Legislature(2021 - 2022)DAVIS 106
04/23/2021 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 | |
| HB132 | |
| HB164 | |
| HB114 | |
| HB132 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 114 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 164 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 132 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
April 23, 2021
8:02 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Harriet Drummond, Co-Chair
Representative Andi Story, Co-Chair
Representative Tiffany Zulkosky
Representative Grier Hopkins
Representative Mike Cronk
Representative Ronald Gillham
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Mike Prax
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 132
"An Act relating to technical education and apprenticeships;
relating to concurrent vocational education, training, and on-
the-job trade experience programs for students enrolled in
public secondary schools; relating to child labor; and providing
for an effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 132(EDC) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 164
"An Act relating to early education programs provided by school
districts; relating to school age eligibility; relating to early
education programs; establishing a parents as teachers program;
relating to the duties of the Department of Education and Early
Development; relating to certification of teachers; establishing
a reading intervention program for public school students
enrolled in grades kindergarten through three; establishing a
reading program in the Department of Education and Early
Development; relating to a virtual education consortium; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 114
"An Act relating to the education loan program and Alaska
supplemental education loan program; and providing for an
effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 132
SHORT TITLE: SCHOOL APPRENTICESHIP PROGS; TAX CREDITS
SPONSOR(s): LABOR & COMMERCE
03/10/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/10/21 (H) L&C, EDC, FIN
03/15/21 (H) L&C AT 6:30 PM BARNES 124
03/15/21 (H) Heard & Held
03/15/21 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
03/22/21 (H) L&C AT 3:15 PM DAVIS 106
03/22/21 (H) Moved CSHB 132(L&C) Out of Committee
03/22/21 (H) MINUTE(L&C)
03/22/21 (H) L&C AT 6:30 PM DAVIS 106
03/22/21 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
03/25/21 (H) L&C RPT CS(L&C) NEW TITLE 5DP 1AM
03/25/21 (H) DP: SNYDER, SCHRAGE, MCCARTY,
SPOHNHOLZ, FIELDS
03/25/21 (H) AM: NELSON
04/09/21 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM DAVIS 106
04/09/21 (H) Heard & Held
04/09/21 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
04/19/21 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM DAVIS 106
04/19/21 (H) Heard & Held
04/19/21 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
04/23/21 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM DAVIS 106
BILL: HB 164
SHORT TITLE: EARLY ED PROGRAMS; READING; VIRTUAL ED
SPONSOR(s): TUCK
04/07/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/07/21 (H) EDC, FIN
04/21/21 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM DAVIS 106
04/21/21 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
04/23/21 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM DAVIS 106
BILL: HB 114
SHORT TITLE: EDUCATION & SUPPLEMENTAL LOAN PROGRAMS
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
02/24/21 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/24/21 (H) EDC
04/23/21 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM DAVIS 106
WITNESS REGISTER
TRISTAN WALSH, Staff
Representative Zach Fields
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information and answered questions
during the hearing on HB 132 on behalf of the House Labor and
Commerce Standing Committee, sponsor.
WESTON EILER, Director of Government Relations
University of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information and answered questions
during the hearing on HB 132.
LOKI TOBIN, Staff
Senator Tom Begich
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 164 on behalf of the Senate
Education Standing Committee, prime sponsor of companion bill SB
111.
REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS TUCK
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: As prime sponsor, presented HB 164.
SENATOR TOM BEGICH
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided information on HB 164 on behalf of
the Senate Education Standing Committee, sponsor of companion
bill SB 111.
SANA EFIRD, Executive Director
Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 114 on behalf of the sponsor,
House Rules by request of the governor.
LEE DONNER, Regional Managing Director
Hilltop Securities
Dallas, Texas
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 114.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:02:37 AM
CO-CHAIR HARRIET DRUMMOND called the House Education Standing
Committee meeting to order at 8:02 a.m. Representatives Story,
Cronk, Gillham, Hopkins, Zulkosky, and Drummond were present at
the call to order.
HB 132-SCHOOL APPRENTICESHIP PROGS; TAX CREDITS
8:03:50 AM
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND announced that the first order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 132, "An Act relating to technical
education and apprenticeships; relating to concurrent vocational
education, training, and on-the-job trade experience programs
for students enrolled in public secondary schools; relating to
child labor; and providing for an effective date." [Before the
committee was CSHB 132(L&C).]
REPRESENTATIVE STORY moved to adopt Amendment 1 to CSHB
132(L&C), labeled 32-LS0476\W.5, Klein, 4/22/21, which read as
follows:
Page 4, line 9, through page 5, line 16:
Delete all material and insert:
"* Sec. 3. AS 14.40.190 is amended by adding a new
subsection to read:
(c) In addition to the reports required under (a) and
(b) of this section, during the first regular session
of each legislature, the Board of Regents or its
designee shall provide to the legislative committees
having jurisdiction over education a biennial
presentation describing the efforts made by the
University of Alaska to collaborate with the
Department of Labor and Workforce Development to
provide credit programs for concurrent secondary
education and registered apprenticeships."
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK objected for the purpose of discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY said the amendment would insert language
for the purpose of alignment with other required reports.
8:05:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ZULKOSKY asked whether the amendment is a
technical amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY deferred to Mr. Walsh.
8:06:24 AM
TRISTAN WALSH, Staff, Representative Zach Fields, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee, sponsor, explained that Amendment 1 was drafted in
consultation with the University of Alaska (UA). He deferred to
Mr. Eiler.
8:07:04 AM
WESTON EILER, Director of Government Relations, University of
Alaska, said Section 3 of the proposed legislation was
"problematic" because it would change the principal duties of
the University of Alaska Board of Regents. Much of what UA
already does is in the area of workforce development, he said,
in collaboration with the Department of Labor & Workforce
Development (DOLWD) and the Department of Education & Early
Development (DEED). Instead of amending the principal duties of
the Board of Regents, he said, language would be added in the
adjacent statutes requiring biannual progress reports to House
Education Standing Committee.
8:09:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK withdrew his objection. There being no
further objection, Amendment 1 to CSHB 132(EDC) was adopted.
8:09:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY moved to report CSHB 132(L&C), as amended,
out of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK objected. He said the apprenticeship
programs are full, that he wants to reduce spending, and that he
doesn't see the need for the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE ZULKOSKY said that she only sees zero fiscal
notes, and asked whether she is missing one.
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK said the number on the fiscal note he was
referring to is 2796.
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND noted a discrepancy in the fiscal notes.
8:11:46 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 8:11 a.m. to 8:28 a.m.
8:28:56 AM
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND announced that CSHB 132(L&C), as amended,
[with the motion to move it out of committee left pending],
would be held until later in the meeting.
HB 164-EARLY ED PROGRAMS; READING; VIRTUAL ED
[Contains discussion of companion bill SB 111.]
8:29:05 AM
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 164, "An Act relating to early education
programs provided by school districts; relating to school age
eligibility; relating to early education programs; establishing
a parents as teachers program; relating to the duties of the
Department of Education and Early Development; relating to
certification of teachers; establishing a reading intervention
program for public school students enrolled in grades
kindergarten through three; establishing a reading program in
the Department of Education and Early Development; relating to a
virtual education consortium; and providing for an effective
date."
8:29:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 164, Version 32-LS0731\I, Klein, 4/20/21
("Version I"), as the working document.
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND objected for the purpose of discussion.
8:31:03 AM
LOKI TOBIN, Staff, Senator Tom Begich, Alaska State Legislature,
introduced HB 164 on behalf of the Senate Education Standing
Committee, prime sponsor of companion bill SB 111. She
explained that the policy changes for the voluntary early
education program are addressed in Sections 2-4, 7-10, 14-17,
20-22, 25, and 29, with repealer clauses in Sections 39, 40, and
45, and applicability language, transition language, and an
effective date in Sections 44, 46, and 47. She said the
voluntary early education programs direct the Department of
Education & Early Development (DEED) to approve and supervise
existing, high-quality, locally-designed, and culturally
responsive early education programs in local school districts.
She said the sections direct DEED to offer the Parents As
Teachers program and demonstrate its efficacy; the sections also
provide a mechanism for DEED to provide a grant for school
districts to design and develop a district program, and to
collect data on the programs for inclusion in its annual report
to the Alaska State Legislature. She said that a comprehensive
report would be provided to the Thirty-Eighth Alaska State
Legislature, and all of the sections under discussion would be
repealed on June 30, 2034.
MS. TOBIN discussed reading programs, addressed in Sections 5-6,
13, 18-19, 23, 29-32, 34-35, and 37, with repealer clauses in
Section 40, and applicability language in Sections 42-45. She
said the policies would direct DEED to establish a culturally-
responsive reading program, and support school districts in
implementation. She said school districts would be required to
offer interventional reading services for students in
Kindergarten through Grade 3 (K-3) who are identified as
struggling with reading. Students would be assessed at the
beginning of the school year, she said, and students struggling
with reading would receive individualized reading support
services. She stressed that the proposed language would ensure
that parents or guardians are notified of the activity, and that
students are provided additional support both inside and outside
of the classroom. The sections would also establish a statewide
reading program, she said, which would direct DEED to provide
intensive support to the lowest-performing 25 percent of school
districts serving K-3 students. Data would be included in a
comprehensive report, to be presented to the Thirty-Eighth
Alaska State Legislature, and the sections would be repealed on
June 30, 2034.
MS. TOBIN explained the last policy, which would direct DEED, in
collaboration with school districts, to establish a Virtual
Education Consortium, to be repealed on June 30, 2034. She said
this proposed policy is described in Sections 21, 36, and 40-41.
She pointed out that other sections included in the bill don't
pertain to the three primary areas of policy: Section 24 would
amend AS 14.14.115 to encourage school districts to engage in
cooperative agreements for the purpose of reducing
administrative costs. Sections 27-28 would amend AS 14.17.505
to increase the unreserved fund balance a school may carry into
a new fiscal year. Section 33 would amend AS 14.20.020 and
direct the State Board of Education to assess and establish
passing scores on teaching competency tests.
8:36:18 AM
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND withdrew her objection to the motion to adopt
the proposed CS for HB 164, Version 32-LS0731\I, Klein, 4/20/21
as the working document. There being no further objection,
Version I was before the committee.
8:36:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS TUCK, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, presented HB 164. He said the goal of the bill is to
empower parents, teachers, and students to increase ready
proficiency early in a child's learning; reading proficiency, he
said, makes it easier to learn many other subjects. He
explained that HB 164 would allow school districts to develop
localized and culturally responsive pre-K programs through a
six-year grant program; would establish a new statewide
evidence-based reading program; and would provide intensive
reading intervention services from kindergarten through grade
three for students experiencing reading deficiencies. The bill
would also require reading intervention specialists, funded by
the DEED, to be available to work with local teachers and
support staff to improve reading scores and assessments through
evidence-based reading instruction. He pointed out the Parents
As Teachers program, which he described as "the most cost-
effective way" of delivering early education to small and remote
communities. Parental involvement is key to a child's academic
success, he said, and the provisions in HB 164 would help catch
developmental delays and no longer allow schools to hold back
students without consultation with parents.
8:41:15 AM
SENATOR TOM BEGICH, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of the
Senate Education Standing Committee, sponsor of companion bill
SB 111, provided the history of HB 164's development. He said
HB 164 and SB 111 represent an effort to effect comprehensive
education reform, a process that began many years ago to address
the systemic inequity in Alaska's educational system which has
reduced opportunities for generations. He explained that
without a solid reading ability, the odds of a child's
involvement in the juvenile justice system, and later the
criminal justice system, are increased; similarly, that
individual is more likely to require state support and to pass
the obstacles to opportunity on to future generations. He
described a three-part strategy, developed in 1994 by the
Coalition for Education Equity.
SENATOR BEGICH explained that the first of the strategy was to
demonstrate the inequity in funding of construction and repair
of rural schools; the bulk of school funding has historically
been allocated to urban or railbelt schools. In 1999, he said,
the Alaska Superior Court characterized the legislature's
funding of Alaska's schools as "racist." In 2000, an extensive,
community-based effort to identify the necessary components of
education began, as well as what parents and educators felt was
missing in school. In villages where the work was done, he
said, several areas were identified, including the need for
greater education opportunities; curriculum more relevant to
culture and experience; greater support from DEED for teachers
and school districts; and consistent approaches to reading to
lock in early educations gains; and more engagement of teachers
in communities. He said the process was then extended to urban
areas, where the same needs were identified, particularly the
needs for DEED support and consistent reading curriculum.
SENATOR BEGICH said a lawsuit, building on prior efforts and
with financial support from the National Education Association,
Alaska Federation of Natives, individual school districts, and
Alaska citizens, sought to establish common components for
ensuring the state was meeting its constitutional obligations
under the education clause. The lawsuit, settled in 2012, with
the court identifying the exact elements of education previously
identified in the research and litigation process as those the
state needed to provide. While funding was increase and some
action was taken, he said, the court and plaintiffs envisioned
action on a much greater scale. Findings in the 2016
legislative performance audit underscored the issues.
8:45:36 AM
SENATOR BEGICH gave a brief history of his legislative efforts
to implement the educational components, explaining that the
ideas generated in the House Education Standing Committee and
Senate Education Standing Committee were all compiled into SB 8
and HB 164. The Senate Education Standing Committee heard SB 8
four times, he said, and there was extensive public support from
around the state for the concepts. The Senate Education
Standing Committee then introduced SB 111 in an effort to
combine the concepts in SB 8 - quality early education,
consistent and community-responsive reading, and greater support
to school districts from DEED - with additional concepts such as
the virtual consortium. He said SB 111 didn't address the
critical issues that had been identified in the preceding 25-
year process, but the Senate Education Standing Committee
removed harmful elements and added back nearly all of the
concepts from SB 8. He said he would make some adjustments,
such as removing the sunset clauses and enhancing the use of
locally-developed Alaska Native curriculum, he supports SB 111
as the next step in building a more robust educational system.
Like SB 111, he said, Representative Tuck's effort with HB 164
is informed by the experience of school districts including
Nome, Lower Kuskokwim, Yukon-Koyukuk, Alaska Gateway, Anchorage,
and many others that have responded to the imperative that an
equitable education should be provided to all Alaskans.
8:49:11 AM
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND commented on Senator Begich's opposition to
the sunset clause, opining that the inclusion of the sunset
clause doesn't seem to make sense in the context of this type of
proposed legislation.
SENATOR BEGICH said the sunset clauses apply to every element of
the bill.
8:50:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK stated his agreement with Senator Begich
regarding the sunset clauses, and he pointed out that every
aspect of the bill is evidence-based. Stronger families, less
crime, stronger communities, and flourishing economies all stem
from equitable education, he said, and with the struggles Alaska
faces, it would be smart to take advantage of the federal
funding to make the proper investments. He asked, "Why would
you want to cut that short by having these repealers in there?"
SENATOR BEGICH pointed out that funding pre-K has been a
struggle every year. He said the data provided by DEED is
clear, with results showing that children supported with early
education outperform their peers at every level of testing.
8:52:30 AM
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND discussed a previously-heard presentation on
preschool grants, and a longitudinal study in Minnesota which
follows kids from preschool all the way through workforce
development.
8:53:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ZULKOSKY requested a more deliberative review of
the sectional analysis.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK agreed.
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK asked how HB 164 compares to SB 111.
SENATOR BEGICH replied, "It is identical, down to the last word,
to the bill that is here." He said there has been extensive
discussion regarding ways to work, in a nonpartisan manner, to
improve the proposed legislation.
8:57:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK expressed the need for a thorough bill, and
he opined that there are no college programs that equip teachers
with the tools to teach kids to read.
SENATOR BEGICH discussed the need to better educate teachers,
pointing out that the teaching program at the University of
Alaska Anchorage, has lost its certification.
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND expressed agreement with the previous
comments.
8:59:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GILLHAM asked how to remove the policies in the
proposed legislation should the sunset clause be removed.
SENATOR BEGICH replied that the plan isn't to wait until the
program has run the full 10 years and then evaluate its success.
He explained that annual reviews would be performed, with annual
reports provided to the legislature, and the programs would be
adapted over time. He added that having a sunset clause poses a
risk of losing all progress once the program expires.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK added that education should always evolve.
He said reports have shown a divide between the upper and lower
classes in educational opportunities, especially through the
pandemic, as working parents try to provide education from home
while trying to make a living. He said that type of feedback
will allow incremental changes in education policy over the next
10 years.
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND commented that the pandemic has allowed a
unique opportunity to address such issues. She then asked for
more information on the Parents As Teachers program.
REPRESENTATIVE TUCK explained that Parents As Teachers has
historically been federally-funded in Alaska. When the program
first passed out of the House as House Bill 69 during the
Twenty-Sixth Alaska State Legislature, he said, it was supposed
to be funded at $9 million over three years. The funding wasn't
implemented, he said, and with a three-year sunset date, the
program ended. He commented that people often look at early
education as "babysitting," and parents need to be educated on
how to maximize a child's learning potential early in life.
9:06:28 AM
SENATOR BEGICH added that language was added to provide greater
resources, such as accessibility to literacy programs, for
parents.
9:07:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS asked for further discussion on the
section on reading intervention.
9:09:31 AM
MS. TOBIN presented the sectional analysis for Section 35 of HB
164 [included in the committee packet], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
Section 35 Adds new section under AS 14.30, Article
15. Reading Intervention and Article 16. Virtual
Education Consortium.
Directs DEED to support school districts in adopting
an evidence-based reading assessment tool to help
kindergarten through third-grade classroom teachers
identify students struggling to learn to read.
Students will be assessed in the fall, and if a
student is determined to be learning to read, the
student will no longer be assessed that year.
If a student is struggling to read, an individual
reading improvement plan must be developed and
implemented to help the student learn to read. Two
more additional assessments will assist in
ascertaining whether reading intervention strategies
are working, provide clear insight into where a
student may be struggling, and permit the department
to provide additional, targeted support.
DEED is directed to provide training to school
district staff in a reading assessment tool and train
school district staff in evidence-based reading
interventions. Districts are asked to identify which
early education program a student attended (if
attended) and report to the department reading
proficiency.
Districts may choose to adopt the reading assessment
tool provided by DEED or use their own reading
assessment tool if it is evidence-based and approved
by DEED. In determining the type of reading
assessment, DEED must consider the time it takes to
administer the assessment, when assessment results may
become available, how the assessment may be integrated
into the classroom, recommendations from taskforces
that studied reading deficiencies, and ensuring the
assessment is culturally responsive.
9:12:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS asked what components school districts
must consider in reading assessments.
MS. TOBIN referred to the text of HB 164, beginning on page 25,
line 24, Section 35, subsection (b), paragraphs (1) and (2),
which read as follows:
(b) In adopting a statewide screening or assessment
tool under (a)(1) of this section, the department
shall consider the following factors:
(1) the amount of time needed to administer the
screening or assessment, with the intention of
minimizing effects on instructional time;
(2) the time frame for reporting screening or
assessment results to teachers, administrators, and
parents or guardians;
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS stated his understanding that DEED would
be responsible for creating the standardized test, find a way to
incorporate it into the teaching, and ensure the results are
reported in a timely manner. He then asked whether the time
frame for reporting should be better defined.
MS. TOBIN replied that many districts already use assessment
tools, with varying levels of efficacy, and that the question
might be better posed to a representative from DEED.
9:14:04 AM
MS. TOBIN resumed her presentation of the sectional analysis of
Section 35, which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Districts are directed to offer help to a K- 3rd grade
student who is struggling to read by offering
individualized reading intervention services.
Interventions must be in addition to core reading
instruction and be provided (when practical) by or
under the supervision of a reading teacher, be rooted
in evidence-based methods that are proven to help a
student learn to read within a single school year,
provide clear instruction and detailed explanation to
the student, be individualized, be offered outside the
regular school day, provide assistance and support to
parents/guardians, and support opportunities to
parents/guardians to learn about resources for adult
literacy.
Individual reading improvement plans must be
implemented at least 30 days after a student is
assessed to be struggling, and a student's classroom
teacher and district support staff must be involved in
the evidence-based interventions.
Progress on individual reading improvement plans must
culturally responsive and be monitored, and
adjustments may be made. Parents/guardians must be
kept updated on the progress of their students, and
additional resources to support individual reading
improvement plans at home must be provided to
parents/guardians.
Once a student is identified as a struggling reader, a
family member must be notified within 15 days.
Notification must include a clear description of what
an individual reading plan entails and how the
district plans to support the student. Explanations of
what evidence-based reading inventions entail and what
may happen if a student continues to struggle to read
must be included in the initial notification.
Parents/guardians must also be told what evidence-
based reading strategies may be implemented at home
and a detailed explanation of which future
retention/progression options, waivers, and good cause
exemptions may apply. Parents/guardians must also
receive information on how mid-year progression works
within the district. At 45 days (or before), if a
student continues to struggle to read, a
parent/guardian must meet with a student's classroom
teacher and district staff to discuss grade
progression.
9:16:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS pointed out that in individual education
plans (IEPs), the parent or guardian is required to be at the
meetings. He asked what would happen if the parent or guardian
is not able to be at meetings to discuss plans for a struggling
reader.
MS. TOBIN explained that the definition for "parent or guardian"
is very inclusive in the proposed legislation, in the hope that
a family member could be present. If a family member is unable
to be present, she said, the discussions would happen with the
classroom teacher and school district staff.
REPRESENTATIVE HOPKINS asked whether a parent(s) would be
required to present themselves at some point, or whether the
educators would still work with the struggling student in the
absence of parental involvement.
MS. TOBIN replied that details regarding such a situation are
included in the proposed legislation in Section 35, subsection
(f), on page 29, line 21, through page 30, line 7.
9:17:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ZULKOSKY referred to Section 20, subsection (a),
paragraph (5), subparagraph (A), beginning on page 17, line 10,
of the proposed legislation, which read as follows:
(A) standards for a locally designed, evidence-based
program that meets Head Start Program Performance
Standards and other federal standards required for
early education programs to receive federal funding;
REPRESENTATIVE ZULKOSKY asked whether existing Head Start
programs throughout Alaska, either federally or state funded,
would be bound by the new requirements.
MS. TOBIN responded that the legislature can't dictate how a
federal program operates within the state. The language of the
proposed legislation, she said, attempts to continue meeting the
qualifications of programs that could be established by the
current or subsequent federal administrations.
REPRESENTATIVE ZULKOSKY asked whether language in the proposed
legislation would require existing Head Start programs to retool
their existing programs.
MS. TOBIN replied that HB 164 would hold Head Start programs at
their established qualifications, and it would encourage school
districts to work with Head Start programs to ensure that all
students have the opportunity for early education.
REPRESENTATIVE ZULKOSKY, referring to Representative Hopkins'
earlier questions regarding the text of Section 35 regarding
reading screening and assessment tools, asked how DEED would
provide support for teachers conducting the assessments. She
clarified her question by asking what the intention behind the
support would be.
MS. TOBIN replied that the nature of DEED support would be
established in regulations, and she said it would be a good
question to ask the department.
9:21:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY stressed the importance of reading programs
and stated her support for HB 164. She commented on the
importance of having parental support and on identifying gaps in
education.
9:24:26 AM
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND announced that HB 164 was held over.
The committee took an at-ease from 9:24 a.m. to 9:26 a.m.
HB 114-EDUCATION & SUPPLEMENTAL LOAN PROGRAMS
9:26:18 AM
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND announced that the next order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 114, "An Act relating to the education
loan program and Alaska supplemental education loan program; and
providing for an effective date."
9:26:25 AM
SANA EFIRD, Executive Director, Alaska Commission on
Postsecondary Education, introduced HB 114 on behalf of the
House Rules Standing Committee at the request of the governor.
She said the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education (ACPE)
supports access to postsecondary education; the Alaska Student
Loan Corporation (ASLC) operates as an enterprise agency of the
State of Alaska, funding and facilitating the Alaska Student
Loan Program. She then detailed the sectional analysis, which
read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Section 1:
Amends AS 14.43.122(b), Consolidation of loans, by
expanding the population eligible to apply for Alaska
Refinancing Loans to include previous Alaska borrowers
and graduates from Alaska high schools and
postsecondary institutions, as well as current Alaska
residents.
Section 2:
Amends AS 14.43.173(a), Loan award maximums; use of
loan award, by eliminating the loan maximums in
statute and providing for the Alaska Student Loan
Corporation (Corporation) to set the annual loan
maximums.
Section 3:
Amends AS 14.43.173(b), Loan award maximums; use of
loan award, by eliminating lifetime loan maximums in
statute and providing for the Corporation to set
lifetime loan maximums.
Section 4:
Amends AS 14.43.173(d), Loan award maximums; use of
loan award, with a conforming change to allow the
Corporation to set loan limits for both half-time and
full-time loans.
Section 5:
Amends AS 14.43.175, Repayment of loans, by providing
for the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education
to offer future student loan borrowers a loan program
with immediate repayment requirements.
9:32:15 AM
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND asked Ms. Efird to clarify whether immediate
repayment would mean avoiding interest.
MS. EFIRD replied that interest is normally deferred while
students are in school, and capitalized when students start
making payments six months after graduation. The proposed
legislation, she said, would allow students to pay interest up
front so it's not capitalized into the end amount, thereby
lowering the total cost of the loan.
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND asked whether "immediate repayment" means
right after closing on a loan.
MS. EFIRD replied that is correct.
9:33:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked whether immediate repayment would be
mandatory.
MS. EFIRD replied that it would be an option.
9:33:50 AM
MS. EFIRD said the proposed legislation would respond to
requests from students and Alaska's higher education community,
and that it would enhance the ability to meet the financial aid
needs of student loan borrowers, allow responsible increases to
annual loan limits, and amend the repayment program to assist
borrowers in keeping overall costs down. She said the changes
are intended to positively impact ASLC in offering economies of
scale and provide the lowest interest rates possible.
9:35:11 AM
LEE DONNER, Regional Managing Director, Hilltop Securities,
testified in support of HB 114, sharing that Hilltop Securities
has served as a financial adviser to ASLC since 2007. He
explained that almost all student loan programs throughout the
country require two eligibility standards. Residency is one
eligibility standard, he said; the other eligibility standard,
he said, is having attended school within the state, which he
noted is an unusual standard. He said the proposed legislation
is not likely to result in a large expansion in a program, and
he noted that it would be limited to refinanced loans instead of
loans initially held by current students. Because the loans
have been refinanced, he said, the proposed legislation would
not pose a credit risk due to the borrowers having established a
post-college credit history. He said HB 114 would bring
Alaska's loan refinancing standards more into line with other
programs that Hilltop Securities advises. Ms. Donner said the
immediate repayment option improves payment performance and
lowers loan delinquency and default. Those who take advantage
of the immediate repayment option not only enjoy a lower loan
cost, he said, but they also perform better overall than those
who don't.
9:41:43 AM
MS. EFIRD pointed out that HB 114 has a zero fiscal note.
[HB 114 was held over.]
9:42:15 AM
The committee took a brief at-ease at 9:42 a.m.
HB 132-SCHOOL APPRENTICESHIP PROGS; TAX CREDITS
9:42:29 AM
CO-CHAIR DRUMMOND announced that the final order of business
would be a return to HOUSE BILL NO. 132, "An Act relating to
technical education and apprenticeships; relating to concurrent
vocational education, training, and on-the-job trade experience
programs for students enrolled in public secondary schools;
relating to child labor; and providing for an effective date."
[Before the committee was CSHB 132(L&C), as amended, with
pending motion to move it out of committee.]
9:44:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE ZULKOSKY pointed out the different dates on the
fiscal notes.
REPRESENTATIVE FIELDS explained that, at one point, HB 132
contained legislation which carried a fiscal note from the
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED); the
legislation has since been bifurcated, he said, and DEED has
requested a zero fiscal note for HB 132.
REPRESENTATIVE ZULKOSKY noted that the motion to move the
proposed legislation out of committee had been made earlier, and
Representative Cronk had objected.
REPRESENTATIVE CRONK maintained his objection. He expressed
that HB 132 is similar to HB 108, and that he doesn't want to
see one bill get passed while the other doesn't get heard. He
suggested hearing HB 108 before deciding to move HB 132 forward.
REPRESENTATIVE ZULKOSKY noted that HB 108 was heard on April 9,
2021, and said the committee substitute for HB 132 was before
the committee because the sponsor of HB 108 didn't want to move
both bills at the same time, but wanted to encourage
apprenticeship in Alaska. She stated her support for HB 132.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY reported that she spoke with the sponsor of
HB 108, and that he expressed to her that he is working with
school districts to acquire information relating to the fiscal
note.
9:49:00 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Zulkosky, Hopkins,
Drummond, and Story voted in favor of moving CSHB 132(L&C), as
amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and
the accompanying zero fiscal note. Representatives Gillham and
Cronk voted against it. Therefore, CSHB 132(EDC) was reported
out of the House Education Standing Committee by a vote of 4-2.
9:49:41 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Education Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 9:50 a.m.