HB 106-TEACHER RECRUITMENT; LUMP SUM PAYMENT  8:51:24 AM CO-CHAIR ALLARD announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 106, "An Act authorizing lump sum payments for certain teachers as retention and recruitment incentives; and providing for an effective date." 8:51:36 AM CO-CHAIR ALLARD opened public testimony on HB 106. After ascertaining no one wished to testify, she closed public testimony. 8:52:25 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT acknowledged missing the amendment deadline but said she had prepared a conceptual amendment to HB 106. 8:52:36 AM The committee took an at-ease from 8:52 a.m. to 8:54 a.m. 8:54:05 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1 to HB 106. 8:54:20 AM REPRESENTATIVE PRAX objected. 8:54:31 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT wished to incorporate the language about allowing Legislative Legal Services to make any conforming changes. She added that Amendment 1 makes the lump sum payments a permanent feature of the system. It removes the three years and makes it wide open that teachers who commit to teaching in Alaska would receive the payments without an end date, she said. 8:55:22 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCKAY noted that Conceptual Amendment 1 may dramatically change the fiscal note. 8:55:45 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT stated that there is not a fiscal note. 8:56:19 AM HEIDI TESHNER, Acting Commissioner, Department of Education and Early Development (DEED), answered questions regarding the discussion on a fiscal note. She said that $57.9 million per year is the grant funding total for the teacher incentive pay. 8:56:58 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT explained that the purpose of the amendment is to take a good idea and make it a permanent idea. It is known that the state is not competitive in its pay to teachers, and it is one way to increase the pay and to keep it there. Her concern with the bill, she said, is the existing retirement system not requiring people to stay more than five years, and having this incentive for only three years is another way to support teachers. 8:57:52 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCKAY recalled that the purpose of the bill was to do a pilot program for three years and determine whether the raises had an effect on retention. MS. TESHNER responded that is correct. The intent of the bill was to create a study to see if it is something that improves retention. 8:58:39 AM REPRESENTATIVE STORY offered her opinion that the ability to raise teacher pay and keep that going is something very much needed. She confirmed her support for the amendment. 8:59:28 AM CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE appreciated the amendment; however, HB 106 was designed to be a pilot program, and it may not be the appropriate way to raise pay for teachers. He stated he would not support the amendment. 9:00:13 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked Ms. Teshner how it would be known whether the three-year incentive worked or not. MS. TESHER responded it would be learned through the process of the data collected and then reporting it out. 9:01:20 AM REPRESENTATIVE PRAX offered his opinion that it is not a good idea to negotiate salaries through the "central authority." 9:02:00 AM CO-CHAIR ALLARD pointed out that when unions are involved, salaries are not negotiated for the teachers, it is done through the school districts. She offered her belief that is something individual districts must do, and although she supported incentives, she stated the bill is good as-is. 9:02:25 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT stated that perhaps Conceptual Amendment 1 could have been a little different, but her concern is that there is no fiscal note or study at the end. She said it seemed like a good idea to provide this incentive so the districts could use it as a recruiting tool. 9:02:58 AM REPRESENTATIVE PRAX maintained his objection. 9:03:03 AM A roll call vote was taken. Representatives McCormick, Himschoot, and Story voted in favor of Conceptual Amendment 1. Representatives Prax, McKay, Allard, and Ruffridge voted against it. Therefore, Conceptual Amendment 1 failed to be adopted by a vote of 3-4. 9:03:42 AM The committee took an at-ease from 9:03 a.m. to 9:04 a.m. 9:04:22 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 2 to HB 106. 9:04:31 AM REPRESENTATIVE PRAX objected. REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT spoke to amendment 2 and related her experiences as a teacher. She said in addition to teachers, there are shortages in support staff; therefore, she wanted to open the idea up to include paraprofessionals and support staff. 9:05:31 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCKAY opined that the proposed amendment was a similar problem to Conceptual Amendment 1 in that there is no fiscal note to estimate additional costs. 9:05:54 AM REPRESENTATIVE STORY offered her belief that it is an important part of the puzzle for students doing very well to have consistent help through support staff. She opined it would be a good incentive and investment in Alaska's resources for this amendment, even though the fiscal note would increase. 9:06:28 AM REPRESENTATIVE PRAX commented that adding paraprofessionals increases the risk of getting nothing "if we push too far." 9:07:12 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT offered her insight that the best way to increase salaries is an increase in the base student allocation (BSA), but since that is uncertain, this [amendment] is one way to make sure staff are incentivized to stay and it would increase recruitment for districts. She brought up an example of when the Department of Law (DOL) did a 20 percent increase, and they now have the lowest vacancy rate of any department; therefore, incentives work. 9:08:07 AM REPRESENTATIVE PRAX maintained his objection. 9:08:12 AM A roll call vote was taken. Representatives McCormick, Himschoot, and Story voted in favor of Conceptual Amendment 2. Representatives Allard, Prax, McKay, and Ruffridge voted against it. Therefore, Conceptual Amendment 2 failed to be adopted by a vote of 3-4. 9:08:43 AM CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE moved to report HB 106 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. 9:09:01 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK objected. He stated he supported HB 106, but offered his belief that it is not a good replacement to increase the BSA. He added that in Bethel, he was told by educators it was something they did not want; they wanted good benefits and an increase to the BSA. REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK removed his objection. 9:09:55 AM REPRESENTATIVE STORY objected. She mirrored Representative McCormick's comments that it should not be a replacement for funding the BSA. She said that working conditions are very important for Alaska's teachers and students to thrive; therefore, we must keep up with increasing costs, which also has a lot to do with local control. She briefly mentioned the practices other states have attempted to adopt. REPRESENTATIVE STORY removed her objection. 9:12:07 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT stated that her objection lies in the fact this creates a difficult position to be in, and she acknowledges that teachers are underpaid and any time there is a chance to increase their salaries, it should be done. On the other hand, she said, a way to do that is to fund the BSA and provide increases on a regular basis to fund the schools and the salaries. 9:12:55 AM CO-CHAIR ALLARD offered her support for teachers and added that there is no guarantee that the BSA would increase teacher salaries; that is up to their individual unions and school boards. She said she believed this increase is an incentive and recruitment tool, as stated in the bill, and reiterated she is in strong support of HB 106. 9:13:19 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT maintained her objection. 9:13:23 AM A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Story, Allard, Prax, McCormick, McKay, Himschoot, and Ruffridge voted in favor of HB 106. Therefore, HB 106 was reported out of the House Education Standing Committee by a vote of 7-0. 9:14:20 AM The committee took an at-ease from 9:14 a.m. to 9:15 a.m. 9:15:02 AM CO-CHAIR ALLARD announced that HB 106 passed from committee.