Legislature(2023 - 2024)DAVIS 106
03/18/2024 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 | |
| HB236 | |
| SB99 | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s): | |
| University of Alaska Board of Regents | |
| Professional Teaching Practices Commission | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 236 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 99 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
SB 99-FINANCIAL LITERACY PROGRAM IN SCHOOLS
8:40:05 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE announced that the next order of business
would be CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 99(EDC), "An Act establishing a
financial literacy education program for public schools; and
providing for an effective date."
8:40:56 AM
HUNTER LOTTSFELDT, Staff, Senator Bill Wielechowski, Alaska
State Legislature, reintroduced CSSB 99(EDC) on behalf of
Senator Wielechowski, prime sponsor. He explained that the
bill, in fifteen steps, would create a half-credit requirement
that could be split among one course or multiple courses and
would seek to teach financial literacy to high school students,
including principes such as how to file taxes and read the terms
of a loan. He welcomed questions from committee members.
8:41:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX commented that financial literacy was taught
through high school in the early 1970s, and he expressed concern
that the state would be telling local school districts to do
something in a specific way according to a specific criteria
that would be dictated to them.
MR. LOTTSFELDT replied that although financial literacy is being
taught in a few districts across the state, the purpose of the
bill is that "these things" are not being taught and are also
changing. He added that the bill is structured to try to
supplement the districts that are already teaching financial
literacy, and the intent is for it to be easily adoptable by
school districts.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX offered his understanding that the bill
would require districts to develop a curriculum but not be told
which specific one they are to develop.
MR. LOTTSFELDT agreed that was a fair statement.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked whether there should be a provision or
state level review and approval of the program.
MR. LOTTSFELDT responded that he was not sure regarding a state
level review, but the specific course and materials would be up
to the district.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX asked whether there was an estimate of the
cost to the school districts and expectations of how much may be
received from the legislature.
MR. LOTTSFELDT replied there is not an estimate on the cost to
the school districts and added that one of the advantages of
financial literacy is that it is a "grassroots type of
movement," in that there is a lot of free online curriculum. He
stated he could not provide an exact number and reiterated that
the bill is structured to make it as easy for school districts
to adopt as possible.
8:48:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY drew attention to page 1, line 8 of the
bill, and offered her understanding that the approval for the
curriculum must come from the Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED), which would take administrative time to find
out how each district meets the requirements of the bill. She
further pointed out the words on line 13, "maximum extent
practicable", and acknowledged that the bill sponsor wanted to
keep flexibility while still meeting the intent of the bill.
MR. LOTTSFELDT confirmed that is correct.
8:49:10 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE opened public testimony on CSSB 99(EDC).
8:49:48 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 8:49 a.m. to 8:50 a.m.
8:50:50 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE clarified that an individual can testify only
one time.
8:51:29 AM
ED MARTIN, representing self, stated that he did not remember
whether he had a personal finance course in high school, but
when he graduated he received a bank savings account from his
parents and got a job. He said he encouraged legislation if it
is necessary to direct school districts to teach something
relevant and added that some big steps for children are student
loans. Regarding the fiscal note, he emphasized that he did not
see justification in state funds going towards "this"
whatsoever. He opined that the legislature should worry about
the education fund, which was vetoed, and added that "this seems
like double dipping" and must be stopped.
8:54:24 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE, after ascertaining that no one else wished
to testify, closed public testimony on CSSB 99(EDC). He noted
that there were three amendments to CSSB 99(EDC).
8:54:45 AM
CO-CHAIR ALLARD stated she would not be moving Amendment 1.
8:54:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT moved to adopt Amendment 2 to CSSB
99(EDC), labeled 33-LS0498\R.4, Bergerud, 1/31/24, which read as
follows:
Page 1, line 8, following "department.":
Insert "The department shall curate and make
available to school districts a list of open
educational resources that are approved by the
department that in combination address the topics
listed in (1) - (14) of this subsection. The list
shall include open educational resources that address
the topic listed in (15) of this subsection if those
resources are available. The department shall update
this list at least every five years."
Page 2, line 21:
Delete all material and insert:
"(b) In this section,
(1) "open educational resource" means
learning, teaching, or research material in any format
that resides in the public domain or is under
copyright and has been released under an open license
that permits access at no cost as well as reuse,
repurpose, adaptation, and redistribution by others;
(2) "school district" has the meaning given in
AS 14.30.350."
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE objected.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT explained that Amendment 2 tasks the
department with providing open educational resource materials.
She referenced a letter from DEED that stated it would not
provide undue burden on them and would allow the department to
vet open educational resource materials to meet the standards in
the bill.
8:56:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK asked Representative Himschoot whether
the Amendment 2 could inadvertently force the hand of districts
and create parameters for the type of curriculum districts might
want to provide independently, thus disempowering them.
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT replied that most districts provide
academic freedom to educators and, if pressed for time, they
would have a bank of resources.
8:57:30 AM
MR. LOTTSFELDT stated that he supported Amendment 2.
8:57:55 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE removed his objection to the motion to adopt
Amendment 2. There being no further objection, Amendment 2 was
adopted.
8:58:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY moved to adopt Amendment 3 to CSSB 99(EDC),
labeled 33-LS0498\R.5, Bergerud, 2/1/24, which read as follows:
Page 2, following line 20:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(b) Notwithstanding (a) of this section, a
school may issue a secondary school diploma to a
student who has not completed the program described in
(a) of this section if the student transferred into
the school district from another school district,
state, or country after completing grade 10."
Reletter the following subsection accordingly.
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE objected.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY explained that Amendment 3 would support
transfer students.
8:59:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX stated that he opposed the amendment and
questioned the issuance of a diploma if it did not have
something behind it that explains what it means.
9:00:28 AM
MR. LOTTSFELDT added that the amendment was drafted in a similar
way to the Alaska Studies exemption amendment. The intent is to
make sure students are being taught financial literacy to the
best of educators' abilities but there are circumstances of
students transferring from other districts or states.
9:01:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT remarked that it felt unfair for a
student to come into the state from somewhere else and be told
they cannot graduate because they did not meet the requirement.
She opined that the exemption would be made only for a small
handful of students, and she expressed her support for Amendment
3.
9:03:04 AM
CO-CHAIR ALLARD sought more clarification on where the exception
stops and provided a scenario of a student of a military family
transferring to a school in Alaska.
MR. LOTTSFELDT clarified that it would be up to the school
districts. He said the exemption is for that one requirement to
get the diploma. Currently, he said, 22 other states have
financial literacy as a requirement, and it is a "50/50 shot"
that a student has not gotten the instruction prior.
CO-CHAIR ALLARD restated that her concern was the verbiage
"after grade 10" and that she knew many high schoolers and found
it difficult to believe that if they still have their eleventh
and twelfth year "they can't finish."
9:05:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY expressed gratitude for the elaboration on
how the amendment is modeled after the Alaska Studies
requirement.
9:05:57 AM
CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE removed his objection.
REPRESENTATIVE PRAX objected.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Story, Himschoot,
McCormick, and Ruffridge voted in favor of Amendment 3.
Representatives McKay, Prax, and Allard voted against it.
Therefore, Amendment 3 was adopted by a vote of 4-3.
9:06:48 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 9:06 a.m. to 9:07 a.m.
9:07:16 AM
CO-CHAIR ALLARD moved to report CSSB 99(EDC), as amended, out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, HCS CSSB 99(EDC) was
reported out of the House Education Standing Committee.