Legislature(2023 - 2024)ADAMS 519
05/08/2024 01:30 PM House FINANCE
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 | |
SB91 | |
SB95 | |
SB99 | |
Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+= | SB 74 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | SB 75 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | HB 275 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | TELECONFERENCED | ||
+= | SB 91 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | SB 95 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | SB 99 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | SB 228 | TELECONFERENCED | |
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 99(EDC) "An Act establishing a financial literacy education program for public schools; and providing for an effective date." 7:21:10 PM Co-Chair Foster discussed the agenda items and how he would proceed through the remainder of session. HUNTER LOTTSFELDT, STAFF, SENATOR BILL WIELECHOWSKI, provided a description of the bill. He summarized that the legislation created a half credit requirement for financial literacy for high school students. He explained that there was a list of 14 topics found on page 2 of the bill. The point of the bill was to teach students how to balance a check book. He noted that 22 states had the same requirement and some school districts in the state required the course. Alaska led the nation in credit card debt at $8,026 per person with the second highest state's debt at $7,000. The average student loan debt was $34,000. In addition, only one-third of Americans could cover a $400. emergency. The American Public Education Foundation awarded Alaska a grade of F on its national report card for financial literacy. He delineated that the bill provided a flexible pathway to adopt the mandate. The program must be completed before graduation and the school district could choose how they wanted design and offer the course. 7:25:08 PM Co-Chair Foster OPENED public testimony. Co-Chair Foster CLOSED public testimony. Co-Chair Foster asked for a review of the fiscal note. KELLY MANNING, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF INNOVATION AND EDUCATION EXCELLENCE, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT (via teleconference), reviewed the published (FN2 (EED) fiscal impact note dated January 10, 2024, in the amount of $71,000 in one-time funds. The appropriation supported the development of a rubric to evaluate courses against the requirements and would bring together a group of 20 educators that included paying a stipend. The appropriation also enabled the hiring of a facilitator to develop the rubric and evaluation process and lastly, $6,000 was for legal fees to implement regulation changes. 7:27:18 PM Representative Galvin emphasized that she was fully supportive of the bill and the concept of learning life skills and financial literacy. She was concerned about the multitude of unfunded mandates and how class sizes were growing and growing. She asked the department how 20 teachers and stake holders would be enough to put the mandate in place and train hundreds if not thousands of teachers. Ms. Manning responded that the 20 educators would comprise a committee participating in the development of the rubric and evaluation of curriculum at the start of the process. She elaborated that the group would help create a process to ensure a course aligned with the standards. Moving forward the department would ensure that any curriculum districts submitted for approval would follow the process. The districts would be responsible for training educators and providing resources and the department would ensure the curriculum aligned with the requirements. Representative Galvin understood that the department would hand the curriculum to districts. She asked if there would be any support for districts in training or classroom management. Ms. Manning replied that the provisions of the bill required the department to evaluate the districts' courses and the districts to implement the course. Mr. Lottsfeldt pointed to page 2, line 4 of the bill that included language to the maximum extent practicable," with the understanding that smaller districts may not be able to offer the course. He delineated that in the House Education Committee, Representative Himschoot included an amendment requiring a list of open source free curriculum was available to the teacher. 7:32:50 PM Representative Galvin favored the language maximum extent practicable. She referenced the large class sizes and felt that the current policy had left children behind, and some districts were cutting music programs and closing schools. She would be supportive of the bill, but she was concerned that the underlying problem of ensuring there was predictable and adequate funding for schools was not settled. Representative Hannan noted that the mandate required an increase in graduation credits. She asked if there was a graduation requirement. She did not find it in the bill. She determined that SB 99 referenced a program, and she was trying to determine if it was a specific requirement to graduate or if merely an equivalent program had to be offered. Mr. Lottsfeldt answered it was an additional half credit requirement for graduation. He pointed to page 1, line 13 of the bill and read: "?A school district may provide the program through one or more courses offered by the school district?" The sponsor wanted to leave it up to the school districts whether to integrate existing course work already offered. He viewed it being taught in other courses as well and not all in one course. Representative Hannan thought that was the reason the bill was confusing. She exemplified teaching an economics course and wondered if it needed to account for all of the requirements. She asked if the requirement was for a new credit, a change in curriculum, or up to the districts to decide if existing courses fulfilled the requirement. 7:37:32 PM Mr. Lottsfeldt responded that for a school district such as Haines that had a financial literacy requirement would not require the additional half credit. He understood that existing programs could count, but a junior achievement or other program would need to account for the half credit which equated to 60 to 90 hours of instruction. Representative Hannan relayed that she had graduated from the Anchorage School District and had been required to take personal finance. She asked if Mr. Lottsfeldt knew if it was still a requirement. Mr. Lottsfeldt answered that when he attended West Anchorage High School it had not been a requirement. Representative Stapp thought it was very important to teach personal finance. He relayed that he would cross sponsor the bill. He thought it was very relevant and strongly favored the concept. He would like to move the bill. Representative Cronk did not disagree with the bill, but he reported that "they" spent two years arguing over local control. However, the bill mandated that school districts teach the course. 7:40:48 PM Representative Ortiz agreed that financial literacy was a good thing to learn; however, he shared the concerns about local control. He referenced the document specifying that Alaska received an F grade in financial literacy and asked how it was determined. Mr. Lottsfeldt answered that he did not know how the rating had been determined. Representative Ortiz was skeptical that the requirements could be evaluated, and a curriculum could be developed for $71,000. He asked how it would work. Mr. Lottsfeldt answered that he did not know. He understood that the Department of Education and Early Development (DEED) put forward the amount that was necessary to do the work. Representative Ortiz commented that the mandates were all good stuff, but the reality was it would not all happen through the process outlined in the fiscal note. 7:43:22 PM Mr. Lottsfeldt agreed with Representative Ortiz's statements. He noted that there was an interest in creating a more real world experience for students upon graduation but there were legitimate questions regarding funding. He understood the concerns. Representative Coulombe had similar concerns. She noted that the bill contained "a lot of shalls." She relayed the following from the bill [page 2, lines 2 through 3]: "A school may not issue a secondary school diploma to a student unless the student has completed a financial literacy program?" She agreed that students should be taught financial literacy. However, she was shocked there was not pushback about the types of bills from the same people advocating for local control. She asked if a district already offered a financial curriculum whether it could it be grandfathered in. Mr. Lottsfeldt answered that the intention was for districts to use what already existed if it met the rubric. The sponsor was trying to make the mandate as easy as possible to adopt, realizing the constraints. Representative Coulombe opined that school districts should be teaching reading, civics, and financial literacy courses but the state thought they were not. Hence, there was a READS Act, a Civics bill, a Financial Literacy bill. She was unsure whether she supported the bill. She supported teaching financial literacy, but they were adding more and more layers of bureaucracy for school districts. She believed that there was an "obvious trend for the state to keep telling districts what to do and she did not support it. Mr. Lottsfeldt thanked the committee. Co-Chair Foster set an amendment deadline of Friday, May 10 at 5:00 p.m. CSSB 99(EDC) was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration. Co-Chair Foster discussed the likely schedule and agenda for the following day. Representative Hannan interjected that the committee had heard another education bill earlier in the day. She relayed that she taught social studies for 30 years. She announced that she would not be voting for any of the bills where the legislature was dictating curriculum to students. She argued that school districts taught courses in different ways. She presumed that if a rural school district did not require a course to graduate, they had a specific reason for choosing not to require it. She did not support mandating a district teach something when they may need to focus on applied math or other subjects. She indicated that there were three bills heading to the floor where the legislature was mandating specific curriculum with no extra money. She stated that Junior Achievement as a program was incredibly successful in Juneau. However, when the class that always hosted Junior Achievement as a club was cut Junior Achievement was eliminated. She believed that everyone supported teaching better financial literacy and civics engagement, but she opposed the legislature overreaching into areas of local control. Co-Chair Foster noted that SB 228 would be removed from the schedule for the following day. Co-Chair Foster RECESSED the meeting until the following morning [note: the meeting never reconvened]. 7:52:47 PM RECESSED
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|---|---|
HB 275 DPS Follow-Up-1 NIJ Best Practices.pdf |
HFIN 5/8/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 275 |
HB 275 DPS Follow-Up-1.pdf |
HFIN 5/8/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 275 |
HB 275 DPS Follow-Up-2.pdf |
HFIN 5/8/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 275 |
HB 275 Transmittal Letter.pdf |
HFIN 5/8/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 275 |
HB275 Letters of Support and Letter of Opposition.pdf |
HFIN 5/8/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 275 |
SB 75 & SB 74 Public Testimony Rec'd by 050624 2.pdf |
HFIN 5/8/2024 1:30:00 PM |
SB 74 SB 75 |
HB275 Sectional Analysis Version B 3.22.24.pdf |
HFIN 5/8/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 275 |
HB275 Summary of Changes Version A to B 3.22.24.pdf |
HFIN 5/8/2024 1:30:00 PM |
HB 275 |