Legislature(2025 - 2026)DAVIS 106
02/05/2025 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HJR5 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HJR 5 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HJR 5-SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS PROGRAM
8:03:22 AM
CO-CHAIR STORY announced that the only order of business would
be HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 5, "Urging the United States
Congress and the President of the United States to reinstate the
Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of
2000 and make the funding mechanism in the Act permanent."
8:04:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JEREMY BYNUM, Alaska State Legislature, As prime
sponsor, introduced HJR 5 to the committee. He said that the
Secure Rural Schools Act of 2000 (SRS) was something that his
local government depended upon and emphasized the importance of
SRS funding to rural school districts in Alaska.
8:05:20 AM
TREVOR SHAW, Staff, Representative Jeremy Bynum, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Jeremy Bynum, prime
sponsor, presented HJR 5 to the committee. He began on slide 2
of the PowerPoint presentation for HJR 5 [included in the
committee packet], which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Urging the United States Congress and the
President of the United States to reinstate the Secure
Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of
2000 and make the funding mechanism in the Act
permanent.
The Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-
Determination Act of 2000 ("SRS Act") was enacted by
the U.S. Congress to provide financial assistance to
rural counties and school districts impacted by the
sharp reduction of revenue from timber sales on
federal lands and National Forests.
8:06:09 AM
MR. SHAW continued to slide 3, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Historically, a portion of Forest Service funds
generated through multi-use activities, such as
grazing, timber production, and special use permits,
were distributed to eligible counties to help maintain
local roads and schools. However, with the significant
decline of the timber industry in the 1990s, lawmakers
sought to provide relief to local communities and
economies through an alternative funding mechanism.
In Fiscal Year 2023, forest counties across the United
States received $252.6 million in payments under the
SRS Act, including $10.9 million for communities in
the State of Alaska.
8:07:00 AM SLIDE 4
MR. SHAW continued to slide 4, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
FY2023 SRS Act Payments in Alaska
.notdef Anchorage: $92,404.67
.notdef Haines: $272,886.54
.notdef Juneau: $629,713.94
.notdef Kenai: $604,468.39
.notdef Ketchikan:
$1,194,087.61
.notdef Mat-Su: $22,365.14
.notdef Petersburg: $764,911.32
.notdef Sitka: $606,023.02
.notdef Skagway: $37,927.48
.notdef Wrangell: $888,492.07
.notdef Yakutat: $595,621.47
.notdef Unorganized: $5,229,332.69 (Chugach & Tongass
National Forests)
8:07:39 AM
MR. SHAW continued to slide 5, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
In the Ketchikan Gateway Borough, SRS payments go
to the Local Education Fund, which is primarily funded
through property taxes the mill rate % equivalent of
the SRS payment is 14%, or 10% of their total local
contribution to schools.
.notdef In the City & Borough of Wrangell, SRS payments
accounted for approximately 55% of their local
contribution to the school district.
.notdef In the Petersburg Borough, SRS payments were equal
to approximately 38% of their school funding
contribution.
.notdef In the City & Borough of Yakutat, SRS payments were
roughly equal to the total amount in local
contribution to their school district in FY23.
8:08:35 AM
MR. SHAW continued to slide 6, which displayed a bar graph that
compared the SRS funding differences in various Southeast Alaska
communities, along with its dollar impact per student.
8:09:32 AM
MR. SHAW continued to slide 7, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
SRS Act funding was reauthorized in the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act through
September 30, 2023.
.notdef The Secure Rural Schools Reauthorization Act of 2023
(S.2581) was introduced to extend the SRS Act funding
mechanism through 2026. This bill passed the U.S.
Senate by unanimous consent. However, it died without
being heard by the House upon the adjournment of the
118th
Congress.
.notdef The last SRS payments under the most recent
reauthorization were distributed to states in April
2024.
.notdef Without Congressional action, there will be no
further payments to communities under SRS. Currently,
no reauthorizing legislation has been introduced in
the 119th Congress.
8:10:41 AM
MR. SHAW continued to slide 8, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
House Joint Resolution No. 5 urges the United
States Congress and President to reinstate this source
of critical revenue for Alaska forest communities, and
to go one step further by creating a permanent funding
mechanism according to the existing SRS Act formula.
Removing the uncertainty of these stop-gap
reauthorizations would provide stability and
predictability to these affected communities across
the nation, especially the small rural communities
that are disproportionally impacted by these lapses in
funding.
8:11:19 AM
MR. SHAW concluded the presentation on slide 9 and offered to
answer any committee questions.
8:11:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ELAM asked if SRS funding was in lieu of funding
that would have been generated by a local timber industry.
8:11:58 AM
REPRESENATIVE BYNUM said that the federal funding was generally
made up of the funds that would have come from timber harvest.
8:13:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SCHWANKE asked if the SRS was similar to the
Payment in Lieu of Taxes program (PILT) that rural schools in
her own district are subject to. She commented that she would
like to see the Tongass National Foret reopened for logging.
REPRESENATIVE BYNUM replied that he would have to do more
research on PILT to properly compare the two programs.
8:16:24 AM
MR. SHAW clarified to the committee that the Secure Rural
Schools formula was originally created to offset the loss of
timber income and provide relief to communities that were
affected by their local timber industries leaving.
8:17:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE UNDERWOOD asked if the Secure Rural Schools act
would have to be reversed if the Tongass National Forest were
allowed to be logged again.
MR. SHAW echoed Representative Underwood's remarks and said that
Alaskans would "love to use" their natural resources.
8:18:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EISCHEID asked how school districts around
Southeast Alaska would be impacted by the Secure Rural Schools
Act not being reauthorized.
REPRESENATIVE BYNUM explained that the impact of a loss of SRS
funding that a community might experience is directly correlated
to the size of a community.
8:21:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EISCHEID emphasized Representative Bynum's
remarks that the impact of reduced or no SRS funding would have
tremendous impacts on communities around the United States and
Alaska.
8:22:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE UNDERWOOD asked Representative Bynum if he has
had any conversations with Alaska's congressional delegation
regarding HJR 5.
REPRESENATIVE BYNUM replied that his office has been in contact
with Alaska's congressional delegation and said that he doesn't
want to make any remarks on their behalf while he awaits their
responses.
8:22:30 AM
CO-CHAIR HIMSCHOOT asked if there have historically been any
gaps in the Secure Rural Schools funds and asked what the
breakdown of fund usage is for the SRS program. She asked how
difficult it would be to convince Alaska's congressional
delegation or the President of the United States to pass a new
SRS act.
MR. SHAW answered that this would be the first time in the
history of the SRS Program that there would be a lapse in
funding. He said that the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
was an example of a law that allowed a community to use all
funds from SRS funding. He added that Yakutat, Alaska is a prime
example of a community that would be greatly affected by the
loss of the SRS program.
8:26:19 AM
CO-CHAIR STORY asked how the SRS could change to become
permanent law and asked if the current legislation being
proposed before the United States Congress has a sunset clause.
REPRESENATIVE BYNUM said that a new piece of legislation would
have to not include a sunset clause in order for it to become
permanent law.
8:27:45 AM
CO-CHAIR STORY pointed out that there were 4 letters of support
from the Wrangell, Ketchikan, Yakutat, and Juneau school
districts.
8:28:17 AM
CO-CHAIR STORY announced that HJR 5 would be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HJR 5 Presentation_Slides, HEDC.pdf |
HEDC 2/5/2025 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 Version A.pdf |
HEDC 2/5/2025 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HEDC 2/5/2025 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 letter of Support - Ketchikan Gateway Borough.pdf |
HEDC 2/5/2025 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 Letter of Support - City & Borough of Wrangell.pdf |
HEDC 2/5/2025 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 Applicable Resolution - Petersburg Borough.pdf |
HEDC 2/5/2025 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 Letter of Support - City & Borough of Juneau.pdf |
HEDC 2/5/2025 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR 5 Rural Schools Shortfall, Alaska Beacon 01-10-2025.pdf |
HEDC 2/5/2025 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HB 69 Written Testimony 6.pdf |
HEDC 2/5/2025 8:00:00 AM |
HB 69 |
| HJR 5 Letter of Support - Craig City SD, Super. 2.12.25.pdf |
HEDC 2/5/2025 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |
| HJR005-1-1-021725-Fiscal Note LEG-N.pdf |
HEDC 2/5/2025 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 5 |