Legislature(2025 - 2026)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/03/2025 03:30 PM Senate 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 | |
| SB82 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 82 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 82-EDUCATION:SCHOOLS; GRANTS; FUNDING; DEBT
3:32:11 PM
CHAIR TOBIN announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 82
"An Act relating to education; relating to public school
attendance; relating to mobile communication devices in schools;
relating to reading proficiency incentive grants; relating to
authorization of charter schools; relating to transportation of
students; relating to school bond debt reimbursement; relating
to funding and reporting by Alaska technical and vocational
education programs; authorizing lump sum payments for certain
teachers as retention and recruitment incentives; and providing
for an effective date."
3:33:41 PM
DEENA BISHOP, Commissioner, Department of Education and Early
Development, Juneau, Alaska, co-presented SB 82 on behalf of the
Administration. She stated she would finish the introductory
presentation of SB 82 that began on Wednesday, February 24,
2025. She reminded the committee that SB 82 includes $180
million for formula funding and Alaska's public schools. She
highlighted that the bill provides state funding for district-
operated residential schools, including updated stipends for
both long- and short-term programs. She noted these schools
serve students from across Alaska, offering career and technical
education and post-secondary dual enrollment opportunities.
3:35:27 PM
KAREN MORRISON, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Education and
Early Development, Juneau, Alaska, co-presented SB 82 on behalf
of the administration. She moved to slide 13, State Funding for
Districts Operating Residential Schools and said SB 88 increases
regional per-pupil monthly stipends by 50 percent, which
represents a total of $4 million annually into the program:
[Original punctuation provided.]
State Funding for Districts Operating Residential
Schools
The regional per-pupil monthly stipends in Alaska's
long-term and short-term residential schools will
increase by 50 percent.
• Southeast Region (Region I) increases from $1,230
to $1,845
• Southcentral Region (Region II) increases from
$1,200 to $1,800
• Interior Region (Region III) increases from $1,452
to $2,178
• Southwest Region (Region IV) increases from $1,509
to $2,264
• Northern Remote Region (Region V) increases from
$1,776 to $2,664
3:35:45 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP moved to slide 14 and said the next
investment under SB 82 is to compensate districts for students
enrolled in their correspondence schools. She noted that 32 of
Alaska's regular school districts and Mount Edgecumbe operate
such programs. SB 82 proposes changing the correspondence
student count from 0.90 to 1.0 full-time equivalent (FTE),
treating them as whole students for funding purposes. She added
that SB 88 would also provide a 20 percent block grant for
student support services, including career and technical
education, special education, English language learning, and
gifted education, acknowledging the shift of students from
brick-and-mortar to correspondence programs. She listed courses
correspondence students take in schools and said the change
helps cover the cost of in-school learning and sports.
3:38:26 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked how the proportion of correspondence
students needing special education services compares to those in
neighborhood schools.
3:38:40 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP said she would get back to the committee
with percentages.
SENATOR KIEHL asked for the same information regarding career
and technical education students.
COMMISSIONER BISHOP said the department could review students'
Individual Learning Plans (ILPs), noting that career and
technical education is generally of interest to most high school
students.
3:39:22 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked why the department believes it is necessary
to increase the per-student factor for correspondence education
from 0.9 to 1.0. He said that in a limited budget environment,
he wants to ensure needs are met and noted ongoing growth in
correspondence programs. He asked what deficiency the department
is aiming to fix.
COMMISSIONER BISHOP stated her belief that the overall
investment in the omnibus bill is meant to rebuild trust in
public schools. She noted that since 2000, and especially after
the COVID pandemic, parents have engaged more directly in their
children's education and have appreciated the opportunity to
lead that process. She emphasized that SB 82 is grounded in the
idea that parents know their children well and want to stay
involved in their education, and the department supports that
involvement.
3:41:47 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP explained that moving the correspondence
funding factor from 0.9 to 1.0 reflects a broader review of
funding formula elements, including small and large school
factors, and school and district location. She said that special
needs and career and technical education are student-driven
factors, relevant to almost all students. She clarified that
although correspondence students may learn outside traditional
settings, the funds go to the district to support various
pedagogical needs. She concluded by stating that the goal is to
show parents their children and educational choices are valued
within the public education system.
3:43:29 PM
SENATOR KIEHL shared that he and his wife have used nearly every
public education option available in the state, as well as
homeschooling without allotments or assessments, and value
parental involvement and choice. He clarified that his question
focused on limited funding and the need to prioritize spending.
He expressed concern about allocating funds to promote a sense
of being valued rather than addressing a specific gap or unmet
need in the education system.
3:44:33 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP stated that the shared need comes from
Alaska's 53 school districts, 32 of which have created
correspondence programs in response to what parents want. She
explained that these districts are already serving students in
correspondence programs without receiving full funding, as the
current formula does not treat correspondence students as whole
students. She said the bill aims to ensure those districts
receive appropriate funding for the work they are doing to meet
student needs. She emphasized that interest in homeschooling and
correspondence programs is not likely to decline, and the goal
is to direct funds to districts that are adapting to support
students with flexible, responsive educational options.
3:46:13 PM
CHAIR TOBIN asked how many school districts offer correspondence
programs.
3:46:19 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP replied 32 out of 52 school districts.
3:46:24 PM
CHAIR TOBIN stated that in terms of broad-based funding 32
school districts would benefit.
COMMISSIONER BISHOP responded that currently 32 districts would
benefit, unless more districts establish correspondence
programs.
3:46:41 PM
CHAIR TOBIN requested information for the committee on how
allotments have changed since the correspondence programs began
in the 32 school districts. She anticipated an increase in
allotments and noted that the legislation does not appear to
prohibit correspondence programs from raising allotments with
additional resources. She asked for clarification on whether she
misunderstood anything.
3:47:01 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP stated that SB 82 could allow for changes or
change could occur through regulation. She offered to provide
data on how school stipends have changed, noting that many
districts have increased stipends when they receive additional
funding. She explained that districts often adjust stipends to
reflect the higher costs of home-based education. She added that
districts have made adjustments to correspondence programs both
within and outside the Base Student Allocation (BSA) formula.
3:47:43 PM
CHAIR TOBIN expressed concern about the rise in correspondence
program allotments alongside increased enrollment since the
pandemic. She noted a lack of comparable graduation rates
between correspondence and brick-and-mortar schools, and pointed
out limited standardized testing participation in correspondence
programs, citing a 14 percent figure from the Department of
Education and Early Development (DEED). She requested an
explanation of the accountability measures in place to ensure
correspondence students are held to similar standards as those
in traditional schools.
3:48:23 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP noted that lower graduation rates in
correspondence schools often reflect the challenges of students
already at risk, rather than shortcomings of the programs
themselves. She pointed out that some students use
correspondence schools to recover credits and avoid returning to
their brick-and-mortar schools for senior year.
COMMISSIONER BISHOP added that many correspondence students take
alternative assessments, such as MAP Growth by the Northwest
Evaluation Association (NWEA), which provides individualized
learning feedback. Despite low participation in the state
summative assessment (15 to 18 percent), she stated the sample
is statistically significant for school performance evaluation.
She compared this to the National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP), which tests less than 5 percent of students and
remains valid.
3:54:05 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP concluded by asserting that correspondence
schools are not the highest-need schools in the state. She
emphasized that the state's school accountability efforts are
more heavily focused on other schools identified as needing
greater support.
3:54:26 PM
CHAIR TOBIN restated that her original question concerned
accountability measures for correspondence students and noted
that she had not heard a direct answer. She summarized that the
response indicated students are not being adequately assessed,
are being pushed into correspondence without sufficient support,
and that the current opt-out provisions undermine consistent
evaluation. She referenced Judge Gleeson's opinion that the
state holds responsibility for ensuring students meet standards-
based education.
CHAIR TOBIN challenged the assertion that NAEP is statistical
significant for 5 percent of the population, pointing out that
NAEP explicitly states it is not statistically significant for
Black students because the state does not have a large enough
sample size. She requested a follow-up response offline that
directly addresses what accountability measures exist for
correspondence students, what measures should be implemented to
improve outcomes such as graduation rates, and how the state can
fulfill its constitutional obligation to ensure a quality
education for all students.
3:55:51 PM
SENATOR KIEHL requested a follow-up response addressing the
statistical validity of assessment results from correspondence
students. He acknowledged that NAEP uses a random sampling
method and expressed skepticism about the claim that a 14
percent opt-in/opt-out participation rate is statistically
valid. He asked to see the statistical analysis supporting that
conclusion, stating concern about potential selection bias in
the sample.
3:56:39 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP added that correspondence program
requirements are established in statute and apply in the same
manner as for all other students in Alaska schools.
CHAIR TOBIN acknowledged the response but emphasized that
correspondence students are not actually participating in
assessments. She stated that if the legislature relies on
assessments to measure student learning and correspondence
students are not taking them, then an alternative accountability
method is needed to ensure public funds are being effectively
used.
3:57:07 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP moved to slide 15 and discussed increased
funding for career and technical education in the foundation
formula. She stated that SB 82 proposes an increase to the
vocational funding factor to support Career and Technical
Education (CTE) in schools. She noted that providing CTE is
challenging for many districts without sufficient scale, so SB
82 would provide additional funding. She said the state Chart of
Accounts has a provision requiring districts to report
expenditures specifically for CTE, offering a form of
accountability for all schools, including correspondence
programs. She added that the increased funding could supplement
federal Carl Perkins grants, which are often insufficient for
smaller districts, thereby enhancing workforce development
opportunities across Alaska:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Increase in Career & Technical Funding
Formula Funding for Career and Technical Education in
the vocational factor will increase from 1.015 to 1.04
for all schools.
District career and technical education expenditures
will be reported annually on required financial
statements.
3:58:33 PM
MS. MORRISON added that the change in CTE funding will increase
from 1.015 to 1.04 for all schools. CTE and correspondence
changes in the foundation formula are a $75.2 million investment
annually.
CHAIR TOBIN referenced AS 14.03.123, which requires school and
district accountability reporting, including student achievement
metrics. She questioned why CTE dollar usage is being addressed
in a separate section rather than incorporated into the existing
report. She expressed concern about increasing the reporting
burden on already overburdened districts.
3:59:18 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP explained that currently, reporting CTE
expenditures in the Chart of Accounts is voluntary. SB 82
recommends reporting through the existing Chart of Accounts to
ensure that CTE funds are tracked separately.
3:59:33 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP moved to slide 16, Teacher Lump-Sum Payments
for Recruitment and Retention. She stated that SB 82 includes
teacher lump sum payments as part of a three-year pilot program
aimed at improving recruitment and retention. She explained that
this initiative comes from the Teacher Recruitment and Retention
(TRR) Playbook and reflects teacher-identified priorities such
as compensation and retention bonuses. The proposal directs
payments of $5,000, $10,000, or $15,000 to individual teachers,
with the highest amount targeted toward those in the most remote
and challenging districts. She noted that teachers have
expressed that this funding could help offset travel costs not
covered during the school year and emphasized the goal of
evaluating whether such incentives improve retention and
recruitment across Alaska:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Teacher Lump-Sum Payments for Recruitment and
Retention
A three-year pilot program will be established to
provide lump sum payments, per the Teacher Retention
and Recruitment Playbook, as a workforce incentive for
certificated teachers employed full-time in public
schools in the amounts of:
• $5,000
• $10,000
• $15,000
Payments would be included in the teachers'
compensation for the Teacher Retirement System
4:01:20 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN asked whether the $180 million mentioned at the
beginning of the meeting as included in the funding formula also
accounts for the temporary teacher bonus payments.
4:01:34 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP replied yes, the bonus payments are included
in FY27.
4:01:49 PM
CHAIR TOBIN stated for the record that the January 16, 2024
legal memo outlining several potential issues with the teacher
bonus program, including concerns related to equal protection
and collective bargaining, is available online
4:02:06 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP moved to slide 17, Report to the
Legislature, and shared details about the report:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Report to the Legislature
House and Senate Education Committees jointly create a
report to be delivered before the first day of the
First Regular Session of the 35th Legislature, which
will:
• Provide recommendations for any changes to the
foundation formula
• Include a survey of each school district's curricula
and services
• Provide definition of "accountability" as it applies
to student performance
• Recommend metrics for determining school and student
performance other than the standardized testing
currently used
4:02:46 PM
CHAIR TOBIN noted for the record that AS 14.03.120 requires an
annual education planning report to the legislature by January
15, which includes school goals, objectives, annual plans, and
performance measures. She stated that this information is
publicly available on the Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED) website through the "public report card." She
also referenced AS 14.03.123, which mandates school and district
accountability reporting and requires the department to rank
districts using assessment metrics, with low-performing schools
required to submit improvement plans. She emphasized that these
statutes already provide substantial information on student
achievement and school performance and suggested that the
reporting requirement in SB 82 may be duplicative and
unnecessary.
4:03:51 PM
SENATOR KIEHL remarked that this may be the first time he has
seen the executive branch recommend a report required to be
prepared by the legislative branch. He assumed the intent was
for the executive branch to support whatever recommendations the
legislature develops.
CHAIR TOBIN acknowledged Senator Kiehl's comment and asked if
there were further questions or comments.
COMMISSIONER BISHOP thanked the committee for hearing the
presentation.
4:04:26 PM
CHAIR TOBIN said the committee would now hear about the fiscal
notes for SB 82.
4:04:44 PM
HEATHER HEINEKEN, Director of Finance and Support Services,
Department of Education and Early Development, Anchorage,
Alaska, provided an overview of the nine Department of Education
and Early Development fiscal notes for SB 82. She said Fiscal
Note 1 is the foundation program allocation. She paraphrased the
analysis for Fiscal Note 1, OMB Component 141, dated January 28,
2025:
[Original punctuation provided.]
This bill amends the public school funding formula in
AS 14.17. In AS 14.17.410, the bill removes the 0.9
funding factor on correspondence average daily
membership (ADM) and moves the correspondence ADM into
the district adjusted ADM calculation before the
special needs and secondary school vocational and
technical instruction (CTE) factors are applied. The
bill also increases the AS 14.17.420 CTE factor from
1.015 to 1.04. The projected increase to State aid
starting in FY2026 is $75,213.2.
The effective date for these provisions is July 1,
2025 (FY2026).
The funding mechanism is a general fund transfer to
the Public Education Fund (PEF). The fiscal note
effect for FY2026 through FY2031 is reported in the
fiscal note for the PEF, as the funding is deposited
to the PEF, not into the Foundation Program funding
component. The above analysis is presented here for
explanation purposes only.
4:06:29 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said Fiscal Note 2 is the pupil transportation
allocation. She paraphrased the analysis for Fiscal Note 2, OMB
Component 144, dated January 28, 2025:
[Original punctuation provided.]
The bill amends the per student amount in AS 14.09.010
for district pupil transportation grants to increase
by approximately 20 percent over the current statutory
rate as adjusted based on a CPI through FY2016 (ref.
SB57 (Chapter 69, SLA 2013)). The new language also
removes Tanana from the list, reflecting the
dissolution of Tanana as a separate district. The
projected increase in pupil transportation costs in
FY2026 is $14,517.2.
The funding mechanism for AS 14.09.010 grants is a
general fund transfer to the Public Education Fund
(PEF). The fiscal note effect for FY2026 through
FY2031 is reported in the fiscal note for the PEF, as
the funding is deposited to the PEF, not into the
Pupil Transportation funding component. The above
analysis is presented here for explanation purposes
only.
The bill also adds language that the department shall,
through regulation, establish a student transportation
plan for students that apply are accepted to attend a
school or school district outside of the student's
local school or district boundary area. The department
anticipates the most effective way to implement these
transportation plans will be to integrate with and add
to district student transportation programs; however,
it may be necessary for the department to directly
enter into transportation agreements or in-lieu of
agreements as these will be added routes and costs on
top of the existing to-and-from transportation routes
funded through AS 14.09.010 grants. The exact scope
and needs to be met by the student transportation plan
cannot currently be known, this fiscal notes projects
an estimated cost of $3,366.3. This amount was
determined based on one percent of the total average
daily membership (ADM) participating at a daily rate
of $15 (whole dollars) per day for a 180-day school
term (see table below). Projected costs would be
adjusted in the out years based on actual program
usage.
Projected FY2026 Total ADM 124,679.35
1 percent ADM Estimated Participation 1,246.79
Daily Rate (whole dollars) $ 15
Total Days (School Term) 180
Projected Cost (whole dollars) $3,366,342
The effective date for these provisions is July 1,
2026 (FY2027)
4:09:00 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said Fiscal Note 3 is for additional foundation
funding. She paraphrased Fiscal Note 3, OMB component 3112,
dated January 28, 2025:
[Original punctuation provided.]
The bill sets out that the department, through
regulation, establish processes for the department to
compensate a district that accepts students after the
fall count period under AS 14.17.600. Because the
department does not collect average daily membership
(ADM) data at the end of the school year, the student
numbers are based on enrollment. Enrollment numbers
are based on student enrollment in a school on a
certain date, as such can be slightly higher than the
ADM, which is calculated on the number of hours a
student is enrolled (full time equivalent (FTE)) and
days of membership over a period of time.
In FY2024, 11 districts experienced growth in
brick-and-mortar school enrollment from the October
count to the count of enrollment on the last day of
school, totaling 41 students. This does not include
department-approved early education programs under the
Alaska Reads Act, and the end of year data excludes
students that graduated prior to the last day of
school.
The fiscal note is based on 50 students, this reflects
the prior year data and an estimate to account for
students that may change school districts mid-year
under the bill provisions that allow a child to attend
a district in which the child is not a resident. The
50 students is multiplied by an average district cost
factor of 1.470 and a base student allocation of
$5,960, for a total projected cost of $438.1. This
fiscal note does not anticipate funding for an
increase in a district's correspondence study program
count.
The effective date for this provision is July 1, 2026
(FY2027).
4:10:16 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said Fiscal Note 4, OMB component 148, dated
January 28, 2025, is for residential school programs. She
paraphrased the analysis:
[Original punctuation provided.]
This bill increases the regional per student monthly
stipend amounts for residential school operations
under AS 14.16.200(b) by 50 percent as follows (noted
in whole dollars):
-Southeast Region (Region I) increases from $1,230 to
$1,845 -Southcentral Region (Region II) increases from
$1,200 to $1,800 -Interior Region (Region III)
increases from $1,452 to $2,178 -Southwest Region
(Region IV) increases from $1,509 to $2,264 -Northern
Remote Region (Region V) increases from $1,776 to
$2,664
The current projected FY2026 residential school
funding is estimated to be $8,458.1 (noted in
thousands). The bill increases this projected funding
to $12,494.0, resulting in a $4,035.9 projected
increase in funding to school districts operating
residential programs.
This portion of the bill takes effect July 1, 2025
(FY2026).
MS. HEINEKEN added that for reference the projected
FY2026 residential school funding is estimated to be
$8,458,100 prior to the passing of SB 82.
4:12:07 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said Fiscal Note 5, OMB component 2737, dated
January 28, 2025, is the allocation for school finance and
facilities. She paraphrased the analysis:
[Original punctuation provided.]
An additional position is needed to administer the
existing student transportation program and
requirements, as well as the additional duties to
oversee the department duty to establish student
transportation plans: one School Finance Specialist 2
at a Range 18, Step B/C, at $122.9. The position would
need two trips annually for oversight and training at
$5.0 total. Support costs associated with establishing
a new position: department chargebacks of $17.6
annually, as well as one-time supplies and equipment
costs of $5.0. This position would be filled in FY2026
to assist with the development of the implementing
regulations.
In FY2026, a one-time increment of $18.0 will be needed
for legal services costs associated with revising and
establishing new regulations. Three regulation
packages are anticipated to establish the processes
for 1) district reporting of and compensation for end
of year student counts, 2) establishing the student
transportation plan, and 3) updating the Uniform Chart
of Accounts to support district reporting of annual
expenditures for secondary school vocational and
technical instruction.
4:13:27 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said Fiscal Note 6, OMB component 2796, dated
January 28, 2025, is for student and school achievement funds.
It addresses several key considerations for Alaska's education
system broken down by section in SB 82:
Section 3 requires school districts to develop policies
regarding mobile communication devices. A one-time cost of
$6,000 is anticipated for legal services to draft the necessary
regulations.
4:13:54 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said Section 4 covers reading proficiency incentive
grants. These provide $450 per student in kindergarten through
sixth grade who meet grade-level proficiency or demonstrate
progress on statewide assessments. Based on current data, 48,847
students meet these criteria, resulting in an estimated total
grant cost of $21,981,200 annually. Additionally, a one-time
cost of $6,000 is required for legal services related to
regulation development.
4:14:34 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said Sections 6 and 7 address charter school
authorization. These sections establish new avenues for charter
school authorization. A one-time cost of $6,000 is anticipated
for legal services related to regulation development.
MS. HEINEKEN said Section 16 pertains to vocational and
technical education reporting. It mandates that districts
receiving vocational and technical education funding submit
program plans and annual expenditure reports. These requirements
will necessitate one full-time Education Specialist 2, at Range
21, to oversee implementation, provide technical assistance, and
analyze statewide reporting. Salaries and benefits for this
position total $131,800 annually. Additional costs include a
$17,600 annual department chargeback, a one-time equipment and
supplies cost of $5,000, and one-time legal services of $6,000
for regulation development.
4:15:38 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said Section 18 of SB 82 covers teacher retention
and recruitment agreements. This section establishes a lump sum
retention and recruitment payment for certificated full-time
classroom teachers on or around July 1 of fiscal years 2027,
2028, and 2029, contingent on legislative appropriations. To
administer this program, the Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED) will require one non-permanent Education
Associate 3, at Range 17, starting in FY 26 to develop
regulations, applications, and review submissions. Salary and
benefits for this position are estimated at $117,000 annually.
Additional administrative costs include a $17,600 annual
department chargeback, a one-time equipment and supply cost of
$5,000, and one-time legal services for regulation development
of $6,000.
The estimated lump sum payments to teachers total $54,690,000
annually from FY 27 through FY 29. Additionally, because these
payments are considered compensation under the Teacher
Retirement System, employer contributions are estimated at
$6,859,100, or 12.56 percent of the lump sum payment. The total
grant amount to school districts, including Public Employees'
Retirement System (PERS) contributions, is projected at
$61,559,100 annually.
4:17:21 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said Fiscal Note 7, OMB component 1060, dated
January 28, 20205 is for Mt. Edgecumbe High School, a division
of DEED. She said Mt. Edgecumbe gave a budgeted interagency
receipt and Fiscal Note 7 increases its receipt authority to
align with the estimated allocation from the public education
fund. She paraphrased the analysis:
[Original punctuation provided.]
This bill amends the public school funding formula in
AS 14.17, by increasing the secondary school
vocational and technical instruction (CTE) factor from
1.015 to 1.04. The increase to the CTE factor results
in a projected increase in State aid funding for Mt.
Edgecumbe High School (MEHS) of $104.0 in FY2026.
As a division of the Department of Education and Early
Development, MEHS' State aid is budgeted as
interagency receipts. This fiscal note increases their
budgeted interagency receipt authority by the $104.0
projected increase. The correspondence factor change
under AS 14.17.410 and pupil transportation program
per student amount changes under AS 14.09.010(a) do
not impact MEHS.
The effective date for these provisions is July 1,
2025 (FY2026).
4:18:17 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said Fiscal Note 8, OMB component 153, dated
January 28, 2025, allocates funds to school debt reimbursement.
She paraphrased the analysis:
[Original punctuation provided.]
This bill extends the closure of the school
construction debt reimbursement program (AS 14.11.10)
to any new voter approved authorizations until July 1,
2030. The current closure became effective January 1,
2015, and the moratorium is scheduled to sunset July
1, 2025.
This legislation reestablishes the program with the
reimbursement rates set at 50 percent and 40 percent
for indebtedness authorized by voters on or after July
1, 2030.
It is difficult to accurately predict the fiscal
impact this bill would have. It can be anticipated
that the department's school construction debt
reimbursement allocation will experience scheduled
reductions as currently reimbursed bonds are paid off
during the five-year extension and new debt service is
not being added. The amount of indebtedness that may
be incurred on projects approved for debt
reimbursement at the 50 percent and 40 percent levels
following July 1, 2030 (FY2031) is unknown.
This portion of the bill takes effect on June 30,
2025.
4:18:58 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said Fiscal Note 9, OMB component 2804, dated
January 28, 2025, corresponds to Section 14 of SB 82, which
modifies AS 14.17.410 by moving the correspondence Average Daily
Membership (ADM) into the Adjusted Average Daily Membership
(AADM) calculation as a factor of 1.0 She said Fiscal Note 9
places the correspondence ADM before adjustments for special
needs and career and technical education. It also increases the
Career and Technical Education (CTE) factor in AS 14.17.420 from
1.015 to 1.04. These changes result in an increased FY 26 state
allocation of $75,213,200.
MS.HEINEKEN said Fiscal Note 9 also includes Section 8 of SB 82
which reenacts AS 14.09.010(a) to increase student
transportation funding by approximately 20 percent over the
current statutory rate. The projected cost for this change is
$14,517,200 in FY 26, with the same amount projected annually
for FY 27 through FY 2031.
4:20:26 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked for the parameters used to develop the
student transportation cost estimates related to the open
enrollment provision.
4:20:56 PM
MS. HEINEKEN replied that she used the rules and payments
currently in place for when parents transport students in areas
where service is not available.
SENATOR KIEHL said he wanted to understand what experiences or
data informed the $15 per day rate, the number of students used
in the estimate, and similar factors.
4:21:30 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said she came from a district with 10 remote
schools, only three of which had bus service, requiring the
remaining schools to arrange their own student transportation.
She explained that due to the inability to hire bus drivers or
provide regular service, the district used in-lieu-of
transportation agreements and adopted a board policy paying $15
per day per family, regardless of the number of students. She
said there was no solid statewide basis for the estimate, so the
department used 1 percent of the average daily membership and
applied a 184-day school year to calculate the projected cost.
4:22:57 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked why the estimate for kindergarten through
sixth grade assessments did not include any assumption of growth
in the number of students reaching proficiency or making
progress. He questioned whether this reflected a policy judgment
about the program's effectiveness or another basis for assuming
no increase in student outcomes.
4:23:33 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP said the department needed a starting point
and used an approximate number that already includes a small
amount of growth. She stated they hope to eventually see 100
percent proficiency. She added that if student performance
improved, the department would return with a supplemental
request and celebrate that success.
4:24:01 PM
SENATOR KIEHL said success is always celebrated, but
supplementals are not. He requested the department provide its
best and most informed estimate of the actual progress expected
because of the funding. He said this information would help
assess how to allocate limited resources effectively.
4:24:25 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP said the second year of assessment data will
be available in the spring, and the department will review it
once complete. She acknowledged that two years of data does not
establish a trend but said it will help indicate the direction
of student performance. She stated the department will report
whether the results show similar outcomes or improvement.
4:24:47 PM
CHAIR TOBIN asked a question about Fiscal Note 6. She said the
employer contribution is estimated at $6,869,000 and asked for
clarification on where the funding for that contribution would
come from.
4:25:05 PM
MS. HEINEKEN said the funding is considered wages under the
Teacher Retirement System (TRS), which requires an employer
contribution. She stated it is the state's obligation to pay
that portion.
CHAIR TOBIN asked if the employer contributions come from the
State of Alaska.
MS. HEINEKEN replied correct.
CHAIR TOBIN asked for confirmation that the employer obligation
would not come from school districts budgets.
MS. HEINEKEN confirmed it comes from the state as an additional
payment.
CHAIR TOBIN said Fiscal Note 9 shows a projected $75 million
increase in state aid for correspondence. She asked what the
total Base Student Allocation (BSA) increase would be for all
schools under SB 82.
4:26:42 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP asked for clarification on the question.
4:26:33 PM
CHAIR TOBIN asked whether there is an increase to the BSA in SB
82.
4:26:52 PM
COMMISSIONER BISHOP replied that the $180 million investment in
SB 82 was designed purposefully and strategically without
including a Base Student Allocation (BSA) amount.
CHAIR TOBIN responded that SB 82 includes a $75 million
investment in correspondence programs but does not provide
funding for schools like Sleepmute, which is currently condemned
and where students are learning in unsafe conditions.
4:27:19 PM
CHAIR TOBIN opened invited testimony on SB 82.
4:27:49 PM
LEIGH SLOAN, Director, Alaska School Choice, Anchorage, Alaska,
testified by invitation on SB 82. She stated she is also a
mother of three and a former public-school teacher. She urged
support for SB 82, emphasizing that open enrollment fosters
accountability through parent choice and drives improved student
outcomes. She referenced national trends and research from
EdChoice.org showing school choice increases achievement across
all school types. She supported SB 82's provisions on open
enrollment, incentive grants, limitations on cell phone use, and
expanded career and technical education, calling the bill a
common-sense step toward aligning Alaska with national education
reforms.
4:32:48 PM
BARBARA GERARD, Principle, Academy Charter School, Palmer,
Alaska, testified by invitation on SB 82. She said education
should build ownership among families by fostering collaboration
between parents, teachers, and students. She supported SB 82 for
expanding school choice through open enrollment, charter
schools, and correspondence programs, and highlighted the bill's
incentives for student achievement, teacher recruitment, and
career and technical education. She expressed concern about the
financial instability facing all types of public schools in
Alaska and the vulnerability of successful charter schools that
lack a second authorizer. She urged support for expanding
charter opportunities statewide and shared her positive
experience as a charter school principal in Mat-Su, where local
support enabled new facilities and student success
4:36:20 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN said that when a school faces the threat of
closure, it creates significant stress for the community, and he
knows that experience personally, as his school has appeared on
a closure list twice. He shared that more than 80 parents in
Moose Pass have expressed fear about their school potentially
closing. Referring to Academy Charter School, he acknowledged
its popularity and noted he knows members of its Parent Advisory
Committee. He asked how the open enrollment language in the
Governor's bill, specifically the elimination of the lottery
system, would impact the school if enrollment shifted to a
first-come, first-served model.
4:37:17 PM
MS. GERARD said the question was difficult because her school
has always used a lottery system, which is conducted publicly by
the City of Palmer's chief of police to ensure transparency and
fairness. She said her understanding of open enrollment was that
it would allow families in the Mat-Su Borough to fill unoccupied
seats but did not realize it might eliminate the lottery
entirely. She said that possibility gives her concern and would
require further consideration. She shared an example of past
applicants misrepresenting their address to avoid tuition and
said while that occurred years ago, it highlighted potential
complications. She concluded by stating the current lottery
system is fair, resets annually, and provides equal opportunity
for families to apply.
4:39:00 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN said that during a hearing on SB 82 the
previous week, the chair asked a question about first-come,
first-served enrollment, and the response made the meaning
clear. He then asked, under SB 82, who would be responsible for
paying transportation costs if a student from [Mat-Su] Valley
wanted to attend Academy Charter School.
MS. GERARD said she was not certain how transportation would be
handled under the proposed legislation but described the current
practice. She explained that families from distant areas of the
borough, such as Big Lake and Chickaloon, drive to a central
pickup location, such as Target, where students board one of two
buses serving Academy Charter School. She said this arrangement
helps reduce, though not eliminate, the cost burden on families
for transporting their children.
4:40:30 PM
SENATOR BJORKMAN thanked Ms. Gerard for her responses and
commented that he enjoys seeing her students when they visit the
Capitol on an annual field trip.
4:40:58 PM
RANDY TRANI, Superintendent, Matanuska School District, Palmer,
Alaska, testified by invitation SB 82. He said open enrollment
and the funding increase for correspondence programs from 0.9 to
1.0 are the two main areas of SB 82 he would discuss. He said
his district supports open enrollment in principle and already
implements it locally. He noted that families often make school
choices based on work and life circumstances and frequently find
creative ways to establish residency, particularly when
commuting to Anchorage. He emphasized a preference for students
to attend brick-and-mortar schools rather than being placed in
settings they do not want.
4:42:17 PM
MR. TRANI said SB 82 should carefully address transportation
requirements and preserve local control over program capacity
and preferences. He gave the example of a limited-seat aviation
program in Mat-Su, stating it would be problematic if students
from outside the district displaced local students. He also
raised concerns about losing local authority over lottery
systems, particularly in charter schools, under a first-come,
first-served enrollment model. Drawing from his experience in
Oregon, he suggested the inclusion of a revocation clause for
non-attendance in open enrollment situations. He expressed that
he did not see anything wrong with the true-up as written in SB
82.
MR. TRANI expressed broad support regarding the funding increase
for correspondence programs and explained that the nature of
correspondence education has changed significantly. He said
nearly one-fifth of Mat-Su students now participate in
correspondence programs, and many engage in district services
like special education, extracurriculars, and career and
technical education. He explained that despite offering these
services, the district receives limited funds, with only a few
hundred dollars remaining after subtracting parent allotments.
He concluded that as correspondence enrollment grows, the
district cannibalizes itself maintain costly services and there
is less money for the entire system.
4:45:58 PM
SENATOR KIEHL said he wanted to ask more about the cost of Mr.
Trani's correspondence program compared to what was generated in
the current formula. He recalled Mr. Trani stating that when
calculating the cost of running his district's correspondence
program and the allotments received, the district did not face a
deficit. There was a little bit of money left over, but the
program essentially broke even and did not require subsidizing
either the education or the allotments.
4:46:46 PM
MR. TRANI said the district was operating at or slightly below
the break-even point. He explained that the several hundred
dollars retained above the revenue did not account for any
districtwide expenses. He estimated that, while they were about
2.5 percent to the positive on paper, they were probably
operating at a slight deficit overall. He added that some
schools operated at a small positive margin while others
operated at a slight negative.
4:47:57 PM
CHAIR TOBIN opened public testimony on SB 82.
4:48:14 PM
BOB GRIFFITH, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 82. He stated that he had served a five-year term
on the State Board of Education and supported adopting all
elements of SB 82. He suggested renaming the bill "Education
Proposals Based on Proven Results in Other States." He spoke in
favor of proficiency grants, citing Florida's success in
offering grants to students who pass AP exams. He said the
program increased AP success among low-income students by more
than 1,000 percent and helped Florida rank third nationwide in
AP achievement despite low overall education funding. He noted
that Alaska is one of only five states that give local districts
exclusive authority to approve charter schools. Alaska's
restrictions limits applications from innovative charter school
models. He said Alaska's laws are the third most restrictive in
the nation, discouraging new models and creating an unequal
power dynamic between districts and parents. He added that no
schools are more locally controlled than Alaska's charter
schools, which are led by local teachers and parents. He
concluded that Alaska spends about $600,000 per group of 25
students each year, but little of that reaches classroom
teachers, and the bill offers a sensible way to direct funds
more effectively.
4:50:54 PM
LUCAS SMITH, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 82. He emphasized the importance of local control
over school choice options in Anchorage. He said this was the
reason he supported SB 82, as he sought to move away from
Anchorage School District policies, particularly those focused
on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and transgender
issues, which the district had refused to change. He said it is
important for SB 82 to maintain its avenues for establishing
charter schools and school choice options outside district
control. He stated his desire for the legislature to make SB 82
its preferred education bill this session.
4:52:58 PM
DEAN O'DELL, Director, Idea Home School Program, Anchorage,
Alaska, testified in support of SB 82 said he wanted to address
the intent of SB 82 to include special needs factor funding as a
necessity for all public schools, including correspondence
programs. He explained that misconceptions persist that
correspondence programs do not serve students with special needs
or provide special services. He stated that IDEA serves more
than 500 special needs students, which is more than the total
enrollment, both general and special education, of 31 of
Alaska's 53 school districts. He described the services provided
to special needs students, including certified special education
teachers offering consultation, interventions, and support, as
well as school psychologists, occupational and physical
therapists, speech and language pathologists, mental health
providers, and classified staff supporting special education
records. He said these services operate alongside the certified
and classified general education supports offered to all
families.
MR. O'DELL stated that, like all public schools, correspondence
programs share the same legal obligation and moral commitment to
serve students with special needs but receive no state funding
for it. He said the special needs factor in SB 82 would create
equity in supporting all public-school students. He added that,
while not part of the bill, an increase to the BSA was also
urgently needed. He concluded that IDEA stood in support of good
policy for all public schools, including the special needs
factor funding in SB 82.
4:55:22 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked for the difference between the formula funds
generated by IDEA students and the amount the Galena City School
District spent on the program.
4:55:46 PM
MR. O'DELL said he could not provide exact numbers but stated
that the district had made significant investments in IDEA, its
families, and the supports offered through the program. He said
the district had expanded its services and facilities in
response to growing family needs. He noted that inflation had
reduced families' ability to afford preferred curriculum options
and necessary resources, leading the district to increase
allotment funding. He emphasized that the district's investment
in IDEA was substantial but said he could not provide exact
figures.
4:56:39 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked whether, in general terms, the Galena City
School District contributed general fund dollars to IDEA or if
the program operated solely on the funds generated by the IDEA
student account.
MR. O'DELL replied that IDEA is self-funded. It pays for itself.
4:57:27 PM
JUDITH ECKERT, representing self, Homer, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 82. She stated that she was a special and regular
education teacher from Palmer, Alaska, and had taught in the
district for about 20 years. She said she had participated in
several studies and now operated an organization called
PixelPandemic.org, which empowers families in the digital age.
She stated that SB 82's focus on digital wellness and brain
health addressed a serious issue, noting that many students
struggle with attention span and academic performance due to
screen exposure and the dopamine loop created by digital
content. She said even educational technology programs can
negatively affect attention, learning, and mental health.
MS. ECKERT described the situation as a statewide crisis, citing
data showing that children ages four to seventeen who spend
extensive time on screens are twice as likely to be diagnosed
with depression or anxiety. She called SB 82 a game changer for
education and digital wellness, emphasizing that families should
have more educational choices, including public homeschooling
and charter options, to reduce screen time and promote real-life
learning. She concluded that increased job training and hands-on
learning opportunities over digital dependence were crucial and
voiced her support for SB 82 and for career and technical
education funding that offers students real-world skills.
5:00:20 PM
LON GARRISON, Executive Director, Association of Alaska School
Boards, Juneau, Alaska, testified in opposition to SB 82. He
stated that SB 82 combines policy and funding measures portrayed
as opportunities for school districts and students. He said the
Association of Alaska School Boards (AASB) recognized areas in
the bill that could support public education choice and
incentivize positive outcomes such as teacher retention.
However, he said AASB had serious concerns about policy
provisions that might undermine local governance or create
inequitable situations where students must compete for space in
their neighborhood schools.
MR. GARRISON outlined several provisions AASB supports within
the bill:
• Reading proficiency grants, if the program first targets
districts needing assistance and then rewards progress.
• Use of standards-based assessments and growth metrics for
reading proficiency.
• Significant increases to pupil transportation funding.
• Increases to residential school monthly stipends.
• Increases to the vocational technical instruction and special
needs factors, including application to correspondence
students.
MR. GARRISON said AASB opposed several other elements of the
bill. AASB remains opposed to charter school authorizers outside
local school districts and boards, emphasizing that Alaska's
charter school success stems from the strong partnerships
between districts and charter schools. He also opposed extending
bond debt reimbursement to 2030, describing it as "kicking the
can down the road."
MR. GARRISON said authorizers outside the K12 system lack the
knowledge and systems needed to manage and oversee public
charter schools and that the bill provides no clarity on
accountability for such entities. He added that AASB is also
concerned with the proposed statewide mandatory open enrollment
policy. He said Alaska already operates effectively under a
voluntary open enrollment model and that the proposed approach
lacks clear protection to ensure local students can attend their
neighborhood schools. He noted that most states with open
enrollment have defined enrollment periods before each school
year to support proper planning and ADM accounting. He concluded
that, as written, AASB opposed SB 82.
5:03:58 PM
AMANDA THOMPSON, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, testified
in support of SB 82. She stated that she was a teacher, a
charter school board member, and the parent of two charter
school students. She said that when she first read SB 82, she
was very excited to see so many initiatives that had succeeded
in other states but had not yet reached Alaska. She explained
that, although she is a third-generation Alaskan, she spent four
years in Miami, where her children began school. She said that
experience, though unexpected, greatly benefited her children's
education because of how Florida incentivized reading and
supported charter schools through multiple authorizers. She said
many of the provisions in SB 82 reflect successful practices in
other states and stated her belief that these could also benefit
Alaska's students, as she had seen positive results for her own
children. She shared proud moments of her children's success and
their growing love of learning at their charter school. She said
charter schools face many challenges, including a lack of
transportation and limited funding, yet parents remain deeply
committed to their success. She disagreed with the AASB's
position that the strength of charter schools comes from their
relationship with school districts, stating instead that it
comes from the dedication of parents and students. She concluded
by urging legislators to recognize the many positive aspects of
SB 82, noting that as both a teacher and a mother, she saw great
promise in the bill.
5:06:32 PM
ROXANNE GAGNER, representing self, Sitka, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 82. She stated that she had been teaching for
more than 25 years and spoke in opposition to SB 82 for several
reasons. She said the teacher retention incentive was short-
sighted, explaining that what truly needed reform was the
benefits and retirement system. She said no teacher wants to
work in a building without a curriculum and that offering a
$10,000 incentive would be less effective than increasing the
Base Student Allocation (BSA), which would benefit all students
rather than individuals. She also opposed the bill's provisions
related to charter schools, describing them as government
overreach that undermines local control and the ability of
communities to decide what works best for them. She said rural
communities operate differently than those on the road system
and require flexibility, not centralized mandates. She spoke
against the proposed cell phonefree school requirement, calling
it another example of government overreach. She said local
schools can and already do adopt such policies, noting that
Sitka has implemented one successfully. She added that cell
phone access can sometimes be beneficial, such as when internet
service was recently disrupted in Southeast Alaska. Finally, she
said the student achievement grant was also short-sighted
because it could lead to a "teach to the test" mentality. She
emphasized that public education serves the whole child and must
account for every aspect of a student's development throughout
their academic career.
5:09:04 PM
CHAIR TOBIN closed public testimony on SB 82.
5:09:09 PM
CHAIR TOBIN held SB 82 in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|