HOUSE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES STANDING COMMITTEE January 28, 1993 3:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Rep. Cynthia Toohey, Co-Chair Rep. Con Bunde, Co-Chair Rep. Gary Davis, Vice Chair Rep. Tom Brice, arrived later Rep. Bettye Davis, arrived later Rep. Pete Kott Rep. Irene Nicholia Rep. Harley Olberg Rep. Al Vezey MEMBERS ABSENT None OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT Rep. Ed Willis COMMITTEE CALENDAR Alaska Board of Education - Alaska 2000 Mechanics of the School Foundation Formula by the Alaska Association of School Business Officials WITNESS REGISTER Joe Montgomery, Chairman State Board of Education 1048 Beech Lane Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Phone: (907) 272-9339 Position Statement: Introduced board members and explained how the board was appointed; was available to answer questions Don Fancher P.O. Box 2027 Bethel, Alaska 99559 Phone: (907) 543-3121 Position Statement: State Board of Education member Robert Walp, Second Vice Chair State Board of Education 804 P St. #4 Anchorage, Alaska 99510-3252 Phone: (907) 265-5606 Position Statement: Available to answer questions John Hotzfield 5890 Liberty Court Wasilla, Alaska 99687-9345 Phone: (907) 376-6445 Position Statement: State Board of Education member June Nelson P.O. Box 158 Kotzebue, Alaska 99752-0158 Phone: (907) 442-3501 Position Statement: State Board of Education member Judy Norton 9824 Atka Circle Eagle River, Alaska 99577 Phone: (907) 696-2477 Position Statement: State Board of Education member Karen Meehan 3640 Chiniak Bay Anchorage, Alaska 99515 Phone: (907) 344-0662 Position Statement: Student advisor on the State Board of Education Jerry Covey, Commissioner Alaska Department of Education 801 W. 10th St., Suite 200 Juneau, Alaska 99801-1894 Phone: (907) 465-2800 Position Statement: Explained the Alaska 2000 program Barbara Martin Assistant Superintendent of Business and Finance Fairbanks North Star Borough School District P.O. Box 1250 Fairbanks, Alaska 99707-1250 Phone: (907) 452-2000 Position Statement: Introduced members of the Alaska Association of School Business Officials (AASBO), including herself; described the foundation formula Janet Stokesbary, Director Finance and Accounting Anchorage School District 4600 DeBarr Ave. P.O. Box 196614 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6614 Phone: (907) 269-2394 Position Statement: Member of the AASBO Richard M. Swarner Executive Director, Business Management Kenai Peninsula Borough School District 44955 Ptarmigan Place Soldotna, Alaska 99699 Phone: (907) 262-4056 Position Statement: Member of the AASBO John Anttonen, Superintendent Hoonah School District P.O. Box 157 Hoonah, Alaska 99829 Phone: (907) 945-3611 Position Statement: Member of the AASBO Laraine Derr, Director of Business Juneau School District 10014 Crazy Horse Drive Juneau, Alaska 99801 Phone: (907) 463-1700 Position Statement: Member of the AASBO ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 93-7A, SIDE A Number 000 CO-CHAIR CYNTHIA TOOHEY called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. and noted members present. She announced that the purpose of the meeting was to hear a presentation from the State Board of Education on the Alaska 2000 proposals, followed by a presentation by the Alaska Association of School Business Officials on the mechanics of the Alaska school foundation formula. CHAIR TOOHEY introduced the members of the STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION who were present at the meeting. They were: Chairman Joe Montgomery and members Don Fancher, Robert Walp, John Hotzfield, June Nelson, Judy Norton, and Karen Meehan. She also welcomed members who were present from the ALASKA ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BUSINESS OFFICIALS: Barbara Martin, Richard Swarner, Janet Stokesbary, Laraine Derr, and John Anttonen. Number 072 JOE MONTGOMERY, CHAIRMAN OF THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, introduced himself. He explained that the seven-member board is appointed by the governor with the legislature's approval and meets 10 or 11 times a year, meeting around the state and in Juneau while the legislature is in session. MR. MONTGOMERY asked the board members who were present to introduce themselves and briefly describe their backgrounds. ROBERT WALP, of Anchorage, introduced himself as a former state director of telecommunications and a retired president of General Communications, Inc. JOHN HOTZFIELD, of the Palmer-Wasilla area, introduced himself as a Christian educator. KAREN MEEHAN introduced herself as a senior at Dimond High School in Anchorage and a nonvoting student member of the board. JUNE NELSON, a native of Kotzebue, said she represented rural educators. JUDY NORTON introduced herself as a teacher in the Anchorage School District in Eagle River. DON FANCHER, of Bethel, introduced himself as the newest member of the board. MR. MONTGOMERY noted that Dr. Roger O. Jarvis was on temporary duty with the U.S. Air Force and could not be present. Likewise, Patricia Norheim of Petersburg was unable to attend. Number 256 JERRY COVEY, COMMISSIONER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (DOE), began his detailed presentation on the Alaska 2000 initiative at Chair Toohey's invitation. COMMISSIONER COVEY presented a document explaining the Alaska 2000 program and the recommendations from the State Board of Education. (The document, incorporated herein, is identified as Attachment 1 and is on file in the House HESS committee room.) COMMISSIONER COVEY said the department had introduced its Alaska 2000 package, which consisted of four bills covering three major components. One was a large capital improvements budget aimed at addressing longstanding statewide construction needs and using the unreserved earnings of the permanent fund. He said no funding plan was initially included in the package, but as the Alaska 2000 committee did its work and received supportive public input, they decided to seek funding through the permanent fund. After the governor expressed a preference for the permanent fund earnings over long-term bonding debt, the committee approached the legislature. COMMISSIONER COVEY said the plan tries to spread about half of the $150 million through the top priority levels of capital projects, not just the top level, and others as funding remained. This was an effort to win statewide support for the proposal by giving each school district some benefit in the first two years and to perform some preventative maintenance that might save larger costs later. He then asked for questions. Number 328 REP. CON BUNDE asked for a point by point description of the Alaska 2000 program, starting with charter schools. COMMISSIONER COVEY said the charter school idea, which he had also helped Rep. Bettye Davis work on, was an effort to create alternatives to local public schools funded with public money and using public school teachers though requiring no additional money. Charter schools would have more latitude than regular schools in organization, in teaching methods and other factors as long as they followed all sate regulations. They would be established at the proposal of and with close involvement by parents. Number 350 REP. BUNDE asked whether parents would have the power to fire teachers. COMMISSIONER COVEY answered no; teachers in charter schools would remain as school district employees subject to regular personnel policies. Parents would more have influence over the programs and methods than over individual teachers. Commissioner Covey said he did not foresee parents having a disruptive influence, for example, firing teachers in the middle of a term. Number 375 CHAIR TOOHEY asked about the size and location of charter schools. COMMISSIONER COVEY responded that such issues would be up to the local board and subject to the provisions of the contract, but they could range from a single classroom to an entire school, or possibly in a different building, as long as it did not require additional funding. He said it might be possible for a group of parents to propose a partnership with an independent entity, such as a corporation or regional corporation, which could supplement the public funding. REP. BUNDE asked whether such an arrangement could lead to charter schools being much better funded than other schools. COMMISSIONER COVEY answered affirmatively. Number 410 REP. BUNDE asked whether students at charter schools would be required to pass standardized benchmark achievement tests. COMMISSIONER COVEY indicated that they would. He added that schools must be subject to open enrollment policies. CHAIR TOOHEY noted the meeting's time constraints and urged Commissioner Covey to continue his item-by-item presentation on the Alaska 2000 handout (Attachment 1). Number 444 COMMISSIONER COVEY moved on and said the department was soliciting proposals and had received previous legislative funding to determine interest and need for alternative schools for rural students. He stated the process would offer information on which to decide whether to build more boarding schools like Mt. Edgecumbe, or to build dormitories at some existing schools, or some other options. Number 464 REP. BUNDE inquired as to the fiscal impact of boarding schools. COMMISSIONER COVEY responded that a trial program with the Yukon Flats School District and Nenana city schools showed that it would cost as much to educate a child from the Yukon Flats area in a boarding school with more programs as it would to send him to a Nenana school. Number 475 COMMISSIONER COVEY said another element of the Alaska 2000 plan would be choice of postsecondary courses, allowing high schoolers to attend colleges, trade schools, or other institutions at no cost as part of their high school curriculum. This would encourage students to do well in secondary school and would only cost the state the price of tuition at the postsecondary institution, he said. (Rep. Tom Brice arrived at 3:28 p.m.) Number 503 COMMISSIONER COVEY continued his discussion on the program. He said the advisory board program would attempt to get more input from the public by establishing advisory boards for all schools, similar to those required for Rural Education Attendance Area (REAA) school districts. Local school districts would decide on such boards' powers and duties, and whether members would be elected or appointed. COMMISSIONER COVEY said the state board has heard testimony on the need to encourage parental responsibility and felt their plan should be a public information campaign to encourage them to help their preschool age children prepare for schooling. Number 529 REP. BUNDE commented that parental encouragement was crucial to any educational system. CHAIR TOOHEY countered that many two-job families do not have time to spend at school, despite the possible benefits to their children. Number 541 COMMISSIONER COVEY began a swifter description of the Alaska 2000 proposals, as outlined on page 3 of Attachment 1. The proposals had several elements aimed at improving student performance, including: developing performance standards for 10 subject areas; measuring student achievement by standardizes testing at three age levels; issuing state certificates of mastery to students who pass the third benchmark tests, in addition to issuing diplomas at graduation; increasing the school year from 180 days to 200 days by the year 2000; funding schools to provide 13 years of education; and encouraging communities to prepare preschool aged children for classroom education. COMMISSIONER COVEY expanded on the proposal to expand the school year, saying that the state board would provide more detail on how other expanded school year programs operate around the world and how students in them perform compared to Alaska's students. He said decisions are yet to be made about how the extra school time would be used, possibly alternate educational experiences such as on-the-job training. He predicted that the board would make more detailed proposals on this question in a few weeks. Number 600 REP. BUNDE expressed concern that a longer school year should not become large-scale child care. He said he looked forward to developing solid educational programs for the extra time. COMMISSIONER COVEY stated there is a need for a complete multi-agency approach to addressing the needs of early childhood education. He said an interagency group in Anchorage was working on such a plan. COMMISSIONER COVEY began discussing the proposals listed under the aim of keeping kids in school, as listed on page 3 of Attachment 1. He said a School Conservation Corps would combine public service with school work. Deregulating vocational programs and increasing funding would return some of the emphasis necessary to such programs lost during earlier budget cuts, he said. Number 639 REP. GARY DAVIS asked which vocational education regulations would be dropped. COMMISSIONER COVEY answered that the state has verification requirements for vocational education funding that according to some indications do not result in improved education. He said reducing the reporting load on school districts would save money that could be better used for instruction. REP. G. DAVIS expressed support of that approach and asked if certificates of mastery might be issued for vocational educational programs. COMMISSIONER COVEY answered no, but it was possible to include such recommendations in his proposals. REP. TOM BRICE asked whether state regulations that are obstructing vocational education programs were established by statute, and how the proposals would change the regulations. COMMISSIONER COVEY responded that there was no need to change statutes. He explained that regulations were established by the State Board of Education and are supported by statutes. At one time, both funding and expenditure for voc-ed programs were by category. Expenditure by category has since been eliminated, and the proposals would also eliminate requirements for categorical funding for voc-ed programs. He said the changes would not decrease funding for voc-ed programs. Number 682 COMMISSIONER COVEY said reporting student contact time by hours instead of days was aimed at allowing school districts more allocating and reporting flexibility. REP. BUNDE asked whether the residential high school proposal would conflict with the Molly Hootch decision. TAPE 93-7A, SIDE B Number 000 COMMISSIONER COVEY said it did not pose any legal problems. The state has complied with the decision and affords rural students access to local schools. But some students want more programs than are available locally. He mentioned the 300 student waiting list at Mt. Edgecumbe. Number 040 REP. IRENE NICHOLIA commented that if many students transferred away from Molly Hootch schools they may have to close, requiring all students to go elsewhere for educations. COMMISSIONER COVEY acknowledged that possibility. He said the state board was responding to requests from parents and they would try to avoid skimming off certain students. Number 082 REP. NICHOLIA mentioned deregulating vocational education. She expressed her belief that it was more important to have certified teachers in the classrooms and noncertified vocational instructors teaching voc-ed classes than to have a noncertified voc-ed instructor teaching academic classes. COMMISSIONER COVEY said the deregulation would involve shifting the talented and gifted program to a formula-driven program, which would free up $4.5 million statewide to be used for voc-ed programs. He said it did not direct the school district to act in any certain way. He added that teacher hiring, layoff and tenure would continue to be governed by contracts. Number 100 CHAIR TOOHEY reminded the committee of their need to vacate the meeting room by 5:00 p.m. and asked how long the foundation formula presentation would last. MR. MONTGOMERY responded that a similar presentation had taken 90 minutes. COMMISSIONER COVEY said he would be available later to finish his presentation and he would gladly yield to the next presenters. Number 110 REP. G. DAVIS mentioned waivers from regulations and asked Commissioner Covey whether the state board had discussed the possibility of allowing students to prove competency in a subject area and therefore winning a waiver of the requirement for that class, and for the hours of instruction time it would require. COMMISSIONER COVEY noted that this was an interesting idea that had not arisen in discussion, but it could fit into the proposals. He added that the board was to solicit public comment on a regulation that would allow the board to waive its own regulations. CHAIR TOOHEY thanked Commissioner Covey and the state board for their presentations and said the committee would reschedule time to complete their presentation. Number 155 CHAIR TOOHEY called an at-ease. (Rep. Bunde left the meeting at 3:50 p.m.) CHAIR TOOHEY called the meeting back to order at 4:02 p.m. She introduced Barbara Martin to begin her presentation on the state foundation funding formula. Number 200 BARBARA MARTIN introduced herself as ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT FOR BUSINESS AND FINANCE FOR THE FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR BOROUGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, and as PRESIDENT OF THE ALASKA ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BUSINESS OFFICIALS. She introduced Richard Swarner of the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District, and Janet Stokesbary of the Anchorage School District. She announced her intent to describe the technicalities of how the foundation formula was calculated. MS. MARTIN began a series of overhead projections showing foundation formula calculations (copies of which are incorporated herein as Attachment 2 and are on file in the committee room). MS. MARTIN differentiated between city school districts and REAAs (Rural Education Attendance Areas). She said school districts are run by cities or boroughs in which the city government shares some management, construction and funding functions. She said REAAs get most of their money from the state and are responsible for managing their money and, along with the state, for managing their construction projects. MS. MARTIN said all districts rely on the state as a primary funding source. The Fairbanks district gets about 70 percent of its budget from the state and, if it were an REAA, would get 90 percent from the state, she said. MS. MARTIN noted that all districts spend from 50 percent to 90 percent of their budgets on salaries and benefits, averaging about 85 percent for larger districts. Rural districts spend more on utilities and less on salaries. MS. MARTIN identified the schedule of district budgeting during a school year, as outlined on page 3 of Attachment 2. She stated that district enrollment projections are due by October 15, budgets are due to the city or borough by April 1, cities must approve minimum budgets by April 30, final local appropriation must be done by May 31, and the final budget is due to the Department of Education by July 15. Number 280 MS. MARTIN said the foundation formula is a simple equation with some complicated features. It is based on instructional units, each worth $60,000. Schools are allocated units based on the number of students and on how dispersed they are. A small school with fewer than 10 students get two units, or $120,000. The larger the school, the more students required for a unit. At the higher end of the scale, a school with 17 elementary students would receive one unit, and 13 secondary students would receive one unit. Smaller districts get more units because of their higher overhead costs. MS. MARTIN said schools get units for special education services: gifted and talented; resource students, who require extra services such as speech or learning therapy; self-contained students, who require more specialized services because they are in more restrictive environments; and intensive students, such as autistic students, who need tremendous amounts of attention. Three intensive students make one unit. Forty gifted and talented students make one unit. Units are also provided for bilingual and vocational services. Number 327 MS. MARTIN discussed two mythical school districts - one was a city district, one was an REAA - to demonstrate the differences in how they are funded. She referred to the area cost differential (ACD) rates, which are established in statute and therefore subject to change by the legislature, aimed at measuring differences in the cost of providing similar services at different school districts. Anchorage is the basis, and Fairbanks' area cost differential is 4 percent more than Anchorage. REP. BUNDE asked whether there had been attempts to change the ACD. MS. MARTIN answered that the ACDs were adopted in 1987, along with the current foundation formula, and have not since been changed. The Alaska 2000 bills from the governor would substitute the ACD with the Alaska school price index, which would change the area adjustment differential numbers. MS. MARTIN said multiplying the number of units by the ACD results in the adjusted units. Adjusted units times the unit value results (originally set at $60,000 per unit, but now set at $61,000 per unit) in the basic need amount, or the amount necessary for a basic education, including overhead and administrative costs. Number 373 REP. BRICE asked why the unit value was originally $60,000. MS. MARTIN answered that the number was selected when the foundation formula system of budget allocation was initiated, because it afforded an amount of state support similar to that provided under the previous allocation system. Number 455 MS. MARTIN resumed her presentation. She said there are two kinds of deducts from basic needs: the deductible PL874 and the required local tax effort, which, when subtracted from the basic need, results in the foundation amount. MS. MARTIN explained PL874 as money paid by the state to school districts with students living on federal land which falls outside a district's property tax rolls, such as Indian lands or military bases, as compensation for lost property tax revenues. She explained that there is a second category of students who are connected to the federal government but who do not live on federal land. Category A students are worth $3,800 from the state through PL874, and Category B students are worth about $75. In figuring the formula, the state cannot take into account much of the money the district gets for PL874, she said. MS. MARTIN said the deduct for PL874 is an attempt at equalizing the financial benefit and therefore the level of education between districts with different levels of federal lands. A federal disparity test requires that a state can allow no more than 25 percent funding disparity between districts. MS. MARTIN said calculations of PL874 deducts are different for municipal school districts and REAAs. Since local effort is not required of REAAs, the state takes 90 percent of their PL874 deduct. Ms. Martin said she believed the district gets to keep 10 percent as an incentive for them to perform the paperwork and participate in the system. MS. MARTIN stated districts which contribute more than the minimum required local tax effort get to keep more of their PL874 deduct, as PL874 funds are meant to be benefits paid in lieu of taxes. She noted that PL874 varies in importance among various school districts and the state receives about $50 million in PL874 funds each year. Without the equalization of the PL874 funds, the state would have to pay out an additional $30 million in formula funds each year. Number 489 MS. MARTIN continued her presentation, moving on to the required local effort, calculated as the lesser of 4 mills of the annual assessed valuation set by the Department of Community and Regional Affairs, or at 35 percent of the prior year basic need. The resulting required local effort, based on the assumption of a community's ability to raise school funds through property taxation, is deducted from the state's payment. Only Valdez, the North Slope Borough and Unalaska use the second test, because they have large assessed valuations. Number 520 MS. MARTIN said the state obligation to a municipal school district is the combination of the foundation money and the local contribution. An REAA's budget is what the state pays in foundation formula funding, plus the 10 percent of PL874 funds they get to keep and any interest earnings on their treasury. MS. MARTIN stated most municipalities can and will pay more to their school districts than the minimum local effort to provide better than minimum educational services. There is a maximum local effort allowed. The maximum local effort is calculated as the greater of either 2 mills of the property tax plus the required local effort, or 23 percent of the basic need plus the required local effort. MS. MARTIN then introduced Mr. Richard Swarner to explain maximum local effort, as his school district has been up against the maximum local effort for years. Number 566 RICHARD SWARNER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT FOR THE KENAI PENINSULA SCHOOL DISTRICT, introduced himself. He referred to a handout showing funding calculations for his district under the foundation formula. (The document, on file in the committee room, is herein incorporated as Attachment 3.) He said the 2 mill test for maximum local effort would probably apply in districts with high property assessments. Number 587 MR. SWARNER noted that the Kenai school district has been at its cap for the last four years and has run out of new creative ways to increase its budget. Under state law, the only way the district can increase its budget without violating the federal disparity test is to raise the instructional unit higher than $61,000. MR. SWARNER said it is not true, as is believed by some, that the maximum local contribution for schools is 6 mills of assessed valuation. The Kenai local effort, bolstered by a sales tax dedicated to education, is equivalent to an 8.4 mill levy of assessed valuation. Likewise, the effort from the Matanuska-Susitna district contributes an equivalent to about 9.5 mills and Anchorage is about 7 mills. CHAIR TOOHEY asked for questions from the committee. Number 621 REP. G. DAVIS asked what would be the effect of raising the instructional unit value to $63,000 from $61,000. MR. SWARNER answered that each $1,000 increase in the unit value costs an additional $12 million statewide. REP. BRICE asked whether the Fairbanks school district was bumping against its maximum local effort limit. MS. MARTIN responded that this is true under current calculations, but there is a proposed change in how students living on military bases are funded, which would raise the maximum local effort by about $5 million. Number 642 REP. BUNDE asked about the governor's proposed funding formula changes. MS. MARTIN responded that she could discuss the components of the changes, but offer no opinion as yet. She said there are four major components to the governor's plan as it pertains to funding. The first is to adopt the school price index in lieu of the area cost differential. The price index was developed through a committee work process in an effort to develop indices that truly reflect the cost of doing business in school districts, as opposed to households. She said the department intended to create an index that could be updated each five years. The second component was to eliminate the mandate to fund gifted and talented students and allow districts to devote some of the money now allocated to them to vocational educational programs. The changes would remove some regulatory components of the gifted student program and give more local control. MS. MARTIN said the fourth (sic) component of the changes would reduce the number of funding communities used along with educational units in calculating state funding. She said the changes would come in two ways. The first would be a change in how small a district can be before it loses up-front money to help operate the school, which she said was controversial, especially as it relates to small REAAs. The second way the changes would come is in changing the limits on how close larger districts on the state's road system can be to each other before they stop collecting up- front overhead operating money. While Fairbanks now has five funding communities and Anchorage has three, the Department of Education says that each might have one under the new system. The Mat-Su district might be most impacted by the change, she said. TAPE 93-7B, SIDE A Number 000 REP. BUNDE thanked Ms. Martin for her presentation, but lamented that the foundation formula program may soon change under the governor's proposals. He asked for a similar presentation on the proposed changes in state educational funding processes. MS. MARTIN said she would be happy to do so. Number 030 CHAIR TOOHEY asked if the Department of Education was ready to deal with students with fetal alcohol syndrome. MS. MARTIN said the state mandated training a few years ago on such children - training the Fairbanks district provided with outside experts, and requiring that new teachers also take such training. Number 045 REP. G. DAVIS asked whether there was a consensus among school districts that the FY 94 budget should include a raise in the foundation formula or more attention to debt reimbursement. MR. SWARNER responded that he did not know if there was a consensus, but both issues were on their way to being major statewide concerns and each required money. He feared that the lack of new construction to meet increasing need would eventually require shockingly high levels of funding requests, possibly up to $1 billion. He said he was encouraged at the governor's desire to frame the school construction issue as a problem to be resolved through a five-year process. He stated that modern school districts face problems, such as crime in the school and teen pregnancy, that require much more money to address under governmental mandate than the relatively simple problems of gum-chewing and running in the halls faced by school districts of 50 years ago. Number 127 MS. MARTIN mentioned the question of single-site school districts. REP. BUNDE complained that more attention was paid to pupil-teacher ratios than to teacher-administrator ratios. MS. MARTIN said the disparity in school districts sizes, locations and needs around the state posed problems in finding meaningful data. She said there is a need to be able to explain such disparities to the public. (Rep. Olberg left at 4:43 p.m.) Number 162 JOHN ANTTONEN, SUPERINTENDENT OF THE HOONAH SCHOOL DISTRICT, described his background as a superintendent in a borough in an REAA and in a small single-site school district. He said equity in school funding of different districts is a subjective consideration, but there are definite problems working against single sites, or single attendance areas. MR. ANTTONEN said multiple-site districts can count from zero for each funding category area, such as bilingual, special, or vocational education; whereas, single-site areas must count from zero in its budgets for the entire district, which he said short-changes them. He commented that the single-site consortium has unsuccessfully proposed legislation to deal with this problem, and he accused the legislature of not wanting to tinker with the foundation formula. The single-site districts have received supplemental appropriations for five or six years to address the inequities. He said Hoonah schools receive about $160,000 in supplementals. Number 200 MR. ANTTONEN stated most single-sites serve from 400 to 500 students. Small municipality single-sites often have a small property tax base, or federal lands, which makes it hard for them to raise funds for schools, he said. REP. B. DAVIS asked whether the administration's proposed funding changes would address these inequities. Number 247 MR. ANTTONEN answered that the changes from area cost differential to a price index system would grant some single-sites an amount approximately equal to their recent annual supplemental appropriations. But Hydaburg, Skagway and Yakutat, and one other single-site, would not see their inequities fully addressed by the changes. CHAIR TOOHEY thanked those making the presentations and ADJOURNED the meeting at 4:50 p.m.