Legislature(2013 - 2014)SENATE FINANCE 532
03/28/2013 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB22 | |
| SB83 | |
| SB57 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 22 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 83 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 57 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SENATE BILL NO. 57
"An Act relating to parental involvement in education;
adjusting pupil transportation funding; amending the
time required for employers to give tenured teachers
notification of their nonretention; and providing for
an effective date."
TIM LAMKIN, STAFF, SENATOR GARY STEVENS, spoke to the
legislation. He related that the bill accomplished three
objectives. The first objective contained in Section 1 of
the legislation encouraged increased parental involvement
in developing children's reading skills. Under the state's
direction, the school districts would publish information
regarding the importance of parental involvement in
developing reading skills in kindergarten through third
grade. The second section and objective of the bill
involved pupil transportation. The legislation realigned
the funding for pupil transportation by annually matching
the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Anchorage. He explained
that the school districts contracted with transportation
providers. The contracts contained a 3 percent adjustment
for inflation according to the Anchorage CPI. Currently,
the state provided a 1.5 percent annual adjustment for
pupil transportation funding for the next two years. Most
districts were forced to subsidize pupil transportation
costs at the expense of education programs. He indicated
that the third objective found in Section 3 was referred to
as the "pink slip" section. He pointed out that
historically March 16 was established as an arbitrary date
to provide notification of layoff or retention. Section 3
moved the notification date forward to May 15th when school
districts funding levels were known. He added that Section
4 of the legislation repealed the current pupil
transportation funding provisions. Lastly, Section 5
allowed existing contracts with teachers and faculty to
expire before the legislation took effect.
Senator Hoffman inquired why the bill used Anchorage as the
CPI base and wondered whether there were other indexes for
higher costs areas. Mr. Lamkin related that other indexes
existed but that using the Anchorage CPI was a "policy
call." Senator Hoffman thought that it would be fair to
consider a higher index for Fairbanks and other high index
areas of the state.
Senator Bishop inquired about the difference in the CPI
between Fairbanks and Anchorage. Mr. Lamkin offered to
provide the information.
Co-Chair Meyer cited Section 3 and inquired whether the
provision only applied to tenured teachers. Mr. Lamkin
confirmed that Section 3 only applied to tenured teachers.
He added that subsection (b) of the statute referred to
non-tenured teachers which required notification by the end
of the school year.
Co-Chair Meyer wondered why the bill was structured with
two separate notification dates. Mr. Lamkin replied that
notification was a policy decision which was established
many years ago.
Vice-Chair Fairclough speculated that due to the nature of
tenure, a tenured position deserved as much layoff
notification as possible[BSW3].
Senator Olson remarked that the March 15th date offered as
much notification as possible, which was more helpful to a
person facing a layoff. Vice-Chair Fairclough ascertained
that the pink slips were issued before the budget cycle for
the state was completed and the school districts funding
levels were known.
Mr. Lamkin concurred. He added that unnecessarily issuing
pink slips caused teacher stress that could affect the
classroom. He voiced that it was a matter of fairness and
transparency.
Senator Dunleavy commented that things were done backward
from the school districts' point of view. He noted that the
districts were legally compelled to enter into contracts
before budgets were known. He believed the change placed
the notifications in line with the budget process.
9:44:50 AM
Co-Chair Meyer relayed that he had heard comments on
Section 2 of the bill on both sides of the issue. Indexing
was not a typical budget practice and might set an
unwelcome precedent. The alternative of dealing with pupil
transportation increases each year was also not ideal. He
preferred supporting the legislation.
Mr. Lamkin communicated that the issue was a policy
question. He pointed out that the cost was real. He
deferred to school district financial officers for further
discussion.
Senator Hoffman believed that in this particular case, the
additional expenses would "diminish" classroom funding and
was the core of the argument.
Vice-Chair Fairclough OPENED public testimony.
AMY LUJAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL
BUSINESS OFFICIALS, spoke in favor of SB 57. She offered
that the Anchorage CPI was the standard for contracts,
recommended by the Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED) statewide. Contracts in Fairbanks and
even Nome use the Anchorage CPI. The costs were real and
increasing. Authorizing the Anchorage CPI budget increase
keeps pace with the actual cost. She discussed Section 3
and agreed with the comments of Senator Dunleavy. She
mentioned the unnecessary stress caused by issuance of the
premature notification and keeping the pink slips in line
with the state and municipal budget processes.
Senator Olson inquired whether it would be fairer to use a
higher CPI. Ms. Lujan reminded the committee that the
contracts were based on the Anchorage CPI and was the
standard.
Senator Olson suggested moving the notification date up to
May 1, which corresponds to the boroughs budgets. Ms. Lujan
observed that the dates vary according to the borough and
opined that May 15 might be a safer date.
DEENA PARAMO, SUPERINTENDENT, MAT-SU BOROUGH SCHOOL
DISTRICT, MAT-SU (via teleconference), spoke in support of
SB 57. She referenced increased parental involvement and
related that tools and resources made available to parents
enriched education. She restated that all school district's
contracts were based on the Anchorage CPI. She shared that
when school districts budgets were developed "global big
picture thinking" was balanced with financial realities.
She believed that the current factor of 1.5 percent was not
sufficient to fully support pupil transportation costs. She
based that assessment on the 's Anchorage CPI's 2.6
percent five--year average. The funding shortfall reduced
instruction funding. She stated that the Matanuska-Susitna
borough school district was preparing to subsidize
transportation funding with its general fund at $1.5
million in FY 2014 with impacts to classroom instruction
funding. The amount was the equivalent to 15 teacher
positions. The bill reduced the shortfall by approximately
$500 thousand.
Ms. Paramo turned to non-retention notification. She
related that under the year to year funding structure
enacted (HB 273) by the state in 2008, funding levels were
not known before statutorily mandated timelines required
contract renewal and non-retention notification. She
relayed the Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District's
support of the notification date change and furthered that
the contract dates should be changed as well. The
Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District thought that the
timeline was a "prudent and responsible fiscal policy." She
thanked the committee and urged for support of the
legislation.
9:56:08 AM
Senator Hoffman inquired how Mat-Su derived the $1.5
million figure which contrasted with the DEED fiscal note
FN2 (EED).
LUKE FULP, CHIEF BUSINESS OFFICER, MAT-SU BOROUGH SCHOOL
DISTRICT, MAT-SU (via teleconference), replied that he was
not certain how the fiscal note was developed. He stated
that the borough developed the budget using the CPI five--
year average of 2.6 percent in relation to the 1.5 percent
increase instituted in SB 182 last year.
DAVE JONES, ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT, Kenai Peninsula
BOROUGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, KENAI (via teleconference),
testified in support of SB 57. He concurred with all of the
previous testimony. He added that DEED's standardization of
school district contracts to the Anchorage CPI was an
attempt to rein in costs and attract more contractors. The
increase to the Anchorage CPI in SB 57 helped stabilize
transportation funding; not at the expense of education
funding. He discussed the notification issue. He related
that the current system left teachers to wonder whether
they had a job and the district in the situation that they
will find another job and not be available if their jobs
were retained.
Senator Dunleavy commented that the May 15th date was
minimal in light of the possibility that the legislature
could end in special session on any given year.
BRUCE JOHNSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA COUNCIL OF SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS, supported the legislation. He shared that
school districts took lying off teachers and school
district employees seriously. He agreed with Mr. Jones and
did not want to lose teachers who sought and gained other
employment due to premature notification. Rural districts
commonly issued contracts to staff in February, especially
in schools with high turnover in order to develop
recruitment strategies for the next year. Most of the
teachers were issued contracts well before the May 15th
deadline. He appreciated the flexibility of the later date
and believed it was more advantageous to have a stable
employment force.
Vice-Chair Fairclough CLOSED public testimony.
SB 57 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
10:05:35 AM