Legislature(2023 - 2024)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/29/2024 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 | |
| Confirmation Hearing(s) | |
| SB266 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | SB 266 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
SB 266-CORRESPONDENCE STUDY PROG; STUDENT ACCTS
4:14:23 PM
CHAIR TOBIN announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 266
"An Act relating to standards-based assessments; relating to
correspondence study programs; relating to student fund accounts
for correspondence study programs; and providing for an
effective date."
4:14:34 PM
CHAIR TOBIN explained that SB 266 was drafted in response to an
Alaska Superior Court decision, issued two weeks ago. The
decision found that two sections of state law regarding Public
Correspondence Programsspecifically related to Individualized
Education Plans (IEPs) and allotmentsunconstitutional. She said
that to ensure these programs remain available to correspondence
families, the Alaska legislature acted quickly to draft SB 266.
She highlighted the following key components of SB 266:
• SB 266 reinstates statewide assessments for all public-
school students. Parents will receive a two-week
notification of testing dates, and students observing a
religious holiday may opt out. Accommodations under the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act remain
unaffected. This provision addresses a conflict with House
Bill 146 (2016), which allowed parents to opt out of
statewide assessments. She noted that this violates a 2007
Superior Court ruling that requires the state to have an
adequate method of assessing whether students meet state
standards.
• SB 266 reinstates the 2008 Department of Education and
Early Development (DEED) correspondence program regulatory
package, originally enacted under the Palin administration.
This package best aligns with requirements in Alaska's
Constitution. It allows DEED or local districts to provide
correspondence programs and student fund accounts (renamed
from allotments), designed for individualized academic
instruction. The State Board of Education is required to
establish regulations for student fund accounts, which must
comply with SB 266 prohibitions against using funds for
partisan, sectarian, or denominational materials.
• Unspent student fund account balances must be returned at
the end of each year, with detailed annual reporting on
expenditures. These stipulations align with existing
requirements for brick-and-mortar schools.
• SB 266 strengthens reporting requirements for
correspondence programs. DEED must annually provide the
legislature with data on student demographics, expenditures
from student fund accounts, statewide assessment
performance, and administrative costs.
CHAIR TOBIN concluded that the SB 266 aims to prevent recurrence
of the legal issues addressed in the court's decision.
4:18:03 PM
MICHAEL MASON, Staff, Senator Löki Tobin, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, said the goal of SB 266 is to
provide clear guidance and guardrails for Alaska's public
correspondence programs. He delivered the sectional analysis for
SB 266:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Senate Bill 266 Correspondence Study Programs
Version B Sectional Analysis
Section 1 Amends AS 14.03.016 by repealing the
blanket withdrawal provisions of statewide assessments
for students in K-12. The statutory requirement for at
least two-week notification of statewide assessments
remains unchanged. Parents may still withdrawal their
public-school participating child from statewide
assessments when testing dates fall on religious
holidays. Accommodations for students covered by the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, who have
a 504 or Transition Impairment Plan, or are identified
as English Learners are not affected by this repeal.
Section 2 Adds a new subsection to AS 14.03.300
requiring the Alaska Department of Education or a
local school district report annually on student
participation in their correspondence study program.
The report must include demographic information,
expenditures made by a student fund account,
appropriately aggregated performance on a statewide
assessment, and administrative costs associated with
operation of the correspondence study program.
Section 3 Repeals and reenacts AS 14.03.310 and
reinstates components of a 2008 correspondence study
program regulatory package promulgated by the Alaska
Department of Education and Early Development. Under
AS 14.03.310, the department or a local school
district may provide a correspondent study program
enrollee a fund account to meet the purpose of
providing individualized academic instruction. The
department or a local school district is prohibited
from supplanting federally required services with a
student fund account. AS 14.03.310 directs the State
Board of Education and Early Development to adopt
regulations pertaining to student fund account
expenditures and outlines stipulations for
regulations. The 2 regulations must comply with AS
14.03.090, which prohibits educators or schools from
advocating for partisan, sectarian, or denominational
doctrines and AS 14.18.060, which prohibits the
selection of textbook and instructional materials that
are biased toward one sex. Regulations propagated
under this section also must meet additional
requirements outlined under new sections (e) through
(g) of AS 14.03.310. The new AS 14.03.310 also directs
the department or local public school district to
return the unexpended student fund balance to the
budget of the department or district including any
funds that remain when a student disenrolls from a
correspondence study program.
4:21:12 PM
MR. MASON continued the sectional analysis of SB 266:
[Original punctuation provided.]
Section 4 Amends AS 14.07.168 to include information
collected under the new subsection established under
AS 14.03.300 in the annual report submitted by the
State Board of Education and Early Development to the
Alaska State Legislature.
Section 5 Amends AS 14.07.158, sec. 23, ch. 40 SLA
2022, which repeals AS 14.07.168 (4) on June 30, 2034,
to include in the annual report provided to the Alaska
Legislature by the Alaska Board of Education and Early
Development that includes the information established
under the new subsection established under AS
14.03.300. Section 4 and 5 relate to the 2034 repeal
of the Alaska Reads Act, ensuring continued reporting
of the information collected under AS 14.03.300.
Section 6 Repeals AS 14.03.300 (b).
Section 7 Stipulates that Section 5 of this Act
takes effect on the effective date of sec. 23, ch. 40,
SLA 2022.
Section 8 Sets an immediate effective date for the
Act, except for Section 7.
4:24:33 PM
CHAIR TOBIN asked for a review of the fiscal note for SB 266.
4:24:42 PM
DEBORAH RIDDLE, Operations Manager, Division of Innovation and
Education Excellence, Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED), Juneau, Alaska, said the fiscal note for SB
266, from the Department of Education and Early Development, OMB
component 2796, dated April 26, 2024, is a one-time expenditure
of $6,000 for the development of regulations with the Department
of Law.
4:25:21 PM
SENATOR KIEHL shared that when he and his wife homeschooled one
of their children, program funding partially assisted in
purchasing a computer for schoolwork. He noted the prohibition
on items purchased with homeschool support funds becoming
personal property and asked whether, under the current rules,
his daughter could have retained the computer she used for six
years.
4:26:19 PM
CHAIR TOBIN asked him to clarify if he meant in perpetuity or
for the full six years.
SENATOR KIEHL replied that he meant in perpetuity. He said he
recalled language in SB 266 prohibiting keeping textbooks
indefinitely and attaching items to a home.
4:26:48 PM
CHAIR TOBIN stated her belief that currently in regulation the
value of the computer would be depreciated over time and parents
may have the option to purchase the item at the depreciated
value.
4:27:11 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked about the boundaries for purchasing items
like curriculum and noted that defining what qualifies as an
educational institution will likely be central to the
committee's considerations. He used McGraw Hill, a textbook
publisher, as an example, suggesting it presumably would not be
considered an educational institution.
4:27:46 PM
MR. MASON stated his understanding that textbooks would be an
authorized expense under SB 266, provided they are approved by
the correspondence program. He clarified that if McGraw Hill
produced textbooks approved by the program, those would qualify
as an allowable expense.
4:28:16 PM
CHAIR TOBIN referred to SB 266, page three, lines 3-13, which
directs the State Board of Education to adopt regulations
requiring the department and districts to approve expenditures
for correspondence study programs. She explained that these
regulations would define allowable expenses and be outlined
through the regulation process. Additionally, she highlighted SB
266, page four, lines 24-25, which provides school
administrators with some flexibility to approve specific
expenditures if they align with a student's Individual Learning
Plan.
4:29:29 PM
SENATOR KIEHL noted prohibitions in SB 266 on purchasing items
like clothing and PE equipment. He explained that while an
allotment could be used for part of the cost of a computer, it
could not be used to purchase a bicycle for PE. He mentioned
receiving questions via email about using allotments for PE
classes or instruction, such as a dance class or ski lesson, to
fulfill a physical education requirement. He asked for
clarification on the restrictions for such expenditures.
4:30:21 PM
SENATOR TOBIN referred to SB 266, pages 4-5, lines 26-2, which
provide guidance on allowable expenditures. She explained that
the 2008 regulations, chosen over the 2005 version, are more
permissive and allow students using a student fund account to
contract with private individuals for tutoring, fine arts,
music, and physical education as part of their learning plans.
She clarified that for other subjects, such as advanced math or
geophysics, a certificated teacher employed by the
correspondence program and qualified in those subjects is
required. However, private individuals may provide services for
fine arts, music, and physical education.
4:32:09 PM
CHAIR TOBIN opened public testimony on SB 266.
4:32:18 PM
LARAE SMITH, representing self, Houston, Alaska, testified with
concerns on SB 266. She said she is a graduate of the IDEA
correspondence program and a private music teacher. She said she
was confused over vague language in SB 266 regarding tutoring,
specifically the prohibition on private or religious educational
institutions, and questioned what qualifies as an "institution."
She also sought clarification on restrictions in SB 266, Section
3(b) regarding student fund accounts and Individual Education
Program (IEP) services, worried it might exclude music lessons.
Additionally, she opposed the prohibition in SB 266 on funding
for field trips and memberships, arguing that homeschool
students should have the same opportunities as public-school
students.
4:34:34 PM
CHAIR TOBIN clarified that the language on supplanting in SB 266
prohibits using district funds to replace federally obligated
funding required for a student's Individualized Education Plan
(IEP) under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act.
4:35:05 PM
MAUREEN CRUMLEY, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, testified
in opposition to SB 266. She stated that parents should have the
ability to use funding for tutors in all core subjects,
equipment for physical education, and services from religious or
private educational institutions to best educate their children.
She stated that her community has excellent opportunities in
these areas, which should be accessible to all families. She
argued that the changes proposed in SB 266 appear to undermine
the current correspondence school program, potentially affecting
over 22,000 students. She concluded by asserting that SB 266
limits Alaska parents' ability to provide the best education for
their children.
4:36:35 PM
AMANDA WRAITH, representing self, Wasilla, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 266. She expressed her commitment to ensuring
all Alaskan children receive an education that meets their
unique needs and develops their individual gifts. She shared her
recent experiences supporting IDEA students at national
competitions, highlighting the valuable opportunities provided
by the correspondence program. She emphasized the need for
equitable funding, asserting that public funding available to
public schools should also be available for correspondence
programs. She criticized SB 266 for limiting educational
opportunities for students and described it as a harmful threat
to parents' rights and Alaska's education system.
4:39:09 PM
STACEY LANGE, representing self, Anchorage, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 266 arguing that it violates her fundamental
right as a parent to direct her child's upbringing and
education. She emphasized the importance of school choice,
stating that parents, not bureaucrats, are best suited to decide
what educational path is best for their children. Citing poor
educational outcomes in the Anchorage School District and
Alaska's low national rankings, she argued that SB 266, along
with recent correspondence school regulations, appears designed
to force families back into public schools. She referenced U.S.
Supreme Court rulings, including Pierce v. Society of Sisters
(1925), Espinosa v. Montana Department of Revenue (2020), and
Carson v. Makin (2022), which affirmed parents' rights to choose
religious schools under school choice programs without violating
the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the United
States. She asserted that SB 266 violates this clause and urged
its rejection.
4:41:31 PM
KATHERINE GARDNER, Deputy Superintendent, Business and
Operations, Matsu Borough School District, Palmer, Alaska,
testified on SB 266. She thanked the committee for reviewing
correspondence programs and allotments, noting that 16 percent
of Mat-Su School District students participate in these
programs. She shared that Mat-Su Central School is the
district's largest school and will move into a permanent
facility next year. She expressed support for correspondence
families and appreciation to the Senate Education Committee for
addressing this topic. She added that the Mat-Su School Board
will review the legislation and provide feedback in the future.
4:43:09 PM
STARLA HALBROOK, representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska, testified
in opposition to SB 266 highlighting the value of Alaska's
current homeschool laws, which she described as generous and
supportive of hands-on learning experiences that benefit her
children's education and health. She expressed concern over the
potential elimination of the rollover of unused funds, noting
that many families rely on these for high school education
expenses. She suggested increasing funding for high school
students to ensure adequate resources for graduation. She also
appealed to the Senate to keep mandatory testing optional,
emphasizing the role of advisory teachers in supporting
families.
4:45:41 PM
JOEL HALBROOK, representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska, testified
with concerns on SB 266. He stated that the allotment has made
schooling enjoyable and beneficial for his family. He shared
that it helps with purchasing resources like Legos for learning
robotics and science, as well as canvases and art supplies for
art and writing. He highlighted the ability to pay small fees
for IDEA clubs and access educational opportunities at museums
and zoos to learn about history, geology, and biology.
4:46:30 PM
SARAH GROVER, representing self, Fairbanks, Alaska, testified
with concerns on SB 266. She emphasized the importance of
maintaining the current funding structure and increasing funding
for high school students to expand their educational
opportunities. She noted the value of allowing access to tutors
and private education for subjects where parents may lack
expertise. She thanked the committee for supporting the program.
4:47:13 PM
ERICKA BEERY, representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 266 arguing that allotments are already subject
to strict oversight, including receipts and Individual Learning
Plan (ILP) alignment, and cannot be used for religious
materials. She described SB 266 as restrictive, likening it to a
vice pushing children back into neighborhood schools,
particularly by removing the option to opt out of standardized
tests, which she said yield delayed and unhelpful results. She
criticized SB 266 for restricting allotments for PE-related
expenses despite rising childhood obesity and diabetes rates.
She also opposed the prohibition on allotments covering parents
accompanying students to museums, noting that neighborhood
schoolteachers are not required to pay for field trips out of
pocket. She questioned who SB 266 benefits, asserting that it
does not serve the best interests of children.
4:49:58 PM
HOWARD BEERY, representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 266. He stated that the lawsuit prompting SB
266 arose from a single correspondence school misusing funds for
religious education, emphasizing that this was not
representative of all correspondence schools. He argued that one
incident should not lead to overhauling the entire system. He
also opposed the prohibition on rolling over funds, noting that
saving for costly endeavors like a pilot's license, which
supports trades needed in Alaska, would no longer be possible.
He questioned whether the National Education Association (NEA)
had any role in drafting SB 266 and urged legislators to
prioritize students over organizations like the NEA.
4:51:18 PM
LON GARRISON, Executive Director, Association of Alaska School
Boards, Juneau, Alaska, testified on SB 266. He expressed
support for SB 266 as a starting point to address the
constitutional violation identified by a superior court judge,
ensuring that correspondence programs can continue operating
within legal boundaries. He acknowledged that SB 266 would make
some changes to how correspondence programs are administered but
emphasized ASB's strong support for these schools. He
highlighted the 85-year history of correspondence programs in
Alaska, dating back to 1936, and their importance in providing
educational options in a geographically vast state. He said the
ASB looks forward to working on SB 266 to support public
education options like correspondence programs.
4:53:46 PM
EMILY FERRY, representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
support of SB 266 emphasizing the need for homeschool families,
neighborhood schools, charter schools, teachers, and principals
to have support and certainty. She stated that resolving the
issues identified in the Superior Court decision quickly would
provide stability and allow focus to return to broader
challenges, such as underfunding and lack of investment in the
education system. She noted that her family values religious
education and skiing, which they personally fund, and argued
that it is reasonable to treat homeschool families equitably in
similar situations.
4:55:08 PM
MADELINE RANCH, representing self, Juneau, Alaska, testified in
opposition to SB 266. She expressed concern as a homeschool
student about the potential impact of SB 266 on students like
her who rely on correspondence programs to advance academically.
She shared her efforts to get ahead in her studies by completing
geometry over the summer and emphasized that many students,
including those struggling academically, benefit from
opportunities to improve through extra effort. She described her
family's financial challenges, including limited access to
technology, such as a computer, and stated that purchasing
necessary tools would be a significant burden. She shared that
her sister, after facing personal challenges, might need access
to homeschooling in the future, which SB 266 could hinder. She
concluded that SB 266 would negatively affect her and others
seeking a proper education.
4:57:45 PM
KIMBERLY BERGEY, Program Director, Raven Homeschool, testified
with concerns on SB 266. She stated that although she is based
in the Palmer-Wasilla area, she supervises the Raven Homeschool
program statewide. She emphasized the need to consider Alaska's
vast geography and dispersed families when reviewing SB 266. She
urged the committee to avoid creating equity issues between
urban and rural areas, highlighting that many rural communities
lack access to physical education facilities and must rely on
purchasing PE equipment for their children. She also pointed out
that some language in SB 266, such as the term "educational
institution," needs clarification to ensure consistent
interpretation. She cited past state purchases from entities
like North Dakota and Calvert Education and questioned how such
providers fit the definitions in SB 266.
5:00:19 PM
CHAIR TOBIN left public testimony open on SB 266.
5:00:43 PM
CHAIR TOBIN held SB 266 in committee.