment #14 was RESCINDED.
Co-chair Sharp advised that the amendment was now again
before the committee for consideration. Senator Donley said
he objected to the main motion. By a roll call vote of 1 -
6 (Adams - yea) (Sharp, Pearce, Donley, Torgerson, Parnell,
Phillips - nay) amendment #14 FAILED.
Senator Torgerson requested a brief at ease. Co-chair Sharp
concurred but asked no one leave the room.
(at ease)
Senator Torgerson explained a brief discussion between
committee members regarding boarding school students. He
noted there was a problem with Galena as they were taking
some of the profit from the Statewide correspondence and
funding a boarding school operation. He has always
supported boarding schools as has the Legislature over the
years, however they have never funded it the same as Mt.
Edgecombe. He wanted to see if there was a quick fix
amendment. Since that could not be accomplished this
evening he will have an amendment he could offer in Rules or
on the Floor tomorrow. Senator Wilken and Eddy Jeans will
meet with him early tomorrow morning to try and work out
some solution.
Co-chair Sharp asked if that would change the values of the
bill. Senator Torgerson said possibly it could, but at this
time he did not understand how they would fix it. Therefore
he would try to work this out. Co-chair Sharp explained the
procedure he wanted to follow. He did not want to send the
Department back to the drawing board with a new CS embracing
new values to make new runs and then it would need to be
changed again. He wanted to make the changes here and send
the bill to the Floor by Friday. Senator Torgerson said
this amendment would not require a title change and perhaps
it could be addressed in the House. Co-chair Sharp said he
would rather legitimize the operation in Galena because it
was a good operation.
Co-chair Sharp outlined the schedule for tomorrow morning.
The oil and gas hearing was for legislators
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|