Legislature(2021 - 2022)ADAMS 519
04/13/2022 01:30 PM House FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB272 | |
| HB273 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 272 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 273 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 13, 2022
1:34 p.m.
1:34:57 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Merrick called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:34 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Neal Foster, Co-Chair
Representative Kelly Merrick, Co-Chair
Representative Dan Ortiz, Vice-Chair
Representative Ben Carpenter
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative DeLena Johnson
Representative Andy Josephson
Representative Bart LeBon
Representative Sara Rasmussen via teleconference
Representative Steve Thompson via teleconference
Representative Adam Wool
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Andi Story, Sponsor; Ariel Svetlik, Staff,
Representative Andi Story; Kelly O'Sullivan, Analyst,
Legislative Finance Division.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Heidi Teshner, Director, Finance and Support Services,
Department of Education and Early Development.
SUMMARY
HB 272 INCREASE BASE STUDENT ALLOCATION
CSHB 272(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with
three "do pass" recommendations, four "no
recommendation" recommendations, and two "amend"
recommendations and with a new fiscal impact note
by the Department of Education and Early
Development and one previously published zero
fiscal note: FN1 (EED).
HB 273 INCREASE BASE STUDENT ALLOC. INFLATION
CSHB 273(EDC) was REPORTED out of committee with
five "do pass" recommendations, three "do not
pass" recommendations, and one "no
recommendation" recommendation and with one
previously published zero fiscal note: FN1 (EED);
and one previously published fiscal impact note:
FN2 (EED).
Co-Chair Merrick reviewed the agenda for the meeting. The
committee would resume with hearing amendments for HB 272.
HOUSE BILL NO. 272
"An Act relating to education; increasing the base
student allocation; and providing for an effective
date."
1:35:33 PM
Co-Chair Merrick indicated the committee had begun the
amendment process on April 6, 2022.
1:35:51 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ANDI STORY, SPONSOR, wanted to discuss the
amendments being offered. She opposed Amendment 1 because
it changed the foundation formula without vetting the
effects. She relayed that the Legislative Finance Division
(LFD) estimated that the amendment would add $11 million
for correspondence to the cost of the bill. The intent of
the bill was only to increase the Base Student
Allocation(BSA) and not to open the formula. She proposed
the increase due to the downward pressure of fixed costs
that was eroding the base formula and to increase student
achievement. She was unsure of the ramifications of
changing the formula.
Co-Chair Merrick interjected that Co-Chair Foster and
Representative Carpenter had joined the meeting.
Representative Story continued that the rest of the
amendments were policy choices. She shared that even though
inflation increased 8 percent since the last BSA increase
(6 years prior)she only proposed an increase of 4 percent
because the body was interested in making other strategic
investments in certain areas such as reading. She had also
heard discussions regarding increased investment in Career
and Technical Education (CTE). Therefore, the 4 percent was
a concession for the occasion to address fix costs but left
money for other opportunities. She also emphasized the
importance of a two-year funding mechanism or forward
funding. She believed that forward funding education
created stability and enabled school districts to plan with
certainty and meet the special needs of students. She
thanked the committee for hearing the bill. She thought
education policy and investments in the children of Alaska
was critical.
1:41:08 PM
Representative Wool noted that Representative Story had
mentioned the inflation increase of 8 percent. He asked if
she meant 8 percent cumulative inflation since the last
increase. He was trying to better understand the formula
calculation. Representative Story deferred the answer to
her staff.
1:42:34 PM
ARIEL SVETLIK, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE ANDI STORY, responded
that the 8 percent inflation Representative Story
referenced was the cumulative inflation between FY 2017 and
FY 2022. She added that the bill proposed a 4 percent (3.8
percent) increase for FY 2023 with another 0.9 percent in
FY 2024 that totaled $71 million in FY 2024.
Co-Chair Merrick asked Representative Johnson to restate
her amendment.
1:43:19 PM
Representative Johnson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1,
32-LS1365\I.2 (Marx, 3/31/22) (copy on file):
Page 1, line 1, following "education;":
Insert "relating to funding for correspondence
programs;"
Page 1, following line 3:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Section 1. AS 14.17.430 is amended to read:
Sec. 14.17.430. State funding for correspondence
study. Except as provided in AS 14.17.400(b), funding
for the state centralized correspondence study program
or a district correspondence program, including a
district that offers a statewide correspondence study
program, includes an allocation from the public
education fund in an amount calculated by using
[MULTIPLYING] the ADM of the correspondence program
reported under AS 14.17.500(a) and 14.17.600(a) [BY 90
PERCENT]."
Page 1, line 4:
Delete "Section 1"
Insert "Sec. 2"
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 1, line 10:
Delete "Section 1 of this Act takes"
Insert "Sections 1 and 2 of this Act take"
Page 1, line 11:
Delete "Section 2"
Insert "Section 3"
Co-Chair Merrick OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Johnson reviewed the amendment. She
explained that the amendment would fund correspondence at
100 percent of the current base formula instead of the
current 90 percent. She maintained that the amendment did
not change any elements to the formula; it was merely an
increase. She offered that roughly 19 thousand students
were in correspondence programs in Alaska, which saved the
state funding. She explained that certain multipliers were
not applied to correspondence students. She thought that
the hybrid model of instruction was working well. Students
were spending more time at home. She argued that it made
sense for the money to follow the student.
1:46:06 PM
Vice-Chair Ortiz asked for the source of Representative
Johnson's comment that Amendment 1 would not change the
formula. He commented that brick-and-mortar schools had
inherently higher costs. He noted that correspondence and
home school students often benefitted from the brick-and-
mortar schools by participating in activities sponsored by
the schools, engaging in sports, and in the use of the
facilities. The school district paid for the costs of
coaches, activity directors, utilities, etc. Representative
Johnson offered that her staff could speak to the formula.
She agreed that students were using the school facilities.
She indicated that the homeschool funding was set by the
district and not by the state therefore the district could
retain more money for utilities. Some schools had more
local students and others had more remote students. She
surmised that school districts had found ways to meet
students needs across the state. Some school districts
offered its own correspondence programs. She stated that
remote students were able to use their allotted money on
coaches or other activities offered at the local school.
Therefore, the increase made sense.
Co-Chair Merrick asked if Vice-Chair Ortiz wanted to hear
from LFD. Vice-Chair Ortiz replied in the affirmative.
1:51:00 PM
KELLY O'SULLIVAN, ANALYST, LEGISLATIVE FINANCE DIVISION,
asked Vice-Chair Ortiz to restate his question. Vice-Chair
Ortiz restated his question and asked whether Amendment 1
would affect the formula. Ms. O'Sullivan understood that it
only changed one portion of the formula. Vice-Chair Ortiz
suggested that she was saying that it changed the formula.
Ms. O'Sullivan responded in the affirmative.
1:52:29 PM
Representative Wool understood that the amendment did not
change the BSA number it only changed the amount from 90
percent to 100 percent. He opposed the amendment. He agreed
that correspondence students saved money. He deduced that
the student teacher ratio was much different and there were
no building costs. He noted that remote students
participated in sports and activities at the local school.
He was concerned that the amendment would add to the budget
rather than decreasing the amount because funding for
brick-and-mortar schools was not being decreased as an
offset. He spoke to hearing from school districts that they
were in dire need financially. He believed that
correspondence schools were currently very profitable
because of the COVID pandemic, and he had not heard
testimony from them that they needed additional funding. He
observed that in Fairbanks, every correspondence student
received $2,000 or $2,500 in order to purchase curriculum,
music, and other activities. He was concerned that with
increased funding more families would take their children
out of brick-and-mortar schools. He supported a robust
education in traditional schools.
Co-Chair Merrick invited Ms. O'Sullivan to comment.
Ms. O'Sullivan indicated that Representative Wool was
correct, and the amendment added to the cost of education.
Representative Wool asked about the impact of going from 90
percent funding to 100 percent for 19 thousand children.
Ms. O'Sullivan responded that the amount would be $11.5
million.
Representative Josephson asked about the impact per
student. Ms. O'Sullivan had not done the math.
Representative Josephson suggested that it would be about
$579 per student. He suggested the bill currently provided
about $280 per student. Ms. O'Sullivan asked if he was
asking what the BSA increase was. Representative Josephson
restated that the bill increased the BSA by $280 per
student. Ms. O'Sullivan answered in the affirmative and
added that in the first year the increase was $223 and in
the second year it increased to $278 per student.
Representative Josephson deemed that the correspondence
increase doubled the amount per student. Ms. O'Sullivan
responded that the amount per correspondence student was
$593. Representative Josephson suggested that if the bill
passed the correspondence also gained an increase via the
BSA increase and it would be a benefit on top of a benefit.
Ms. O'Sullivan replied in the affirmative
Representative Carpenter asked what portion of the student
allotment the correspondence programs would receive. Ms.
O'Sullivan deferred the answer to the Department of
Education and Early Development (DEED).
1:59:53 PM
HEIDI TESHNER, DIRECTOR, FINANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICES,
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT (via
teleconference), responded that it would be up to the
school district to determine whether they would change the
student allotment or provide more services directly to the
correspondence students.
Representative Carpenter deduced that the district
determined what portion of the 90 percent for
correspondence students went to the students. Ms. Teshner
responded, "That's correct."
Representative Johnson commented that the amendment was not
an either or option and was not attempting to take away
anything from students. She noted the teacher shortage in
the state in relation to the benefits of correspondence.
2:01:28 PM
AT EASE
2:02:20 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Johnson highlighted that the district still
received the funding and would decide how the money was
distributed and spent because it was under local control.
She emphasized that correspondence was not in competition
with brick-and-mortar schools. The amendment provided
additional funding to districts and would allow for a
hybrid system. She argued that it was a huge commitment to
home school children, and she did not anticipate a huge
increase in homeschoolers due to the increase.
Correspondence did not take away the responsibility of the
districts. She thought correspondence was the way of the
future and the amendment leveled the playing field. She
indicated that the Matanuska Susitna (MAT-Su) School
District had a truancy rate of 30 percent. She opined that
the pandemic had changed things and the traditional brick-
and-mortar model might become a hybrid. All students were
equal, and the state was trying to educate them in the
unique environment of Alaska. She wanted to see a level
playing field for students. She had done correspondence as
a child and thought that Alaska had offered it first in the
nation. The amendment would bring more money into the
district. It was evident during the pandemic that
correspondence school was positive for some. She noted that
the Mat-Su school district had created its own
correspondence school as a response to demand. She
maintained that the model was working.
2:06:48 PM
Representative Carpenter asked Ms. Teshner to speak to the
cost-sharing arrangements between brick-and-mortar schools
and correspondence programs.
Ms. Teshner responded that if a student was enrolled in
both models splitting the time evenly, the brick-and-mortar
school would get 50 percent of the formula and for
correspondence they would receive 50 percent of the 90
percent funding. Representative Carpenter was aware that
his district had both brick-and-mortar schools and
correspondence programs. He deduced that if a child moved
into a homeschool program the district received the
reduction in funding. Ms. Teshner replied that since the
student was no longer served by the brick-and-mortar the
cost of providing the services shifted but she agreed that
he was relatively correct because the brick-and-mortar cost
more to run than correspondence. Representative Carpenter
restated his question. He was talking about the per student
allocation; the BSA. He surmised that if a student decided
to participate in correspondence and leave the brick-and-
mortar school, the district would realize a reduction in
funding. Ms. Teshner suggested that if a student was
enrolled in a brick-and-mortar school at the time of the
count and shifted to a correspondence program after the
count, the student would be generating less money for the
district. However, it depended on when the shift happened
if it happened after the 20 day count period-the-brick and
mortar BSA would apply. Representative Carpenter assumed
that the change happened between years. He calculated that
the BSA did not change in the first year. In the following
year, if they switched to a correspondence course the
school district would receive 90 percent of the BSA. Ms.
Teshner replied that he was correct.
2:12:26 PM
Representative LeBon deduced that a student who was
enrolled in certain courses and sports and received his
core classes via correspondence the funding associated with
the non-correspondence activities followed the district. He
asked if his statement was true.
Ms. Teshner indicated the student would be jointly enrolled
in brick-and-mortar and correspondence and funding would
come from both correspondence and traditional education.
Representative LeBon concluded that the money did follow
the school district.
2:14:26 PM
AT EASE
2:22:49 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Johnson pointed out that the district would
still manage the funding and determine what share was
distributed to a correspondence program. She offered that
if a student spent half a day or more in the brick-and-
mortar school and half a day at correspondence it counted
as full-time student at a district as far as the district
receiving the add-ons or cost adjustment factors to the
BSA. The other BSA factors were not being changed at all.
However, for any correspondence student doing more than
half of their education in correspondence, the district did
not receive the additional BSA funding for the student. She
ascertained that correspondence was beneficial to the
district. She claimed that Amendment 1 brought students
into parity and did not harm the district.
2:25:20 PM
Representative Wool cited Representative Carpenters
scenario and indicated that a student enrolling in
correspondence in a following year was a decrease to the
district since the multipliers were lost; it was a
significant reduction. The largest recipients of the 10
percent increase were the Idea, Raven, and Mat-Su programs.
He argued that the simplest solution would be to raise the
BSA, and all children would receive an equal increase. He
reiterated that he did not believe correspondence was
broken and they were not requesting increases like the
brick-and-mortar schools. He could not justify the
increase.
Representative Johnson relayed that Amendment 1 did not
change the formula. The formula amounts stayed the same but
merely brought correspondence student into parity with
other students. She opined that there was a new way of
teaching and learning and that people had adapted. The
increase was not significant. She calculated that the
projected education spending total was $1.19 billion, and
the amendment increased the total to $2.06 billion. She
argued that the amendment would pay dividends for districts
and students.
Co-Chair Merrick MAINTAINED the OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Carpenter, Johnson, LeBon, Foster
OPPOSED: Ortiz, Wool, Edgmon, Josephson, Merrick
The MOTION FAILED (5/5). Amendment 1 FAILED to be ADOPTED.
[Representative Rasmussen was absent from the vote.]
2:29:40 PM
Representative LeBon MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2,
32-LS1365\I.1 (Marx, 3/14/22) (copy on file):
Page 1, line 5:
Delete "$6,153"
Insert "$6,181"
Page 1, lines 7 - 9:
Delete all material.
Page 1, line 10:
Delete "Section 1 of this"
Insert "This"
Page 1, line 11:
Delete all material.
Representative Josephson OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative LeBon reviewed the amendment. He informed
the committee that the amendment increased the BSA from
$5.93 thousand per student by approximately $251 to $6.18
thousand. The second proposal eliminated the increase in FY
2024. The effective date for the change was July 1, 2022.
He commented that school districts were asking for
immediate relief and the amendment increased the amount in
HB 272. The increase was less than 5 percent and was more
immediate for the school districts.
2:31:18 PM
Vice-Chair Ortiz asked for the overall fiscal impact. He
wanted the net effect since the amendment increased the
first year increase but eliminated the second year
increase. Representative LeBon indicated that the amount
would be $7.1 million. Vice-Chair Ortiz asked if the total
increase would be over 2 years. He understood the increase
in the first year but wanted Representative LeBon to factor
in the elimination of the second year increase. He
discerned that there would be a net decrease from the
original bill. Representative LeBon explained that he was
splitting the difference between the increased amounts for
FY 23 and FY 24.
2:33:38 PM
AT EASE
2:35:29 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Josephson argued that the bill was not
enough to meet the districts needs and the amendment was a
cut to the bill which he could not support.
Representative Carpenter agreed that the amendment was a
cut to the bill. He calculated that the amendment cut the
amount from $71 million to $64.2 million. He delineated
that FY 2025 through FY 2028 would each be $6.9 million
less than the original bill but still offered an increase
to the current BSA. He ascertained that if the amendment
passed the BSA increase would continue into the out years.
2:37:13 PM
Representative Wool felt that it was an increase to current
law but a decrease to the bill. He would not support the
amendment. He heard from his school districts that they
were in need and the bill was not enough. He opposed the
amendment.
Representative LeBon understood he was proposing a
reduction to the bill proposal. He voiced that next year if
the legislature chose to increase the BSA they could. He
thought giving the districts some more relief in the
present was the benefit of the amendment.
Representative Josephson MAINTAINED the OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Carpenter, Johnson, LeBon
OPPOSED: Wool, Edgmon, Josephson, Ortiz, Foster, Merrick
The MOTION FAILED (4/6). Amendment 2 FAILED to be ADOPTED.
[Representative Rasmussen was absent from the vote.]
2:39:23 PM
Representative Josephson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 3,
32-LS1365\I.3 (Wallace/Marx, 4/2/22)(copy on file):
Page 1, line 8:
Delete "$6,208"
Insert "$6,376"
Representative LeBon OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Josephson reviewed the amendment. He
commended the bills sponsor for her leadership on
increasing the BSA. He communicated that the issue was a
math problem and the BSA was not raised since 2017. He
voiced that there was a sense in the legislature that
inflation was not real. He recounted testimony from March
7, 2022, from the Fairbanks School District (FSD)
Superintendent, Andy Degras, and Chief Operating Officer.
He highlighted several of his important points. He relayed
that Mr. Degras stated that the FSD deficit for FY 23 was
$19 million and the two year deficit was $23 million. He
was going to deploy a step down approach and would be
executing draconian cuts. The COVID related relief did not
cover deficits and would be 90 percent exhausted by June 1
of 2023. The district was closing 3 schools. He furthered
that cuts would be made to the classroom, counselors, e-
learning staff, instructional aides, administrative staff
and assistant principals, and activities coordinators. He
also cited utility and other increases and that fuel alone
cost $1 million. In FY 23, the district would receive $5.3
million from HB 272. In the following year it would only
offer the district an increase of $3 million. He added that
salary increases were not included in the numbers.
Representative Josephson continued that he supported full
funding of oil tax credits in the amount of over $500
million. He was aware of the availability of State and
Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) funds [under the
American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA)] that could supplant other
funding needs. He believed that the $57 million increase
was affordable for the state, and he appealed to Mr.
Degras testimony regarding the factual need for the
funding increase.
2:45:28 PM
Representative Wool agreed with Representative Josephson.
He believed that school funding should be adjusted for
inflation. He supported the amendment.
Representative Josephson provided wrap-up. He asked for the
committees support and noted that the amendment took the
amount up to 7.8 percent match for inflation but, inflation
had been about 9 percent.
2:47:12 PM
AT EASE
2:47:35 PM
RECONVENED
Representative LeBon MAINTAINED the OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Thompson, Wool, Josephson, Ortiz, Foster
OPPOSED: Carpenter, Edgmon, Johnson, LeBon, Merrick
The MOTION FAILED (5/5). Amendment 3 FAILED to be ADOPTED.
[Representative Rasmussen was absent from the vote.]
2:48:32 PM
Representative Josephson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 4,
32-LS1365\I.4 (Wallace/Marx, 4/2/22) (copy on file):
Page 1, line 8:
Delete "$6,208"
Insert "$6,285"
Representative LeBon OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Josephson reviewed the amendment. He
indicated that the amendment would increase the BSA over FY
22 and spread it over two years. The increase was more
incremental but valuable.
Representative Wool noted that the amount was less than the
previous amendment. He asked for a brief explanation of the
methodology.
Co-Chair Merrick noted Representative Rasmussen had joined
the meeting.
Representative Josephson responded to Representative Wool's
question and noted that in the first year the 4 percent
increase was close to the bill sponsors increase and the
second year increase was larger than the proposal in the
sponsors bill. The total amount in FY 24 was roughly $85
million.
2:50:47 PM
Representative Wool asked if FY 23 would be left the same
as the original bill. Representative Josephson responded in
the affirmative.
2:51:00 PM
AT EASE
2:53:16 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Josephson provided wrap-up comments. He
offered that the amendment would increase the second year
funding. He did not know what both bodies would support. He
asked the committee to look at the facts and decide.
Representative LeBon MAINTAINED the OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Wool, Josephson, Ortiz, Foster
OPPOSED: Carpenter, Edgmon, Johnson, LeBon, Rasmussen,
Thompson, Merrick
The MOTION FAILED (4/7). Amendment 4 FAILED to be ADOPTED.
2:55:03 PM
Co-Chair Merrick MOVED to RECIND action on Amendment 3.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Co-Chair Merrick asked for a roll call on Amendment 3.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion on Amendment 3.
IN FAVOR: Edgmon, Josephson, Ortiz, Wool, Foster
OPPOSED: Carpenter, Johnson, LeBon, Rasmussen, Thompson,
Merrick
The MOTION FAILED (5/6). Amendment 3 FAILED to be adopted.
2:55:56 PM
AT EASE
2:59:05 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Johnson MOVED to RECIND action on
Amendment 1.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative Johnson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1,
32-LS1365\I.2 (Marx, 3/31/22) (copy on file):
Page 1, line 1, following "education;":
Insert "relating to funding for correspondence
programs;"
Page 1, following line 3:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Section 1. AS 14.17.430 is amended to read:
Sec. 14.17.430. State funding for correspondence
study. Except as provided in AS 14.17.400(b), funding
for the state centralized correspondence study program
or a district correspondence program, including a
district that offers a statewide correspondence study
program, includes an allocation from the public
education fund in an amount calculated by using
[MULTIPLYING] the ADM of the correspondence program
reported under AS 14.17.500(a) and 14.17.600(a) [BY 90
PERCENT]."
Page 1, line 4:
Delete "Section 1"
Insert "Sec. 2"
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 1, line 10:
Delete "Section 1 of this Act takes"
Insert "Sections 1 and 2 of this Act take"
Page 1, line 11:
Delete "Section 2"
Insert "Section 3"
Representative Josephson OBJECTED.
Representative Johnson reiterated her explanation of
Amendment 1.
3:00:40 PM
Representative Josephson pointed out that he had not
received any requests or letters asking for the increase.
He understood that the formula had been 80 percent but was
increased to 90 percent and felt that the need for the
increase was not established. He related that the committee
had just rejected an increase of $355 per year and the
increase in the amendment was $579. He did not see the
logic in the amendment. He opposed the amendment.
Representative Wool wanted to help all students as well. He
countered that an increase to the BSA would help all
students. Correspondence schools received 90 percent but
had much less expenses and overhead. He noted that the
Galena School District would receive $3.2 million and had
7.3 thousand students enrolled in its correspondence
program. The school district had fewer buildings than in
Anchorage but was receiving much more funding. He stated
that Fairbanks had a lot of in person students and would
only receive $380 thousand from the amendment. He noted
that the Mat-Su School District would receive $1.6 million
and had 2000 students in its district correspondence
school. He reiterated that correspondence costs were lower.
He would rather increase the BSA for all rather than
picking a few winners and losers. He opposed the
amendment.
3:04:19 PM
Vice-Chair Ortiz associated himself with the remarks of the
two previous speakers. He offered that how the amendment
would impact districts and homeschool students was highly
variable. He opposed the amendment.
Representative Carpenter cited Representative Johnsons
data that 19,366 students were affected by the amendment.
He surmised that the number of correspondence students
affected a number of schools in the state. Correspondence
had the highest growing demand in the states school
system, and they were being denied 10 percent of the
funding. He interpreted the amendment as whatever method
the parents decided for their children the schools would be
held harmless. He felt that the amendment was fair.
Representative Wool suggested that 19,000 students in
correspondence represented students and not schools. He
argued that they were not in brick-and-mortar schools and
the overhead was much less. The cost of operating a school
with a 25 to 1 teacher to student ratio was much different
and it was unfair to suggest the amendment leveled the
playing field. A correspondence school had one teacher to
150 students and was not equal to a brick-and-mortar
school. He emphasized that correspondence schools were
making money, or they would ask for more. He stressed that
correspondence was not for every child and many hated
remote learning during the pandemic. He wanted to maintain
brick-and-mortar schools. He continued to argue that
correspondence schools were making money.
Representative Johnson wanted to address the numbers. She
voiced that anyone from any of the districts could be using
their opportunity to join another district through
correspondence and the programs were diverse throughout the
state. She thanked Idea and the Galena School District for
educating students around the state. She restated that the
school district still received money for correspondence
students and chose the amount to dispense to the parents
for correspondence. For those participating in a hybrid
system the district still received some amount of funding.
She felt strongly about the issue. She had seen the
correspondence programs grow and change over the years. She
reiterated that the state had an attendance issue it needed
to address. Society was changing and hybrid education was
becoming more common. What was not changing was the desire
to educate Alaska's students at the same level and with
high standards. The school districts maintained the
responsibility and worked with correspondence students.
3:12:47 PM
Representative Josephson MAINTAINED the OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Johnson, LeBon, Rasmussen, Thompson, Carpenter,
Foster
OPPOSED: Edgmon, Josephson, Ortiz, Wool, Merrick
The MOTION PASSED (6/5). Amendment 1 was ADOPTED.
3:13:36 PM
Representative Josephson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 5,
32-LS1365\I.5 (Wallace/Marx, 4/2/22) (copy on file):
Page 1, line 5:
Delete "$6,153"
Insert "$6,285"
Page 1, lines 7 - 9:
Delete all material.
Renumber the following bill sections accordingly.
Page 1, line 10:
Delete "Section 1 of this"
Insert "This"
Page 1, line 11:
Delete all material.
Co-Chair Merrick OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative Josephson reviewed the amendment. He
explained that the amendment aligned with Representative
LeBons comments that the school districts needed immediate
help. The amendment offered a 6 percent increase in one
year beginning on July 1, 2022. He noted that in his
district the Anchorage School District was doing well in FY
23 due to COVID relief money that would run out in the
following year. He cared that other districts around the
state were struggling. He was perplexed that the Fairbanks
School District was not fully funded when he knew the state
had enough resources in the current year. He implored the
committee to adopt the amendment and warned of a lawsuit if
it did not pass.
.
3:16:02 PM
Representative Wool calculated that Amendment 5 added about
$132 per student to the BSA and the prior amendment added
roughly $600 per student. He believed that the amendment
provided the same opportunity as the prior amendment did
for the brick-and-mortar school students, which were the
majority of children in the state. He continued to offer
his support for the amendment. He thought the increase in
Amendment 5 was modest when compared to the increase for
correspondence students.
Co-Chair Merrick indicated that the $132 per student was in
addition to the increase in the bill. She asked whether the
statement was correct.
Representative Wool answered in the affirmative.
Co-Chair Merrick MAINTAINED the OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Josephson, Ortiz, Wool, Edgmon, Foster
OPPOSED: Johnson, LeBon, Rasmussen, Thompson, Carpenter,
Merrick
The MOTION FAILED (5/6). Amendment 5 FAILED to be ADOPTED.
Representative LeBon MOVED to RECIND action on Amendment 2.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
Representative LeBon MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 2,
32-LS1365\I.1 (Marx, 3/14/22) (copy on file):
Page 1, line 5:
Delete "$6,153"
Insert "$6,181"
Page 1, lines 7 - 9:
Delete all material.
Page 1, line 10:
Delete "Section 1 of this"
Insert "This"
Page 1, line 11:
Delete all material.
Co-Chair Merrick OBJECTED for discussion.
Representative LeBon explained that his amendment would
address the immediate need of school districts. He urged
the committee to adopt Amendment 2.
3:19:37 PM
AT EASE
3:30:01 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Josephson could not support the amendment
because it was a cut to the overall bill. The opportunity
to increase the BSA was rare, and he did not want to
approve an increase that was not granted in perpetuity.
Representative LeBon provided wrap-up comments. He
commented that the previous speaker had painted a dire
picture for the Fairbanks School District. He restated that
his amendment addressed the immediate need. The state would
know more about its financial position in the following
year.
Representative Josephson MAINTAINED the OBJECTION.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: LeBon, Rasmussen, Thompson, Carpenter, Johnson
OPPOSED: Josephson, Ortiz, Wool, Edgmon, Merrick, Foster
The MOTION FAILED (5/6). Amendment 2 FAILED to be ADOPTED.
3:32:46 PM
Co-Chair Foster MOVED to report CSHB 272(FIN) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSHB 272(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with three "do
pass" recommendations, four "no recommendation"
recommendations, and two "amend" recommendations and with a
new fiscal impact note by the Department of Education and
Early Development and one previously published zero fiscal
note: FN1 (EED).
3:33:15 PM
AT EASE
3:34:37 PM
RECONVENED
HOUSE BILL NO. 273
"An Act relating to education; increasing the base
student allocation; and providing for an effective
date."
3:34:46 PM
Co-Chair Merrick indicated there were no amendments offered
for HB 273.
REPRESENTATIVE ANDI STORY, SPONSOR, relayed the purpose of
the bill. She voiced that the HB 273 linked the BSA
directly to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for urban Alaska
over a three year rolling average with a gap year. The gap
year was necessary because the official inflation figures
from the US Census Bureau arrived after districts sent its
budgets to its municipalities. She delineated that the
effective date of the bill was on July 1, 2024. Passage of
the bill would signal to communities that the legislature
realized that school districts faced fixed costs. The bill
also created a steady and predictable budget for the whole
school community and system. She felt that it was a modest
amount that allowed the legislature to invest in other
educational initiatives as well.
Co-Chair Foster MOVED to report CSHB 273(EDC) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSHB 273(EDC) was REPORTED out of committee with five "do
pass" recommendations, three "do not pass" recommendations,
and one "no recommendation" recommendation and with one
previously published zero fiscal note: FN1 (EED); and one
previously published fiscal impact note: FN2 (EED).
3:37:54 PM
AT EASE
3:38:34 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Merrick reviewed the agenda for the following
morning meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
3:38:53 PM
The meeting was adjourned at 3:38 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 272.HB 273 Public Testimony Rec'd by 041322.pdf |
HFIN 4/13/2022 1:30:00 PM |
HB 272 HB 273 |
| HB 272 Amendment 1 Backup 041322.pdf |
HFIN 4/13/2022 1:30:00 PM |
HB 272 |
| HB 272 Adopted Amendment 1 041422.pdf |
HFIN 4/13/2022 1:30:00 PM |
HB 272 |
| HB 272 Public Testimony Rec'd by 041322.pdf |
HFIN 4/13/2022 1:30:00 PM |
HB 272 |