Legislature(2005 - 2006)CAPITOL 106
02/10/2005 11:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB1 || HB18 || HB73 || HB30 || HB65 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 1 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 18 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 73 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 30 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 65 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 1 - INCREASE AMT OF BASE STUDENT ALLOCATION
HB 18 - INCREASE AMT OF BASE STUDENT ALLOCATION
HB 73 - INCREASE AMT OF BASE STUDENT ALLOCATION
HB 30 - APPROP: K-12 EDU OPERATING/DEBT EXPENSES
HB 65-APPROP: K-12 PUBLIC EDUCATION
CHAIR NEUMAN announced that the committee would be hearing HOUSE
BILL NO. 1, HOUSE BILL NO. 18, and HOUSE BILL NO. 73, which all
address the base student allocation used in the formula for
state funding of public education; as well as HOUSE BILL NO. 30
and HOUSE BILL NO. 65, which are both acts making appropriations
for K-12 education operating and school debt expenses.
CHAIR NEUMAN stated that there would be general testimony at
this meeting.
11:07:40 AM
CARL ROSE, Executive Director, Association of the Alaska School
Boards, stated that he has submitted written testimony and
therefore he would be brief in his comments. He said:
On Wednesday January 26, [2005], I was on an audio
conference from Washington D.C. with the large five
school districts of the state. We talked about some
of the inhibiting factors that we would face this year
with the budgetary process. We talked about coming up
with a reasonable number that we could put forward
because the association had not resolved itself behind
a set number. ... The reason we had this meeting was
it was our impression that we were going to try to ...
fund education early so our attempt was to get a
number out there that we could all agree with. Kenai,
Fairbanks, Anchorage, Mat-Su, and Juneau were present
at this meeting. We decided on a number, and that
number was [$]4,995. I put that number out online;
... I've visited with most of you here and I'm trying
get hold of as many people as I can, to get that
number out. Since that time these boards have gone
back and they've met in their respective school
districts, and they have needs that exceed this
[$]4,995. [$]4,995 was the number we decided on, and
we wanted to say that this number does not meet all of
our needs, but it does create a positive investment
trend line in education. ... Basically what happens
is, since 1999, we've been held constant and ... since
2004 we've started a trend line increase in public
education. The members who were present in this audio
conference recognized the need to call us behind a
number that was reasonable, that was responsible,
defendable, and that we could be part of the budgetary
process. I don't have to tell you some of the looming
issues that you have to deal with, and we simply want
to be part of that discussion. We decided that
[$]4,995 was representative of a number that was
responsible; it does not meet all the needs of the
schools that were present. But they chose a number
such as this to be able to move forward, and since
then they've adopted some higher numbers and I
appreciate the fact, and they'll be down here
advocating for that number. The Association for
Alaska School Boards [ASSB] is advancing [$]4,995
because we think it creates that positive investment
stream in education. ... I'm being criticized for
coming in with a lower number than many of us need.
This was the determination that was made; I've shared
it with my membership. This weekend we will be
meeting down here in the ... Treadwell Room and we're
going to be trying to get ourselves together to get up
on a hill to give a number. [$]4995 is the number
that ASSB is advancing. We understand that there is a
need for more, and ... if we can stay on a positive
trend line, over a period of time we can recover from
the last decade and a half of being held constant with
the exception of enrollment increases.
MR. ROSE asked that the committee move the bill out of the
committee so that it could move on to the House Finance Standing
Committee.
11:11:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SALMON asked if the $4,995 would fix the eroding
floor or the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) and the
Teachers' Retirement System (TRS).
MR. ROSE replied that it would not; it would only address the
basic student allotment. He commented that those other issues
will probably be dealt with later.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO asked if this was a $420 increase.
MR. ROSE answered affirmatively.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO remarked that a $420 increase translates
into a "certain number of millions".
MR. ROSE replied, "That is correct. The actual number on an
increase is $23 million above the governor's $62 million." In
response to Representative Gatto, he stated that this would
result in a total increase of just over $85 million.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA commented that the five school district
[representatives] that met to determine the $4,995 [later
returned to their home districts] and realized that in order to
make any real progress in student achievement, they would have
to come up with new numbers. He noted that Kenai's new number
was $5,086 to make material progress, and Anchorage's new number
was $5,120. He asked if Mr. Rose knew what the new numbers were
for the other three districts.
MR. ROSE responded that he did not have these numbers. He noted
that many other districts are passing resolutions, but they do
not meet at the same time.
11:13:33 AM
CHAIR NEUMAN mentioned that his office has received several of
those numbers and he will make sure that [Representative Gara]
receives this information as well.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked which of the five large school
districts will still face cuts, and which ones will make
material progress with a base student allotment of $4,995..
MR. ROSE commented that only one of the school districts has
agreed to the $4,995, while the other districts have varying
needs. He said that class size is a critical, costly issue.
Regarding student achievement, he remarked:
We're in an era of student accountability.... No Child
Left Behind is creating a standard that we have to
meet. Adequate yearly progress is a target that we're
all trying to get to. ... Once we identify kids who
are not meeting the standard, or not meeting adequate
yearly progress, what kind of strategies and programs
do we have in place to meet those needs, to have those
kids be successful? We have to do this above and
beyond, and inside of our current appropriation. ...
We ... have a federal impact that we're dealing with.
We are doing a lot of work that is being mandated on
us, and we have very little investment to get it done.
The number that I bring to you today is along an
investment trend that will require additional
investment next year. The question really is, "Do we
go for all the money we can get in one year, or do we
cause a trend that continues the investment so we can
recover from the last 15 years of flat funding with
the exception of enrollment increases?"
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO commented that Mr. Rose's chart makes a
very clear statement.
MR. ROSE said that the chart shows a positive trend line from
2004 going up to 2007. He said that he is not talking about the
2007 appropriation; that will be in subsequent years. He
reiterated that this number keeps [this topic] in the budgetary
process as part of the discussion and not set aside.
CHAIR NEUMAN reminded the public and the committee members that
educational funding, by the governor's proposal, would increase
by $1,021 from 2003 to 2006.
11:17:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS stated that he had some information on how
much some communities are contributing to hit their cap level,
and he asked why some communities don't contribute more than
they do.
MR. ROSE replied that this is a very difficult question to
answer. He said:
The different thresholds that we have [are] based on
property value across the state and what people are
willing to contribute, and you're balancing that up
against the local level with the taxable properties
and what they will be. ... Our educational community
which is the original education attendance area [pays]
no local contribution because they don't have any
taxable value. So that's a pretty broad spectrum. I
think that these are local determinations that are not
only made by the school board. As you well know, the
school board is not fiscally autonomous. We're
dependent on our parent bodies, which are our
municipalities. And it's that relationship between
municipalities and school boards that help to get that
local contribution. What people choose to do at the
local level is purely within their domain and I really
can't comment on that. But I know of what you speak,
and I've heard this concern elsewhere.
REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS said, "I'm looking at a total here of
[$]167,995,000 since '02, ... and if they're not [making the
maximum] local contribution, we're not the only one at fault for
not funding education."
11:19:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented that the schools in her district
have been hurting for many years, and they've had to make cuts
long before some of the bigger schools had to start making cuts.
She said that in her area, the local municipalities were funding
up at the cap as long as they could. She remarked:
It's a little bit lower now because the revenue
sharing has stopped, but up until that point many of
them were at the cap. And when I look at some of the
bigger districts and see that ... their communities
are not doing that, that is very frustrating for
me.... It's something that the local communities, ...
especially those bigger ones, need to look at and see
... if they're giving their all, like some of the
smaller ones are.
MR. ROSE referred to a chart that "shows what was left to reach
in the cap for some of these communities around Alaska".
REPRESENTATIVE GARA stated that he wanted to be clear about the
trend line, which he said could be misinterpreted by some
people. He remarked that the schools don't use the money that
the [state government] gives to them for PERS and TRS; that goes
directly into a retirement account. In comparing state school
funding to inflation over the last five years or over the last
ten years, he said, school funding has lagged behind inflation,
if you don't count in the PERS/TRS money. He stated:
I don't want anybody to walk out of here thinking
we've been giving schools more and more money;
compared to their costs we've actually been giving
them less and less money. Two years ago we actually
cut their funding by ten million dollars, the total
school budget. That doesn't even include inflation.
Last year we had a good budget that put them a little
bit ahead. Three years ago it was a hold-even budget,
and four years ago, and going back from then, schools
fell behind inflation. So the trend line only goes up
if we add in all the money they can't use, like the
money to count in inflation and the money to count in
PERS and TRS. You back those things up, the trend
line is going down.
11:21:30 AM
MR. ROSE responded that this is the reason for the request for
the additional $23 million. He commented that in the governor's
proposed operating budget, the money that will be used for
instruction and operation will be decreased from $46 million to
$24 million. He said, "If we use the $62 million, after the
PERS and TRS are paid, [it] is a $24 million increase up against
the benchmark of $46 million last year."
11:22:17 AM
MIKE SIGLER stated that he represents Alaska Kids Count, which
is a parent-led, independent organization. He is also the
parent of two school-age children in Juneau. He commented that
in Juneau, the class sizes continue to grow and "as a result the
quality of our children's education continues to erode."
Harborview Elementary School, he said, has a kindergarten class
of 26 children, 11 of which have special needs. He stated that
there is a third-grade class with 30 children at Auke Bay
Elementary School. He said:
As parents, we see the need for smaller class sizes
and know how fewer children in a classroom allow
teachers more time for individual attention to meet
each [child's] learning needs. Alaska Kids Count
supports reducing average class size to reach the
Juneau School Board's published class size goals.
These are modest ratios and do not reflect an ideal.
For example, current middle school class size ... is
32; the school district goal is 30. It's not a big
change but it would help in the classroom.
CHAIR NEUMAN reminded Mr. Sigler that there were many people who
wished to testify and asked him to submit his testimony in
writing.
MR. SIGLER continued:
Alaska Kids Count supports an increase in foundation
funding of approximately [$]112 million statewide,
which is [$]50 million more than the governor's
proposed funding level, and requires a base student
allocation of $5,120, which matches what the Anchorage
School Board has proposed. The governor's proposal is
[$]62 million, an increase of [$]38 million for
retirement and [$]24 million to compensate for
inflation. Even assuming a $900,000 local
contribution, which in Juneau does go to the cap, the
governor's proposal requires $600,000 in cuts to
Juneau's schools. While Alaska Kids Count appreciates
the governor's proposal, we ask the governor and the
legislature to do more for Alaskan students.
11:25:13 AM
PEGGY COWAN, Superintendent, Juneau School District, stated that
the Juneau School District has the same concerns as the other
districts. She noted that she can provide information regarding
cuts in writing if the committee members would like. She
remarked:
Without the governor's proposal we'd have untenable
cuts; with the governor's proposal ... it will require
allocating all of our fund balance except for
$150,000, which is way less than 1 percent. The state
allows 10 percent in fund balance and we're going to
be going down to a fraction of a percent. We will
also have to make cuts: staff, in terms in some aides,
councilors, teachers, and cut hazardous bus routes.
The school board has not chosen a funding level. A
budget advisory group that advised the school board
and met and made some modest recommendations for
increases in staff, textbooks, and technology, which
would add $553, which would bring it up to [$]5,433 to
the SA [student allotment]. At a minimum we would
like to eliminate the cuts that we're making this year
and help modestly with PTR {pupil-teacher ratio].
That number would be [$]5,090. As Mr. Rose indicated,
... we've also been talking to the ... school board's
association, and our board will meet, and I imagine it
will be a compromise of those numbers. The PTR that
we're suggesting ..., the $5,090, would take our
current primary, kindergarten [to] second grade, to 20
students from the 25. We'd have 25 students in our
intermediates, and 30s in our middle school and high
school, so these are not extravagant numbers that
we're proposing. But they'd get back to what is
manageable. ...
MS. COWAN continued:
We would like early funding if it is sufficient. ...
Our borough has funded to the cap; I'm very proud of
it and incredibly appreciative of their support. Last
year they had the courage to raise taxes in order to
provide the additional money that ... your legislative
addition allowed them to add. ... We have 5,314
students. We have 328 teachers, but that's 234
classroom teachers, ... 53 [special education]
teachers, 11 councilors, nine English as a Second
Language teachers, librarians, and music, and PE
specialists.
11:28:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said, "Just so I understand the [$]5,090
number, that would let you avoid cuts and let you make some
progress on teacher ratios, or just avoid cuts?"
MS. COWAN replied, "Avoid cuts and some progress on ratios."
She said that it would allow the district to have an average of
30 kids in the high school and middle school classes. She noted
that some of the shop classes have to have low numbers for
safety reasons. She said that it would allow the elementary
school classes to have average size of 25 students, and the
kindergarten classes would have an average of 20 students. She
noted that Mary Becker, the school board chair, supports the
increase and is next on the witness list, but Ms. Becker wished
to give her testimony time to another witness.
11:29:55 AM
JOY BEAVER, [student at Juneau Douglas High School], said:
I've talked to my English teacher today about the
things that she thinks that should be changed. She
says she agrees with me that we should reduce the
class size and originally it's supposed to be 31.8
average for a class, but in reality there's ... 38
seniors in one class and 35 juniors in one class.
I've talked to Mr. Hanley and he tells me that we
should have more money for textbooks, desks, more
Alaska Native teachers, and training on racism so kids
won't be racist. ... I think we should explore more
opportunities to save more money and make more money.
So maybe we could get the school into ... having
fundraisers for next year.
CHAIR NEUMAN informed the committee that Ms. Beaver and some of
her classmates visited him at his office earlier in the week and
he had explained to the students about how base student
allocation formulas work.
11:32:06 AM
ANDI STORY, Member, Juneau School Board, and Alaska Kids Count,
stated that she is the parent of two students in the Juneau
School District. She testified in support of a base student
allocation of $5,120, which is the Anchorage School Board's
recommendation. She commented:
Our superintendent spoke well of ... when we brought
back the governor's number to our district about how
it would still mean cuts for Juneau, and when I would
go out in the public, parents would say, "Will this
number that the governor has given help us with our
class sizes and other improvements that we'd like?"
And of course I'd have to say, "No, it didn't."
School boards across the state wrestled with, "Should
we go with the governor's number and use it in our
planning?", because, if we don't use it, we would show
massive cuts and it would really demoralize staff and
get parents alarmed again, and they lobbied hard last
year for more funding and [the legislature was]
responsive. But the danger ... of going with the
governor's number is people think, "Oh, this means
things are taken care of, and we're going to have
improvements," and they won't call you, and that's how
things are going to happen, is if they call you.
MS. STORY continued:
As a new school board member, it's hard to put things
into context because I hear that ... we give a lot of
money to education, and we're asking for a lot more.
And so what I have to do is ... look for resources.
And I got a hold of a Education Week, which is put out
by a nonprofit group ... in Washington D.C., ... [for]
people who are interested in public education and
professionals and the public to raise the level of
awareness about what's happening across the state. ...
They show ... that Alaska ranks 40th out of 50 in
their education spending per student, adjusted for the
area cost differential. ... Also they say Alaska's the
only state with a negative average annual rate of
change from 1992 to [2002], meaning increases in
school spending did not keep pace with inflation
during that period. ... We did make progress last
year, so we are moving up and I appreciate that
movement, but it tells me, in comparison to what other
states are spending on education, that we can do
better.
11:35:11 AM
JIM NYGAARD, Superintendent, Southeast Island School District,
Thorne Bay, noted that this is his first year in Alaska. He
commented that he is shocked at the condition of PERS and TRS,
and the impact the deficit has had on the budget in his
district. He said, "I know that, proportionately when I compare
this district to Juneau and Anchorage, it's just a scratch, but
it's certainly a statewide challenge and I appreciate your
support in addressing some of those issues." He explained that
he is in the process of developing next year's budget, and in
doing so he is looking at "where the district is at currently
and where the district was at last year." He commented that
last year's huge cuts in staff and programs are shocking, and
"that's not even taking into account the additional hike in TRS
and PERS for this year, as well as our health insurance that our
teachers are dependent on." He said that a lot of his concerns
have already been addressed, but he emphasized:
We've become extremely dependent on federal money to
complement some of our efforts, whether it's trying to
address No Child Left Behind, [or] some of our higher
needs children with some of the title programs. ...
Those programs have all been cut back. ... The federal
government promises to pay 45 percent of special
[education] costs and the best I can recollect that
they've ever paid was nearly 15 percent. So we have a
lot of room that we're making up and, as our children
get diagnosed with more and more difficulties, we are
expected to step up to the plate on an annual basis.
The other thing I'd like to address is: we are
dependent on federal funding for programs such as E-
rate, and without E-rate a rural district such as
Southeast Island District will not survive. And once
we're dependent on certain technologies, to pull the
rug out from underneath us, with the loss of E-rate
funding, for example, our district has yet to be
approved for our current year. So planning for next
year's program implementation, it really is a
struggle. ... As you discuss the critical bills in
front of you please remember the needs of Alaska's
children. ... Appropriate funding of education will
allow our kids to reach their greatest potential. ...
11:38:57 AM
CHARLENE OSTBLOOM, Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC), stated that
the conference represents 42 tribes. She said:
Within our region, we have three single-site, one
urban and four REAA [Rural Education Attendance Area]
school districts. TCC has been a strong advocate for
many years of increasing the foundation formula
funding for public schools and will continue to
testify on the best legislative bill that will
accomplish this. We appreciate the governor and the
members of the legislative body for starting the
discussion of increasing the foundation formula early
on in this legislative session. We also appreciate
the governor's recommendation for an increase to the
funding to Alaska's public school system. With so
many bills that are before us today in support of
increasing the foundation formula, it is difficult for
us to decide which bill to support. In principle we
support all bills that ask for an increase in the
foundation formula but are unable at this early date
to settle on any one. For the compelling reasons that
were outlined in the Iditarod Area School District
Superintendent [Joe] Banghart's testimony to the House
Special Committee on Education on February 8, we would
be remiss if we did not settle for the bill that gave
the largest increase to Alaska's public system.
MS. OSTBLOOM continued:
We intend in the days ahead to give each bill our most
serious consideration. At this current time we
support [Anchorage School District Resolution 2004-
2005-10 entitled "Resolution in Support of Increased
State Funding of the Alaska Public School Funding
Program."] ... The school members are requesting that
the governor and ... the legislature ... increase the
base student allocation in the foundation formula to
[$]5,120, which would provide an additional $112
million in state support. For us this would be the
best-case scenario. We will continue to monitor the
bills and will continue to testify for an increase.
11:41:20 AM
ERNIE MANZIE, Superintendent, Valdez School District, remarked
that Valdez is perceived as a very fortunate community with no
funding issues or problems. He said:
While I think Valdez has been fortunate, we too are
struggling with funding issues. We presented to the
school board just recently a balanced budget, but
while that budget was balanced and it was based on
current base student allocation, it was developed with
educational cuts that are not in the best interest of
the district here. ... We support an increase in the
student base [allocation]. ... We also deal with a
funding floor; we certainly hope that there's some
discussion about addressing that issue for those
districts that still have the floor. Especially when
we talk about looking at PERS and TRS, fixes running
through the student base allocation. There are issues
with districts that have a funding floor with that.
We are fortunate in Valdez; this is a community that
funds to the cap and has a long history of being
supportive of the education in the community. We also
... want to thank you for trying to address early
funding. ... As a principal in the past, many times I
would be looking at staff that would have to be let go
in a building because of budget uncertainties, and
then two months later watch those same people being
rehired into different buildings. And it's just
frustrating, and can be disruptive to the educational
process. ... As we struggle with funding, [the Valdez
school district's] success is being compromised as we
continue to wrestle with these funding issues. So I
would certainly encourage you to support the necessary
increase for the school districts.
11:44:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked if Mr. Manzie would speak to
[legislators] outside of this committee also regarding the
funding floor issue.
MR. MANZIE replied that he will be in Juneau next week and will
do that.
11:45:08 AM
DOUG JOHNSON, Valdez School Board, focused on the funding floor
issue and said:
It's not just us; it's a lot of other districts....
It's a big problem for a lot of people, and I ask this
year, so we don't have to go through what we did last
year with separate bills ,... it needs to go away. I
think it was something that was set up for a reason in
[1998] ... but it's taken a lot of hits for a lot of
the districts ... and I would hope that if PERS and
TRS relief is rolled over in the student dollars, at
the minimum, as we do it, something will be taken care
of so we do not have to just have the districts go
with 60 cents on the dollar, or whatever it would be
per district.... It is ... one of the bigger problems
for some of the smaller districts here. For us doing
a budget is not fun; we've lost six teachers in the
last three years that we have not replaced. We went
through a very tough negotiation that lasted two years
that were quite strong and to get our teachers'
contract back in line.... We're trying to cut dollars
on other things. The city takes care of us here to
the cap but the cap is depreciating here as far as
taxes are concerned. ... I would hope that when it
comes to the ... people that are running the funding
floors there, I'd like to see it go away. I think
it's something that needs to go away, and we're going
to be trying to address that next week while we're
down there. But I would at least hope that as we roll
things over that we would not have to have people go
back out and, as you do a bill, that the PERS and TRS
part of it does not count towards the funding floor.
... And then we get a dollar-for-dollar of PERS and
TRS relief without having to go back through and take
the chance of losing it.
11:47:49 AM
JENNIE HAMMOND stated that she lives in Nikiski and has a
kindergartener and a prekindergartener. She commented:
I am excited that with [the education funding] the
Kenai School District will lower PTR. This is the
number one concern of parents and community members in
the district, which is why I can ask that you even add
more into the foundation formula. With this, the
commitment by the Kenai School District is to lower
the PTR even more, bringing back some of the teachers
we lost three years ago. Some of our schools have
classes of over 30 students. The teachers are doing a
terrific job but this is not fair to the kids or
teachers. It is sending a mixed message to our
children, that education is not the priority of the
state. [$]5,200 is the amount the district says they
need, if not more. School board members are there in
Juneau; they have all the facts. Please listen to
them. Parents have told them their concerns.
MS. HAMMOND continued:
Please support forward funding. This would allow
school districts to plan their budgets and to not lose
teachers due to pink slips. In order to make children
first, we must put aside everything in order to truly
do just that. I volunteer in my son's class, and I am
the coordinator for the Box Tops and Campbell's Soups
Labels For Education. I help with the parent
preschool program at Nikiski Northstar and go the PTA
and school board ... meetings. Plus I am on the
instructional committee at Nikiski Northstar. I truly
do not know what else I could do to let you know that
the education funding for Kenai School District is
lacking in adequate funding due to the cost of doing
business in the Kenai Peninsula.
11:49:54 AM
MARY FRANCIS, Executive Director, Alaska Council of School
Administrators, had the following comments:
I had a meeting on Tuesday with the ASA Board, which
is the superintendent's association board of
directors, and ... I wanted to speak to the issue that
some of you have spoken to me privately about, and
that is the frustration ... you feel about getting the
districts and the superintendents in the districts and
the school boards to settle on a particular number.
My board, the superintendents' association board,
discussed the reason that that's difficult. ... Each
district has it's own unique circumstances ...
Recently, with federal government budgets released,
that is going to greatly impact vocational education
at the state level and the local level.... [That] is
another example of a moving target; people just
learned about that this week. And so now all of a
sudden districts that perhaps were relying on federal
Carl Perkins money are suddenly saying, "...Now if
we're going to have a decent vocational education
program, we're going to have to cough up money in that
area too." So I just wanted to share that information
with the committee and of course we support increased
base student allocation.
11:52:37 AM
BILL BJORK, President, National Education Association Alaska
(NEA-Alaska), commented that he has submitted a written
testimony as well. He said that the committee members are
seeing different requests from districts around the state which
reflect the different needs among Alaska's school districts. He
remarked, "This is going to continue until we finally agree upon
what it will take to meet Alaska's constitutional mandates to
... establish and maintain a public education system open to
all." He explained that the second issue he'd like to address
is class size. He asked the committee not to divide the number
of students by the number of certificated employees because that
doesn't reflect true class size. He pointed out that the number
of certificated employees includes councilors, librarians, and
others who deliver essential services to students, but do so in
smaller groups or with individuals. He said, "The class size
question is, 'How many students are in each classroom as each
grade level?' ... True class size is the critical information
for you during your deliberation."
11:54:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS asked Mr. Bjork if he or NEA would
"support going into the permanent fund to fund education."
BILL BJORK replied that last year [the NEA] supported a
mechanism by which earnings from the permanent fund could be
used in a way, "but it's a complicated issue and we don't think
that this is an issue necessarily for this year. But ... the
long-term funding for state government and the required services
may require us to look at that hard choice into the future."
11:55:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS commented, "I don't want to leave my
children burdened with a big problem."
BILL BJORK responded that the children of Alaska get one
opportunity at a quality education and if they are going to be
qualified for well-paying jobs into the future, they need the
best public schools possible. He said, "We think of it as an
opportunity rather than a problem."
11:56:18 AM
CHAIR NEUMAN closed testimony with the reminder that those who
wish to testify can do so at the next committees.
11:56:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO stated that as the sponsor of HB 1, he
would like to offer Amendment 1, which changes the student base
allocation to $4,896.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked to please clarify this.
CHAIR NEUMAN explained that this amendment would make a $307
increase per student.
11:57:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO clarified that his Amendment 1 is actually
a committee substitute. [He moved to adopt CSHB 1, Version 24-
LS0001\F, Mischel, 2/9/05].
REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS asked if that was a motion to adopt the
CS.
11:58:10 AM
CHAIR NEUMAN replied, "I believe that was a motion to adopt.
Any objections to this?" There being no objection, CSHB 1
Version F was before the committee.
11:58:34 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 11:58 to 11:59 a.m.
11:59:48 AM
CHAIR NEUMAN clarified that CSHB 1 Version F was adopted for
discussion, and stated that the CS increases the governor's
original proposal of $63 million to about $65 million; the
governor's increase was a 6.5 percent increase over last year
and the CS is a 7 percent increase over last year.
12:00:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO stated that the previous student base
allocation was $4,576, and the allocation proposed in Version F
is $4,896, a $320 increase.
12:02:09 PM
CHAIR NEUMAN commented:
Our main purpose today here is to try and make sure
that we do as much as we can to move this process
along. This is the first step in a long process. I
think what we're going to try and do here today ... is
to try and provided further incentive for a two-year
funding for schools, extension of the 70/30 bonds for
packages, possibly pay off the floor. We have not
received yet the legislative budget and auditing
findings that are related to the cost of education
increases last year yet. ... There's a lot of
unanswered questions out there yet.... I have talked
to some of the school districts and some of the
leaders of the educational communities, and a priority
to them right now is to make sure that this does
continue through the process. There will be further
time to talk on this; it will be going to your
committee and HHES [House Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee] next. ... It is pretty
important that we try and move this along as per their
recommendations.
12:03:31 PM
CHAIR NEUMAN turned attention back to the CSHB 1 Version F.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA [made a motion to adopt] Amendment 1 labeled
24-LS0142\G.1, Mischel, 2/10/05.
REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS objected.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA explained that Amendment 1 erases the
remaining years of the "falling floor" in the foundation
formula. He said:
Currently this year there still remain 13 school
districts that will continue to lose funding. The
community of Valdez will lose another $119,000 for
their base student allocation money. Communities from
Pelican to Iditarod to the Lower Kuskokwim school
district will lose substantial sums of money. These
are places that are grappling with rising fuel costs,
... some of which have lost even their basic fine arts
curriculum, just to maintain the basic levels of
services in their communities. And so for a cost of
roughly $2 million we can eliminate ... the future
impact of this, what's called the 'falling floor'.
And the reason that's so important is if you tried to
come up with a base student allocation number for
these 13 school districts ... that would equate to the
amounts of money that they're losing in the falling
floor, that number would be something like $6,000 per
student, and we obviously can't afford to do that.
But for these 13 school districts we can protect them
at a cost of about $2 million by just preventing the
foundation formula from continuing to fall.
12:05:46 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO clarified that it is also referred to as
the "eroding floor". In order to give the committee an
historical perspective of this, he pointed out that when the
funding formula was established, it seemed that some school
districts were receiving too much money. He said:
The way they made the adjustment on districts that
received too much money was to say, "We will not cut
the amount of money you're receiving. We will keep it
there and we will call it a floor." But as we
increase money for these schools that were receiving
too much money, we will erode the floor until the
floor is completely eroded and then the formula will
become the same for everyone. ... The way they did
that was to say, "We'll give you 60 cents on each
increase dollar rather than a dollar for a dollar,
until you have essentially finished eroding the
floor." So there was a justification for doing this;
if we were to at this moment wipe out the eroding
floor, we would essentially be giving a bonus to some
schools but not others, which, while it's a fine idea,
... that money has to come from somewhere, and that
money would come from some other school districts that
did not qualify for having the eroding floor present.
... It was justified back then; it was agreed to ...
by the districts that had the eroding floor that
simply avoided the immediate penalty of a drastic
reduction in favor of the eroding floor.
12:07:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA responded that he has heard from several of
the districts "that are suffering from the eroding floor". He
noted that Alaska Gateway is no longer able to provide any fine
arts instruction, and that the Iditarod School District is
facing a $500,000 deficit this year and this would help them
with at least $100,000 worth of it. He stated that all of these
communities are suffering; many are facing increased fuel costs.
He commented, "For a very small amount of money we can protect
some school districts that really aren't ... bathing in the
luxury of excess funds but are ... suffering from the reality of
inadequate funds."
12:08:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SALMON remarked that all the school districts
that the committee had heard testimony from had asked for more
money. He pointed out that the legislature could spend $2
million to help these school districts "get out of their
financial mess." He continued:
The problem is not only with the big school districts;
we're having real problems in the smaller school
districts. ... It's a money problem, both of them are
money problems, and we should look at that favor, that
Senate Bill 36, never did the rural community any good
to begin with.
12:09:57 PM
CHAIR NEUMAN recognized the comments offered by Representatives
Salmon and Gara. He recommended that they put together some
type of bill that addresses the eroding floor issue alone.
12:10:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS commented on the [eroding floor issue]:
stated:
People have different ideas of how it happened, and I
was there, and I'm not going to go into the details of
it but we didn't support it then and I don't support
the idea now. I think with No Child Left Behind all
you do is continue to open that gap in the areas. And
if I knew for sure those were the problem districts I
think we're remiss for not addressing this. But [I
asked Representative Salmon] earlier about putting in
a bill to address it separately. And I've been
talking to people; I think we don't need a waiver in
Alaska for No Child Left Behind as long as you
continue to treat the rural districts and some of the
school districts [fairlike]. And it was perceived ...
that they were getting excess money; my understanding
was, back then it was more about a bilingual problem
and special needs. ... My memory of that ... and I'm
trying to be very quiet on that because I know a lot
of the history and I could get in trouble later on.
12:11:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN objected to Amendment 1.
12:12:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented that this problem [of the
eroding floor] came about because some districts thought that
rural districts were getting too much money. She said:
It's ridiculous to think that some schools were
getting too much money. ... I don't think that
probably was really happening. ... But anyway we have
to deal with what we have now. ... I agree that we
should get rid of this problem. We should get rid of
this ... I think it's a good amendment. [But] because
we've got so many different things and so many issues
that we're dealing with right now, I'm concerned about
what we're passing on to finance. ... It is a problem
though; there's no doubt about it.
12:13:21 PM
REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS objected to Amendment 1 and reiterated
that he has offered to be a cosponsor of a bill to address this
issue rather than put it on HB 1.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Gara and Salmon
voted in favor of Amendment 1. Representatives Gatto, Neuman,
Lynn, Thomas, and Wilson voted against it. Therefore, Amendment
1 failed by a vote of 2-5.
12:14:25 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA moved [to adopt] Amendment 2.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN objected.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said:
This is the education committee. We're the ones that
have heard testimony from the school districts. At
this point in the session, this is the committee with
the most expertise on what the schools' needs are,
what we need to do to enhance student achievement. If
another committee decides at some point that under
their purview there's something wrong with this bill,
then they'll express those concerns in those
committees.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA continued:
Frankly, I'm convinced by the [Alaska Kids Count] and
the Anchorage School District testimony about the
education funding number that they requested. I think
this is a year where we have a chance to make real
progress. This is a year where we shouldn't just be
happy with the status quo [that] 50 percent of our
low-income students fail the state's benchmark exams.
This is a year we shouldn't be happy with the status
quo that ... Alaska sends a smaller percentage of our
students to college than 47 other states.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA explained that Amendment 2 is an attempt at
a compromise number for base student allocation based on the
number requested by the Kenai Peninsula School District. He
pointed out that their request was a base student allocation of
$5,086, which is close to what the Anchorage School District and
Alaska Kids Count had recommended of $5,120. He commented that
a $5,086 base student allotment would add about $40 million to
the governor's budget request. He said that the governor's
request and the current committee substitute propose a very
similar amount, and would require a K-12 school budget of about
$820 million. He said:
For $820 million, we've heard from school districts
that will make essentially no progress; in very few
school districts slight progress; in many school
districts, large steps backwards. So we can spend
$825 million to do very little, or we can spend ...
$860 million to do something real. ... This number
would allow the Kenai Peninsula School District to
restore some teachers they've cut over the last three
years. It would allow other school districts to add
some teachers, to come up with a palatable teacher-
student ratio. It would allow us to make some real
progress. If we don't adopt a number like this ...,
the impression among everybody is going to be [that]
we've spent more money on schools, what do schools
have to show for it. ... Their response, in fairness,
is going to be: we didn't give them any money to hire
more teachers. We gave them money to deal with their
retirement problem; that money's going into a
retirement account. We gave them money to deal with
some of the problems of inflation. We didn't give
them enough money to deal with increasing fuel costs,
because we changed the law a few years ago in a way
that doesn't give school districts full compensation
for their fuel costs. ... This number builds a fair
compromise. I'm hopeful that as the bill goes through
the committee process, people will give more attention
to the slightly higher number that some of the other
school districts have asked for. ... I think this is a
responsible way to deal with some of the educational
problems in the state and to at least make some real
progress. And I think that is the charge of this
committee.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA moved [to adopt] Amendment 2.
12:18:18 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN commented:
I would have to disagree that this committee has the
most expertise in education. Perhaps we have the
greatest focus on education ... that's what we do
here. But I wouldn't want to denigrate the expertise
of other committees.... We have to take the proposed
amount ... and put that into the larger picture.
Everything else has to be funded in this state.
12:19:15 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked, "How much money are we talking
about here?"
REPRESENTATIVE GARA replied that the governor's proposal and
Representative Gato's bill, if left unamended would spend
roughly $825 million on K-12 this year. He stated out that his
amendment would spend about $865 million; about $40 million more
than the governor's budget.
CHAIR NEUMAN noted that the amendment is to spend $200 per
student more than proposed in the CS, which equates to about $40
million in revenue for the entire state.
12:20:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SALMON commented that the experts and
professionals who are testifying are the ones who advocate a
higher number. He said, "We need to start listening to these
people. We're not experts here but these people are
professionals."
CHAIR NEUMAN stated that this is just the tip of the iceberg and
there are many other educational needs out there and they will
be weighed in further committees, "but we do need make sure that
we get this moving along so that they can have their time to do
that. We've not received the numbers from the budget/audit
committee on numbers that they're expecting back tomorrow." He
noted that he has been in touch with some of the school
districts and the leaders of the educational community; "that is
their recommendation also."
12:21:27 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said:
If we don't adopt Amendment 2 and we go with the bill
as it reads, the testimony has been that the Copper
River School District will have to engage in cuts,
that the Anchorage School District will engage in
cuts, that the Kenai Peninsula School District will
engage in cuts, that districts representing more than
have the people in the state will end up cutting
staff, and thereby ... helping reduce the ability of
students to achieve.
12:22:05 PM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Gara and Salmon
voted in favor of Amendment 2. Representatives Gatto, Neuman,
Lynn, Thomas, and Wilson voted against it. Therefore, Amendment
2 failed by a vote of 2-5.
12:22:45 PM
REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS commented that he doesn't think that the
legislature or the state should be responsible for inflation.
He said, "Has the local contribution gone up with inflation? ...
I don't think it has, and I don't think that [legislators are]
the only sole responsible people for every time inflation goes
up." He advocated local contribution increases and noted, "I'm
a property owner and ... I support education so it wouldn't hurt
me to pay another $100 or whatever it would be."
12:23:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA pointed out that local contributions have
gone up, he said, however:
that doesn't give the state the excuse not to have its
contribution stay up with costs too. I'm not saying
that the state has done a bad job. Last year ... all
of a sudden we were faced with this massive PERS/TRS
problem that nobody anticipated and we're faced with
it again in the next few years. ... I think maybe
we'll have to find a funding source to deal with
PERS/TRS problem, maybe outside of the foundation
formula or outside of this budget. ... But if you back
out the money that we've put into retirement and ...
the money that's gone to covering inflation, our
contribution has resulted in cuts to school districts
over the years.
12:24:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO commented, "When the [governor] first
proposed these increases to education ... those numbers were met
with great applause and this committee has increased those
numbers somewhat, obviously not as much as some members would
have preferred, but nonetheless, higher than the governor's
original proposal."
12:25:07 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON remarked that the committee members have
been talking about early funding for the schools, which would
need to be moved through the Senate in the next 21 days. She
said:
I am willing to move this bill forward just ... for
the sake of early funding. But I'm very upset with
this; we haven't dealt with the eroding floor, ...
we've got more to do to really figure out what we're
going to do about PERS and TRS. ... There's a lot of
things in education yet that we as a ... legislature
have a responsibility to take of and I'm concerned
that some of this isn't getting taken care of and I
just want to carry that forward, that we need to deal
with some of this.
12:26:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE LYNN commented:
We've got to get on with this.... We've got to keep
the lights on in our schools, we've got to keep the
staff we need, we've got to avoid those pink slips for
teachers, and we've got to educate our kids, which
really is the highest priority of anything that we do
here. ... We need to take action today; it may not be
the figure that all of us would like, but it's a
figure to get it started. ...
12:27:34 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA pointed out that there has been no objection
to moving the bill or any effort by any committee members to
slow down the process. He stated that he agrees with early
funding but also agrees with adequate funding.
12:27:59 PM
CHAIR NEUMAN moved to report CSHB 1, [Version 24-LS0001\F,
Mischel, 2/9/05] from the committee. There being no objection,
CSHB 1(EDU) was reported from the House Special Committee on
Education.
12:28:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON moved [to adopt CSHB 30, Version 24-
LS0193\F, Utermohle, 2/9/05 as the working document]. There
being no objection, Version F was before the committee.
12:28:42 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA commented that he had not seen the bill yet.
CHAIR NEUMAN explained that this is an allocation bill that goes
along with CSHB 1. He said, "For the record, it does include
funding for the amounts that were approved by the voters in
Anchorage and around the state last year for their additional
70/30 grants, or debt bond reimbursements."
12:29:43 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA stated, "I have no idea where these numbers
came from. I don't know ... if they were tailored to match
Representative Gatto's committee substitute or what the number
in the foundation formula, the $762 million, reflects. I don't
know how that relates to a base student allocation."
CHAIR NEUMAN responded that the numbers were prepared by the
administration. He said, "They have to follow certain formulas
as to where the money goes, and this matches committee
substitute 1." He noted that [Eddy Jeans, Manager of School
Finance and Facilities, Department of Education and Early
Development] helped prepare the numbers.
12:30:28 PM
REPRESENTATIVE GARA commented, "There's an amount of money in
the foundation program that must relate to a base student
allocation we're choosing. How can we vote on the proper amount
of money to put in the foundation program without knowing ...
what base student allocation we're voting on?"
CHAIR NEUMAN responded, "I believe the base student allocation
that just passed on [CSHB 1] was a [$]4919." He deferred to the
staff of the bill sponsor.
12:30:55 PM
TOM WRIGHT, Staff to Representative John Harris, Alaska State
Legislature, testified on behalf of Representative Harris,
sponsor of CSHB 30. He explained, "The amount passed in HB 1 is
found in Section 4 of the appropriation bill, which is
contingency language based upon the passage of a bill to
increase the student base allocation to an amount equal, or at
least [$]4,896. And that's where these numbers are taken from."
REPRESENTATIVE GARA objected and said:
I'm not going to slow down this bill; I'm going to let
it out so we can continue our discussion of the
education budget. It seems to me that ... the number
can't accidentally meet the number that was proposed
in Representative Gatto's committee substitute;
somehow it exactly matches that number. So it seems
that members of this committee have decided upon it
without discussion before this committee or during
this committee. If this is going to be a
collaborative process where all members have input, I
would suggest this isn't the best way to go about
things. It seems like both of these numbers were
worked on with only some of the members involved in
the discussions.
12:32:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented that this is the first time she
had seen this [committee substitute]. She asked for
clarification from Chair Neuman that the CSHB 30 matched [CSHB
1].
CHAIR NEUMAN answered affirmatively.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented, "So [CSHB 30] just takes care
of other things that are covered in the formula anyway: the
boarding home grants, the youth in detention, pupil
transportation. This just has all that rolled into one?"
MR. WRIGHT responded that this was correct. He said that the
numbers correspond to what is being proposed for fiscal year
2006. Also included in CSHB 30, he explained, is $65.35 million
based on the legislation that [the committee] had previously
passed. He added that [later] there will be discussion of
PERS/TRS, not just on the school district level but on a state
level; he commented that it's going to be a major topic this
legislative session. He said that this is the beginning of a
process, and this probably isn't going to be the final number,
but the committee has made an effort to come up with what they
think is a reasonable number. Any committee has a purview of
education, he remarked, and they'll be making assessments as
well.
12:34:22 PM
REPRESENTATIVE THOMAS moved to report [CSHB 30, Version 24-
LS0193\F, Utermohle, 2/9/05] with individual recommendations and
attached fiscal note. There being no objection, CSHB 30(EDU)
was reported from the House Special Committee on Education.
[CSHB 1, Version 24-LS0001\F, Mischel, 2/9/05, was reported from
the committee as CSHB 1(EDU) earlier in the meeting. HB 18, HB
73, and HB 65 were held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|