Legislature(2021 - 2022)BUTROVICH 205
03/23/2022 01:30 PM Senate JUDICIARY
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 | |
| SB34 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 34 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 124 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 229 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
SB 34-STATE-TRIBAL EDUCATION COMPACT SCHOOLS
1:35:38 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND announced the consideration of SENATE BILL NO. 34
"An Act providing for the establishment of public schools
through state-tribal compacts."
[CSSB 34(EDC) was before the committee.]
1:36:04 PM
SENATOR GARY STEVENS, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau,
Alaska, speaking as sponsor of SB 34, summarized the
sponsor statement.
[Original punctuation provided.]
State-Tribal Education Compacting Senate Bill 34
proposes an opportunity for Alaska to enhance
educational outcomes and student experiences by
providing high quality, locally-driven education via
the use of State-Tribal compact schools.
Alaska is an incredibly culturally and linguistically
diverse state, with at least eleven distinct Alaska
Native cultures and twenty State-recognized official
Alaska Native languages. As a state, we have much to
gain from providing a pathway for our education system
to reflect this wealth of diversity and possibility.
Passage of this legislation will provide Tribes the
opportunity to voluntarily apply to establish a State-
Tribal compact school. State-tribal compact schools
will affirm the State's commitment to educating
Alaska's children, and honor a government-to
government relationship with Tribes by partnering with
them to improve educational outcomes. Partnering with
tribes to deliver education will reestablish a sense
of ownership and pride in the public educational
system, and has the potential to substantially improve
educational outcomes.
Alaska, like many states, has a staunch policy of
local control as regards education policy and budget
decisions. State-Tribal compact schools will provide
another avenue for addressing existing challenges and
ensuring that children are prepared to be healthy,
productive community members and to be positioned for
success.
Thank you for your consideration of this important
piece of legislation.
1:35:40 PM
SENATOR STEVENS explained that the bill initially would have
implemented state-tribal compacted schools. However, Version G
is a scaled-back version. He explained tribal compacting as a
process by which the state and a tribal entity reach an
agreement to formally recognize the tribe's authority to operate
and oversee a K-12 school to enhance educational outcomes. This
bill would allow state and tribal entities to set up a
negotiation process to allow tribes to control their own
schools. He characterized it as a direct relationship with the
state that would allow tribes to access funds for educational
enrichment. He noted that the Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN)
was very supportive and may be able to provide some funding. He
envisioned this as a starting point that would allow the Board
of Education and Early Development and federally recognized
tribes some time to organize a model demonstration project to
ensure that it works before returning to the legislature with
legislation to meet those goals.
1:37:58 PM
TIM LAMKIN, Staff, Senator Gary Stevens, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, Alaska, provided a brief summary and a
sectional analysis for SB 34, Version G, on behalf of the
sponsor. He reiterated that Version G was a scaled-back version
of SB 34 because the sponsor became aware of the complexities
regarding tribal compacting, yet he wanted to begin the tribal
compacting process. First, SB 34, Version G, would allow
recognized tribes to negotiate with the Board of Education and
Early Development. Second, it would request that the legislature
introduce specific legislation on the model for compacting.
Finally, it would set a timeline for introducing legislation to
implement state-tribal compacting. He turned to the sectional
analysis for SB 34.
1:39:06 PM
MR. LAMKIN stated that Section 1, subsection (a) would direct
the Board of Education and Early Development to negotiate a
demonstration state-tribal compact. It would include a single
compact for a few schools for five years. Subsection (b) would
direct the governing body of federally recognized tribes to
negotiate by the end of this calendar year. Subsection (c) would
direct the board to initiate the negotiations by March 2023.
Subsection (d) would require that legislation be filed no later
than January 2024 addressing or proposing that compact.
Subsection (e) identifies the board as the Board of Education
and Early Development.
1:40:06 PM
MR. LAMKIN stated that Section 2 amends the uncodified law to
execute the demonstration state-tribal compact in the
forthcoming legislation for the compacting model that would take
effect by 2029.
MR. LAMKIN noted that Section 3 would provide an immediate
effective date.
SENATOR STEVENS commented that this bill results from the Alaska
Educational Challenge. He explained that several years ago, the
commissioner of the Department of Education and Early
Development called 100 people together to work on the most
immediate needs for education in Alaska. He related that working
to develop tribal schools was fourth on the list.
1:41:00 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND said he previously heard the bill in the Senate
Education Committee. The committee identified complexities, so
addressing the state-tribal education compact issues will take
time.
1:41:11 PM
SENATOR KIEHL stated that this was a promising model for a
demonstration project. He asked about the vision for tribal
schools and if they would serve enrolled members of tribes as
students or if they would serve all Alaskans interested in
attending.
SENATOR STEVENS responded that small village schools would like
to cover Native cultural history and language while still
preparing students to live and compete in the world. He stated
that the topics were broad.
1:42:38 PM
SENATOR SHOWER joined the meeting.
1:42:51 PM
SENATOR KIEHL referred to page 1, which outlines the
demonstration state-tribal education compact with federally
recognized tribes and tribal organizations. He asked for
clarification on tribal organizations.
MR. LAMKIN explained that the prior committee indicated that
might be instances where a consortium or group of tribes would
collectively deliver health or other services. In those
instances, the federally recognized tribe may consider
negotiating and including a tribally-empowered organization,
such as Southeast Alaska Regional Health Consortium (SEARHC). He
reiterated that a state-tribal education compact has many legal
and judicial considerations. This bill doesn't put into place
any of these changes. Still, it would allow the Board of
Education and Early Development (the board) and federally
recognized tribes or organizations to negotiate and discuss the
state-tribal education compact.
1:44:31 PM
SENATOR KIEHL offered his view that a consortium would make
sense. He recalled that congressional intent arose in some legal
challenges with COVID-19. He asked whether Native or village
corporations would be included in the list of tribal
organizations.
MR. LAMKIN stated the sponsor's intent was not to include
corporations; however, corporations could participate in
negotiations with the Board on the structure of the model.
Although this language does not preclude them, corporations
would not likely be part of the final model.
1:45:29 PM
SENATOR SHOWER pointed out the legal memo in member's packets
[memo dated February 21, 2022, from Marie Marx, Legislative
Counsel] highlighted some constitutional challenges. He asked if
a state-tribal education compact school was established close to
the road system, and it excluded non-Native students or non-
Native teachers, whether legal challenges would ensue. For
example, suppose a state-tribal education compact school was
established near Glennallen, but it excluded 30 non-Native
students or non-Native teachers.
SENATOR STEVENS responded that the intention is not to exclude
anyone. He stated that he has eight villages in his district but
only one school. If these villages chose to create a state-
tribal education compact tribal school, it would not exclude
non-Native students. One solution might be the use of a charter
school. He pointed out that Anchorage has a Native language
charter school, so this proposal would not be the first school
to offer Native languages. He surmised that the charter school
would need to be amended for Native charter schools.
MR. LAMKIN highlighted that an earlier version of SB 34 touched
on preferential enrollment and employment, which were key flags
that were identified. The sponsor has backed off from that
language since it raised some potential constitutional
challenges. At this time, SB 34 only allows federally recognized
tribes to negotiate terms with the Board. It does not commit the
state to any priorities or preferences. The Alaska Constitution
requires the legislature to provide equal access to every child
in the state.
1:49:11 PM
SENATOR STEVENS related that everyone had been frustrated with
scoring, especially since rural Alaskans do worse than urban
students. The legislature tries to find ways to help improve the
educational system for students throughout the state. This bill
may be one of the answers.
1:49:33 PM
SENATOR SHOWER acknowledged that Alaska's education system
allows for flexibility. He asked whether NEA-Alaska had
expressed any resistance.
SENATOR STEVENS answered that he had not heard any organized
resistance. He said the idea was to improved performance for
rural Alaskan students. He stated that the state-tribal
education compact schools would be state schools funded by the
state. These schools would fall under the local school district
and the Department of Education and Early Development (DEED).
1:51:31 PM
SENATOR HUGHES offered her view that there is excellent
potential for ownership by tribes to help ensure their students
have academic achievement. She related that she had lived in
rural Alaska and could see how this could be effective. Further,
she stated that the Senate Education Committee held eight
hearings on this bill. She asked from a legal perspective how
the compact might work. She anticipated that the state-tribal
education compact would be a legal document with specific
requirements. She wondered what would happen if the compact
requirements were not fulfilled.
1:52:41 PM
SENATOR STEVENS deferred to others to respond to legal question
He explained that he has held discussions with the Alaska
Federation of Natives (AFN), villages and the department to gain
their perspectives on state-tribal education compacting.
MR. LAMKIN stated that this bill would direct the board to
negotiate a contract, and the contract terms will include
numerous things. He related that the sponsor modeled the
original bill after a Washington state compact, but initially
considered charter school modeling. He offered his view that the
board and DEED have a general idea for a starting point. He said
it would undoubtedly include curriculum, assessment, and
collective bargaining.
1:54:11 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND summarized the timeline in SB 34 [listed in
subsections (b),(c), and (d)], which requires that a federally
recognized tribe must respond to the board on or before December
31, 2022. Further, not later than March 31, 2023, the board
shall meet and negotiate with the federally recognized tribes.
Finally, not later than January 31, 2024, the parties must
submit recommended legislation. He offered his view that
timeline should allow parties to answer some of these questions.
SENATOR STEVENS agreed. He reiterated that the original approach
was to rush in and create state-tribal education compacted
schools. However, the worst thing to happen would be creating
schools and having them fail. He stated that this bill would
provide sufficient planning time to ensure success for any
schools formed.
1:55:10 PM
SENATOR SHOWER asked whether he envisioned any federal funding
that would replace Undesignated General Fund (UGF) monies.
MR. LAMKIN responded that it was too early to say. He stated
that state funds would help leverage federal funding. He did not
anticipate that there would be any financial burden on Alaska to
fund state-tribal education compacted schools.
SENATOR SHOWER recalled during discussions with Ms. Kitka that
some federal funds could be available.
SENATOR STEVENS emphasized that this will not require less state
funding, but it recognizes that rural communities have specific
educational issues to address. This bill would allow additional
funding to help student achievement but not reduce state
support.
1:57:27 PM
JULIE KITKA, President, Alaska Federation of Natives, Anchorage,
Alaska, stated that she serves as the Alaska Federation of
Natives president.
1:57:57 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked for her comments on SB 34.
1:58:11 PM
MS. KITKA responded that the state-tribal education compact bill
is to move forward with transformational education, supporting
and incentivizing innovation and doing things better. She
explained this is not about tearing things down but building
something better. AFN supports the two-step process, in which
the state board, commissioner, and DEED negotiate on the state's
behalf with tribes is the important signal it gives to other
parties. In particular, the AFN requested the US Senate Indian
Affairs Committee hold an oversight hearing, and they have
subsequently held one hearing. Further, AFN asked the Secretary
of the US Department of Education (USDoE) to help support this
innovation and transformative education for compacting and other
initiatives with that department and the US Department of the
Interior (USDoI) related to funding. In addition, AFN and US
Senator Lisa Murkowski await a solicitor's opinion from the
USDoI on the ability to use flow-through funding on compacting
for schools. Once that occurs, it will help inform the different
paths on the federal side. She characterized the demonstrations
as hybrids. She said they will have a federal component to help
support teacher preparation, curriculum, and upgrading
facilities. She noted that the Alaska educational system is not
working for many rural Alaska students.
2:01:05 PM
MS. KITKA stated that the state-tribal compacting model for the
Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service provides
an effective funding mechanism to stretch funding. She noted
that there is not a lot of compacting in the state, only the
Alaska Tribal Child Welfare Compact. She stated that AFN would
like to see this model used in education. She assured members
that AFN does not want to overturn the educational system in the
state but to engage in negotiations with tribes and the
department.
MS. KITKA stated that the legislature would determine if any
state laws would need a waiver or improvements. For example,
former US Attorney General William Barr traveled to villages
regarding rural law enforcement, then declared a public safety
emergency based on his observations. US Attorney General Barr
discussed using the legal authority to compact for public
safety. She highlighted other uses of that compacting model that
could be used to make improvements. She emphasized that the
state-tribal education compact wouldn't just teach about Native
culture but would teach through that culture to obtain deep
ownership by the community and tribal membership. She stated
that AFN strongly believes that parents are the first educators,
but the community is vitally important for education success.
She said, "It can't just be a school sitting on the hill away
from the community."
2:03:40 PM
RICK AGNEW, Legal Counsel, Alaska Federation of Natives, Federal
Way, Washington, stated he was available to answer questions. He
said he agrees with Ms. Kitka on the policy questions.
2:04:49 PM
JOEL ISAAK, Tribal Liaison Project Coordinator, Department of
Education and Early Development (DEED), Juneau, Alaska, said the
department has been working on the Alaska Education Challenge
since 2016, and adopted the state Board of Education and Early
Development's recommendations. Since then, the board has created
a compacting committee to review the regulatory overview and the
types of support the department should consider. He highlighted
that the department had had substantial tribal engagement. He
defined compacting as a government-to-government agreement, one
that is a dynamic, flexible, and powerful mechanism because of
significant discussions and due to the wide geographical spread.
He noted that compacting has been successful in healthcare in
Alaska and in Washington state for education.
MR. ISAAK explained that SB 34 would allow the tribes to lead
and be involved in developing the legal framework for the
education compact in Alaska. He indicated that the Board of
Education and Early Development is tasked by the legislature and
the Alaska Constitution to oversee and conduct education. The
department favors a demonstration project because it is a
focused effort. This demonstration will focus on the technical
and mechanical aspects that help student outcomes, including
parental involvement and increased student attendance. SB 34
would give them time to consider and address the complicated
questions and develop a well-thought-out proposal.
2:08:43 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked for the difference between a compact and a
contract.
MR. AGNEW answered that the compact is a government-to-
government agreement with the parties on equal footing, which
contrasts with a contract, in which the agency issues the
contract and the school is subject to the contract. Thus, under
a contract, schools would not be on equal footing. He emphasized
the importance for tribes to be on equal footing, which is why
change can be embedded in compact terms. He noted that the
federal government often uses compacts. One advantage is to
consolidate funds. The federal government is notorious for
having single-purpose grants. Compacts allow different agency
funds to educate children, whereas contracts are subject to the
program's limitations. He reiterated that compacts put the
parties on an equal footing and allow them to consolidate and
leverage money for education.
2:10:51 PM
SENATOR HUGHES noted that Mr. Isaak stated that the compact
would be dynamic and flexible. She asked whether the compact
could change along the way or once it was negotiated, it would
represent the planned agreement. She asked what state and
federal issues would need to be addressed.
2:11:32 PM
MR. AGNEW said the state-tribal education compact would be
subject to federal and state constitutional requirements because
the federally recognized tribes will operate in conjunction with
federal law. As Ms. Kitka mentioned, the state would want to
leverage federal funds to avoid a supplanting problem. In terms
of the constitutional issues related to the governance and
operation of the school, the state-tribal education compact is
subject to state and federal constitutional prohibitions on
discrimination, and the stated goal is not to exclude non-Native
students. He opined that it is possible to meet the compelling
state interest tests in constitutional law. He stated that the
parties will design and agree to a compact, which is an
agreement between the state and federally recognized tribes and
tribal organizations. Thus, if an annual review or semi-annual
review is embedded in the state-tribal education compact, it
will be fully enforceable because both parties agreed to it.
MR. AGNEW stated that the sponsors of SB 34 [and HB 351, the
companion bill] indicated the need for a flexible agreement, so
if the demonstration project were to fail, there would be a
quick way to remedy it.
MR. AGNEW highlighted one of the key ideas, to institute a
demonstration project and continuously monitor how well it works
because it is transformative. So as a matter of law, the parties
to the state-tribal education compact could agree on checks for
maintaining the program and assessing whether the program meets
the quality standard. Suppose the parties decided to terminate
the compact after a probationary period of six months or some
other timeframe. In that case, several mechanisms would enforce
the termination, such as withholding school operating funds or
the state-sanctioned educational programs. Thus, the state Board
of Education and Early Development and the federally recognized
tribes and tribal organizations in the state will build into the
demonstration state-tribal educational compact the enforcement
mechanisms.
2:14:47 PM
SENATOR KIEHL said he was surprised that the department worked
on the state-tribal education compacting for several years. He
has been working with a tribal entity and village in his
district, striving to develop a new model for their school.
Although they have reached out to the department, no one has
responded to them. He recalled that Ms. Kitka mentioned a
consortium. He asked if she could share her vision for the
state-tribal education compact negotiation process and how broad
a group of tribes or tribal entities would be. He further asked
if she envisioned that a single statewide consortium would run
multiple sites or if one tribe would conduct the demonstration
project.
2:16:00 PM
MS. KITKA anticipated that the pieces would come together once
the solicitor issued an opinion. It will clarify the flow-
through funding for compact schools and the appropriation
process for the US Departments of Interior and Education. She
envisioned private sector and corporate funding sources would
come from those supporting innovation in education in the state.
She imagined that some innovative measures would be included in
some compact schools. Other innovative approaches could be
included in other compact schools since AFN supports innovative
education for all students, not just one group.
2:16:51 PM
MS. KITKA emphasized testing the model to determine if the
compact was helpful to address education in rural Alaska.
MS. KITKA envisioned an interregional consortium consisting of
small, remote villages, for example, combining Kawerak in the
Nome region with a village in Bristol Bay. She outlined the
various models for compacting, including a statewide consortium,
regional consortiums, and intertribal consortiums. She
highlighted that the Tribal Health Consortium represents all the
tribes in the state, with one entity negotiating on behalf of
all the tribes. In addition, regional compacts, including
Tlingit and Haida in Southeast Alaska, Kawarek, Incorporated
(Kawarek, Inc.) in Nome, or Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) in
Interior Alaska, negotiate on behalf of their specific tribes,
and intertribal consortiums are formed to address specific
topics. She pointed out that the Association of Village Council
Presidents (AVCP), Kawarek, Inc., and TCC might work together on
an issue, or a single-site might negotiate on compacts for
various programs.
MS. KITKA suggested that the state-tribal education compact
would be formed as a small interregional consortium, working
with the state Board of Education and Early Development because
of the interest in different regions. She acknowledged that this
is limited to a demonstration project that needs development,
but it represents a step forward. She explained that all
federally-funded or state-funded compacts are subject to
financial and program audits, providing accountability and
responsibility. She recapped that SB 34 would allow the state
and tribal entities to create a new model and test it to see if
it will work in Alaska to improve outcomes. She surmised the
state-tribal education compact would be driven by innovation
that can be incentivized to provide a better educational model
for some children.
2:19:43 PM
SENATOR SHOWER stated that the legislature would like to save
money yet focus on providing a good education for students in
the classroom with the same 54 school districts and avoid
overlapping administrative costs for services such as IT or
superintendents. The legislature has considered forcing
districts to consolidate, noting that some districts have
consolidated services already. He pointed out that Hawaii [State
Department of Education] has a single, statewide school district
serving seven islands [approximately 285,000 students].
SENATOR SHOWER asked whether AFN has considered whether
compacted schools would fall under the state's existing school
districts or if it would create a separate district. Hence,
tribal entities would have more control, which would require
additional administrative support.
2:21:02 PM
MS. KITKA responded that was something that would be negotiated
with the state Board of Education and Early Development when
developing the state-tribal education compact. She surmised that
the state board would decide. Regarding cost savings in rural
Alaska on education, the best thing would be for the state to
help remove the prohibition on federal funding for facilities.
She related that a rider has been in place since about 1997
prohibiting federal appropriations from helping rebuild or
refurbish schools. She stated that AFN had requested the Senate
Indian Affairs Committee eliminate the rider. She offered her
belief that if it was removed, the state could access
infrastructure funds designated explicitly for school
facilities. She admitted that AFN does not have all the answers,
but AFN worked with the commissioner, the Tribal Liaison Project
Coordinator, and the state Board on these issues. AFN has also
been working with the US Senate Indian Affairs Committee,
emphasizing the need to support and incentivize innovation and
make improvements and reminding the federal government of their
federal trust responsibility on education.
2:23:04 PM
MS. KITKA wondered if state-tribal entities could improve
education in rural Alaska so that resources could be stretched
further or provided more efficiently. Ultimately the test will
be how well students perform and whether the commissioner and
the state board agree that state-tribal education compacting is
a winning model. She stated that AFN doesn't want to turn the
system upside down but would like to push the edges and use
innovation to achieve better outcomes.
2:23:43 PM
SENATOR SHOWER agreed that pursuing the rider was a valid path
to follow. He reiterated his desire to consolidate districts to
control costs. He suggested that the compacted schools be
contained within the existing school district structure or
having them all fall under one district, perhaps bringing in
other districts.
2:24:18 PM
SENATOR KIEHL stated that the bill calls for the tribal
organization or consortium to work with the department. The
department represents the state executive branch, but schools
statewide are operated by locally elected school boards in the
state. He asked whether the negotiation process would allow
local school districts to collaborate and understand the impacts
on their enrollment and take advantage of any opportunities and
mitigate potential harms.
MR. ISAAK offered his view that one of the strengths of the bill
is allowing those conversations to occur and for districts to
examine how compacts would affect them. He related that the
Senate Education Committee held discussions on efficiency. He
stated that tribes have already figured out ways to deliver
services by working together to solve problems, creating
efficiencies by sharing costs and services, and having the funds
flow to the tribes. He characterized the compact as an engine
for addressing solutions and suggested that a compact school
might address a need that a non-compact school district hasn't
solved because the compacted school can focus its energy and
expertise on the obstacle. Although this bill relates to a
small-scale demonstration project, the solutions could have far-
reaching effects.
2:27:54 PM
MR. ISAAK turned to the topic of increasing efficiency. He
offered his view that tribes can apply for transportation funds
and may have a more efficient way of transporting pupils than
the district currently does because they have the
infrastructure. He suggested that the most effective compact
will engage with the local school district to take advantage of
any efficiencies to provide services more economically and
closer to home.
MR. ISAAK stated that the state-tribal education compact process
would identify questions. He acknowledged that he could not
project how many students might be enrolled in one school versus
another school two or three years from now, but the process can
review the demonstration projects and project the number of
students the schools will serve. He said one of the strengths of
the demonstration project is that it provides an interim step
that can give a more definitive view of the compact schools.
2:29:34 PM
MS. KITKA related that the compact model is not new. The US
government engages in numerous successful compacts with Pacific
Island nations and the Millennium Challenge Corporation's five-
year compacts with low-income countries. For example, the US has
had a compact with Mongolia for ten years, building railroads.
She highlighted that compacts work with large countries, island
nations, and Native Americans.
2:30:40 PM
SENATOR KIEHL acknowledged that Mr. Isaak pointed out
opportunities, and he agreed with the potential benefits. He
expressed concern that the bill does not put specific
responsibility on any party, nor does it make local school
districts party to the state-tribal education compact. He
offered his belief that if school districts are not involved
during the negotiation and design process, they will attempt to
stop the process because districts will be concerned about how
the state-tribal education compact will affect them. He asked
who will involve the districts and when they will become
involved.
MR. ISAAK responded that the conversations have been about a
state-tribal education compact. The negotiations taking place
are between the state and the federally recognized tribes. He
stated that school districts have ample opportunities to be
involved because it is a public process. For example, the state
Board of Education and Early Development meetings are publicly
noticed and allow public comment. The department developed a
webpage specifically for tribal compacting, including an
overview and contact information, allowing for public comment.
He said he made presentations to the Association of Alaska
School Boards, Alaska Superintendents Association (ASA), and
NEA-Alaska. He co-hosted with NEA Alaska at the First Alaskan
Institute of Elders & Youth Conference. He offered his belief
that the department has clear lines of association with those
organizations to ensure opportunities for input.
2:33:54 PM
MR. ISAAK highlighted that some superintendents have reached out
because their local school board expressed an interest in a
state-tribal education compact. However, there is not currently
a path to do so. In those instances, he met with the tribes, the
superintendents, and the school boards to consider what the
compacted schools would look like in their communities and
receive feedback. Although he has not met with every tribe
expressing an interest through their school boards in Alaska, he
has had some discussions. He noted that state-tribal education
compacts do not provide more teachers, so there will be a need
for excellent educators in compact schools. Further, the
department has given presentations at educational conferences
throughout the last five years to be publicly available in the
venues and locations that educational professionals attend.
MR. ISAAK emphasized this as the department's strategy and how
this bill would continue to support that engagement.
2:35:47 PM
MS. KITKA emphasized that AFN would not be opposed to local
school boards attending state-tribal education compact meetings.
She did not view these negotiations as adversarial. Instead, AFN
seeks common ground to move forward. The state-tribal education
compact negotiations are not secret. She welcomed school board
members, superintendents, and teachers to attend and provide
their input and expertise. She said AFN seeks to build a win-win
situation and proactively plans to contact parents to inform
them about the state-tribal education compact and its potential
effect on students.
2:37:23 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked whether any federal funding streams
currently available to tribes for education require state match
and if money from the Base Student Allocation (BSA) could be
used. She recalled earlier testimony that state-tribal education
compacts should not require additional cost to the state.
MS. KITKA answered that AFN was still working out those revenue
streams and not trying to compete with other tribes across the
nation for funds for their schools or programs. AFN seeks to
reprogram additional funds and create new streams of revenue.
And the only thing that may concern the other tribes would be
removing the prohibition against facilities money coming into
Alaska. She said she did not anticipate the necessity for
matching funds. She offered her view that if the federal
government required matching funds, it should be related to an
excellent federal program that drives innovation for everybody,
not just compact schools.
2:38:10 PM
SENATOR HUGHES stated her appreciation that the sponsor moved
away from the Washington model that would have given preference
to Alaska Native children in the villages. She explained that
the Alaska Native Health Tribal Consortium providers welcomed
non-Natives patients.
SENATOR HUGHES recalled years ago, when her family lived in Fort
Yukon in rural Alaska, the tribal clinics did not accept non-
Native patients. Her family needed to fly to Anchorage or
Fairbanks for medical treatment. Subsequently, tribal clinics
incorporated the health center model, and to receive funding,
the clinics had to accept all patients. She wondered if the
Washington model would create any constitutional issues. She
recalled that the original bill would have established a
preference for Alaska Native teachers and students. She said she
could see where that might be more effective to have a tribal
perspective. She wondered if that would raise constitutional
issues or if it could be handled via the job description to
avoid the constitutional problems.
2:39:45 PM
MR. AGNEW responded that there would not be a bar against hiring
Alaska Native teachers. However, establishing a preference for
hiring teachers must meet a compelling state interest to pass
constitutional muster. In this case, the educational program
could easily be considered a compelling state interest. He
cautioned against creating a blanket ban for Native or non-
Native teachers because it could raise some constitutional
challenges but creating a preference tailored specifically to
the quality of the education program would likely be acceptable
since it would be a legitimate qualification for employment for
teachers. If so, that would likely pass constitutional muster
because it would establish a narrowly defined educational
program.
2:41:21 PM
SENATOR HUGHES stated that currently, school districts must
adhere to numerous state laws. She said the legislature is
currently considering a bill related to reading intervention
programs. She asked whether he envisioned tribal schools would
have to comply with all state laws or if the compacting
agreement could suspend or waive specific laws. She surmised
that the commissioner would not have the authority to do so, but
the legislature could authorize it.
MS. KITKA replied that when the report and negotiated compact
come before the legislature, tribal entities could request
waivers for any laws or regulations they identified as not
applicable to state-tribal education compacted schools. The
legislature can debate the pros and cons of any waivers as the
legislation moves through the process. However, AFN has not
identified any, and she did not envision a large-scale exemption
from state law. Some laws may need to be modified, but she did
not believe that radical changes would be necessary.
2:43:20 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND invited the sponsor to the presenter's table and
Senator Stevens and Mr. Lamkin came forward.
2:43:32 PM
SENATOR KIEHL stated that this bill provides a fairly short
timeframe to develop a proposal for the legislature to consider,
but he envisioned it was doable. However, it gives the
legislature five years to put this into place.
SENATOR STEVENS first provided some general comments. He
explained that the bill was much different when the Senate
Education Committee held discussions on it. At that time, he had
envisioned that the state would create many new compacted
schools, but he realized that was too ambitious, so this version
made limited changes. He offered his view that much of today's
discussion falls outside the bill's scope since those
considerations will be determined after the state and federally
recognized tribal entities negotiate. He agreed that the bill
probably gives the legislature too much time.
2:44:52 PM
SENATOR STEVENS said he likes the charter school system. If he
were negotiating a state-tribal education compact, he would
encourage using the charter school model because charter schools
fall under school districts. The districts control the charter
schools, and they are a part of every school district.
SENATOR STEVENS pointed out that the bill says that the state
needs to go to the next step, but it doesn't provide an answer.
It creates the setting for the state and federally recognized
tribes to find solutions. He stated that this process should
involve everyone, and as Ms. Kitka eluded, the negotiations
should identify common ground. He emphasized her comment about
not teaching Alaska Native culture but teaching through the
Alaska Native culture, which is considerably different. He
offered his belief that it could be transformative.
2:45:41 PM
SENATOR STEVENS cautioned members that the committee was getting
"in the weeds." He offered his belief that the state and
federally recognized tribes would answer these concerns during
the negotiating process to develop the compact. He highlighted
that the Department of Education and Early Development would
participate, and no one would be excluded. He said he likes that
school districts that want to participate are welcome to do so.
He stated that the goal of the state-tribal education compact is
to develop a model. He emphasized that this bill is the first
step in the process. The negotiated compact should answer some
questions members asked.
2:46:23 PM
MR. LAMKIN emphasized that the SB 34 plans for the compact to
have a duration of five years. He said the five-year sunset was
to allow the legislature and the administration sufficient time
to assess how compacted schools were functioning and whether to
continue them.
2:47:11 PM
SENATOR KIEHL asked whether five years was a long enough
timeframe to determine if the pilot program was working and
needed to be made permanent or if it should sunset. He related
his understanding that once the compact is negotiated and
questions are answered, the compact would be capped at five
years. The legislature would have to act to extend it, so
compacted schools would operate for four years. He expressed
concern about whether that timeframe was sufficient to decide if
the new system was working and for the legislature to say, "Yes,
let's keep doing it."
SENATOR STEVENS offered his view that it was sufficient time
because DEED started considering state-tribal education compacts
with the Alaska Education Challenge approximately four years
ago. He suggested that once the state and federally recognized
tribes negotiate, they come up with a recommendation.
2:48:38 PM
MR. LAMKIN stated that the Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED) and AFN had indicated the five-year timeframe
was reasonable. He pointed out that it was not uncommon for
boards and commissions to have a sunset ranging from four to
eight years.
CHAIR HOLLAND related his understanding that he was referring to
the timeline for the program to prove itself. After holding
conversations with the stakeholders, he plans to propose the
date for the legislature to approve enabling legislation to be
changed from January 31, 2029, to June 30, 2026. He anticipated
discussing that at the next meeting. He noted that he still
feels a little uncomfortable with the bill. Still, he will try
to get more comfortable because the intent of SB 34 is to
resolve many of the questions pertaining to organizing the
compact.
2:50:31 PM
CHAIR HOLLAND held SB 34 in committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 34 Summary of Changes A to G.pdf |
SEDC 3/17/2022 10:00:00 AM SJUD 3/23/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 34 |
| SB34_AFN_Support.pdf |
SEDC 3/17/2022 10:00:00 AM SJUD 3/23/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 34 |
| SB034_TribalCompacting_SponsorStatement.pdf |
SEDC 4/21/2021 9:00:00 AM SEDC 2/11/2022 9:00:00 AM SJUD 3/23/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 34 |
| SB 34 AFN White Paper- Nixon - Self-Determination Dec.2021.pdf |
SEDC 2/11/2022 9:00:00 AM SJUD 3/23/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 34 |
| SB 34 AFN Report on Education Compacting 12.2.2021.pdf |
SEDC 2/11/2022 9:00:00 AM SJUD 3/23/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 34 |
| SB 34 Fiscal Note.pdf |
SJUD 3/23/2022 1:30:00 PM |
SB 34 |