Legislature(2009 - 2010)CAPITOL 106

03/31/2010 08:00 AM House EDUCATION

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

Audio Topic
08:06:23 AM Start
08:06:33 AM HB393
09:56:23 AM Adjourn
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
Scheduled But Not Heard
Moved CSHB 393(EDC) Out of Committee
      HB 393-CHARTER/ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL FUNDING                                                                             
8:06:33 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  SEATON   announced  that  the  first   order  of                                                                         
business would be HOUSE BILL  NO. 393, "An Act relating                                                                         
to charter school approval and funding."                                                                                        
[Before  the committee  was HB  393, identified  as 26-                                                                         
CHAIR  SEATON  reviewed  the recent  additions  to  the                                                                         
committee packet germane to HB 393.                                                                                             
8:08:25 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER  reintroduced HB  393,  relating                                                                         
that  the  bill was  requested  by  the Alaska  Charter                                                                         
School  Association  as  a   means  to  enable  charter                                                                         
schools to  qualify for federal  grants.   An amendment                                                                         
has been drafted  to address the concern  that the bill                                                                         
stipulated  that the  school district  would provide  a                                                                         
participating  share equal  to  the difference  between                                                                         
the federal  and state funding.   The drafted amendment                                                                         
would remove "for approved projects"  and refers to the                                                                         
specific statute, AS 14.11.020.                                                                                                 
8:11:43 AM                                                                                                                    
SAM   KITO,   III,   Architect,  School   Finance   and                                                                         
Facilities Section,  Department of Education  and Early                                                                         
Development  (EED),   directed  attention   to  charter                                                                         
school  information  provided   by  the  department  to                                                                         
address questions raised at the previous hearing.                                                                               
     8:14:58 AM                                                                                                               
     MR.  KITO  referred  to a  document  titled  "State  of                                                                    
     Alaska, Department of  Education and Early Development,                                                                    
     Active  and  closed  Charter Schools."    The  document                                                                    
     listed charter  schools currently  in operation  in the                                                                    
     state, as well  as charter schools that  were closed or                                                                    
     never opened.   In response to Chair  Seaton, he stated                                                                    
     that the schools may have  been authorized or may never                                                                    
     have been opened.                                                                                                          
     8:16:22 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE  P. WILSON,  referring to  the document,                                                                    
     said that  in 2002,  the New Beginnings  Charter School                                                                    
     closed,   but   the   opening  date   is   not   shown.                                                                    
     Additionally,  in 2004  the Horizon  Charter School  in                                                                    
     Mat-Su closed.  She asked  for the opening dates of the                                                                    
     two schools.                                                                                                               
     MR.  KITO  explained that  the  table  was compiled  by                                                                    
     staff using  a variety of sources  and that information                                                                    
     was unavailable.                                                                                                           
     CHAIR SEATON  thanked the department for  compiling the                                                                    
     list since  it provides  a broader perspective  for the                                                                    
     8:17:19 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE KELLER  recalled the  superintendent has                                                                    
     the  authority  to   authorize  leased  charter  school                                                                    
     facilities.   He  asked  whether  school districts  are                                                                    
     paying to upgrade leased facilities  in addition to the                                                                    
     cost of the lease.                                                                                                         
     8:17:59 AM                                                                                                               
     MR. KITO answered that charter  schools pay leases from                                                                    
     their  operating  budgets.     He  was  unsure  of  the                                                                    
     specifics  for   each  charter  school,  but   the  EED                                                                    
     facilities  program  does  not provide  funding  for  a                                                                    
     leased  facility.    Thus,  if  a  school  district  is                                                                    
     providing  any  funding  to   upgrade  a  facility  for                                                                    
     student  occupancy,  presumably  the funding  would  be                                                                    
     paid for  from their operating  budgets, or would  be a                                                                    
     condition of the lease.                                                                                                    
CHAIR  SEATON  observed  that  local  school  districts                                                                         
either own or  lease a charter school  facility, but it                                                                         
falls under the  local school district's responsibility                                                                         
to  provide a  facility  for charter  schools that  are                                                                         
authorized within the district.                                                                                                 
MR. KITO agreed.                                                                                                                
8:19:06 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to  the U. S. Department                                                                         
of  Education  Guidance  document  titled,  "The  State                                                                         
Charter  School  Facilities Incentive  Grants  Program"                                                                         
and asked for a description of the program.                                                                                     
MR. KITO  informed the committee  that the  program was                                                                         
authorized in 2001  by the No Child  Left Behind (NCLB)                                                                         
legislation, and was reauthorized  in 2004.  He related                                                                         
that  California  and  Indiana received  grants.    The                                                                         
program  was  reauthorized   again  with  the  American                                                                         
Recovery   and  Reinvestment   Act   of  2009   (ARRA).                                                                         
Although  not  currently  funded by  Congress,  federal                                                                         
regulations  allow for  four charter  school grants  in                                                                         
the amount of up to $10 million per state.                                                                                      
8:20:40 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ  asked  whether  federal  startup                                                                         
funds for charter schools are still available.                                                                                  
MR. KITO  said he was  not familiar with  that program.                                                                         
He returned  to the  facilities program and  noted that                                                                         
the  regulatory process  for application  is in  place,                                                                         
but Alaska does not meet  the standard to score well in                                                                         
the   competitive   process.     If   funding   becomes                                                                         
available,  states would  apply,  and the  applications                                                                         
would be  scored and prioritized by  federal reviewers.                                                                         
When  approved,  the  programs  would  receive  federal                                                                         
funds   through  the   state   for   start-up  or   the                                                                         
enhancement  of  school  facilities, thus  helping  the                                                                         
state  "step   into"  a  fully   functional  facilities                                                                         
charter  school funding  program.   The  intent of  the                                                                         
program   is   that   the  federal   government   would                                                                         
participate  at a  high level  in the  first year,  but                                                                         
federal  participation would  decrease over  time until                                                                         
the   state's   program   is   fully   functioning   or                                                                         
     functioning  better  than  it was  before  the  federal                                                                    
     program was involved.                                                                                                      
     CHAIR  SEATON asked  whether the  decreasing percentage                                                                    
     of federal funds  is for the facility, or  for the four                                                                    
     schools authorized for the statewide program.                                                                              
     MR.  KITO   clarified  that  there  were   four  grants                                                                    
     available   under    federal   regulation    for   this                                                                    
     authorization, but  there is  no funding provided.   He                                                                    
     stated  his understanding  that each  grant would  be a                                                                    
     grant to  the state  for its  program, and  the funding                                                                    
     mechanism "stair-steps"  but is not tied  to a specific                                                                    
     project,  but is  tied to  the overall  state's program                                                                    
     for charter school facilities.                                                                                             
     8:23:46 AM                                                                                                               
     CHAIR SEATON commented that  funding for charter school                                                                    
     facilities  is necessarily  separate  from  the way  in                                                                    
     which schools are funded via  municipal bonds and other                                                                    
     funding means.   He related his  understanding that the                                                                    
     program is  separate, even  though charter  schools are                                                                    
     public schools in Alaska.                                                                                                  
     MR. KITO  explained that according  to the  guidance it                                                                    
     does  not necessarily  need to  be a  separate program,                                                                    
     but charter  school funding for facilities  needs to be                                                                    
     based on  a metric  that uses a  per-pupil calculation.                                                                    
     So, if  the state had  a way of funding  charter school                                                                    
     facilities, but  it was not separate  from the existing                                                                    
     program,  that  funding  could  be  used  for  scoring.                                                                    
     Currently,  the  state does  not  have  the program  so                                                                    
     establishing  a   separate  program   is  one   way  of                                                                    
     achieving this.  However, the  program does not need to                                                                    
     be a "stand alone"  program, separate from the existing                                                                    
     state facilities program.                                                                                                  
     8:25:13 AM                                                                                                               
     CHAIR SEATON  asked whether the committee  was familiar                                                                    
     with   the   stair-step   program   and   the   federal                                                                    
     government's role.                                                                                                         
     8:26:01 AM                                                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER said  his understanding  is that                                                                         
bill   tried   to   model  federal   stair-step   grant                                                                         
administration  language  used  in existing  law.    He                                                                         
deferred to the drafter of the bill.                                                                                            
8:27:12 AM                                                                                                                    
JEAN  MISCHEL,  Attorney,  Legislative  Legal  Counsel,                                                                         
Legislative  Legal and  Research Services,  Legislative                                                                         
Affairs Agency, introduced herself.                                                                                             
CHAIR SEATON referred to page  2, line 2, which was the                                                                         
"stair stepping mechanism."                                                                                                     
MS. MISCHEL  expressed her understanding that  the ARRA                                                                         
provides  incentives in  five-year  increments and  the                                                                         
bill anticipates  that the federal portion  would be 90                                                                         
percent of allowable  costs of the project.   The lead-                                                                         
in  language  on  page  2,   lines  2-3,  requires  the                                                                         
department to  apply for available federal  funding and                                                                         
award  federal  funding.   She  pointed  out that  this                                                                         
language  relates  to  federal dollars;  in  fact,  the                                                                         
state  portion is  the dollar  per  pupil amount,  plus                                                                         
there  would be  a local  contribution to  make up  the                                                                         
difference.    If the  federal  program  is not  funded                                                                         
until  fiscal  year 2013  (FY  13),  then there  is  no                                                                         
obligation  for  the state  to  apply.   She  explained                                                                         
there  are  other  ways  to  access  these  funds;  for                                                                         
example,  the state  can decide  that  it wants  school                                                                         
districts to apply directly for  funding.  However, she                                                                         
advised  that  would  be burdensome  for  small  school                                                                         
8:29:55 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  SEATON provided  a scenario  in which  there are                                                                         
four projects  totaling $10 million.   He asked whether                                                                         
the  language of  the bill  anticipates  that only  the                                                                         
money  expended  in  the  first year  would  be  at  90                                                                         
percent  federal  reimbursement,  and if  the  projects                                                                         
were not  completed until the  third year,  that amount                                                                         
would be  reduced to 60 percent  federal reimbursement.                                                                         
The 40  percent remaining would  be a liability  to the                                                                         
local municipality or school district.                                                                                          
8:31:06 AM                                                                                                                    
     MS.  MISCHEL  indicated  that   would  be  an  accurate                                                                    
     interpretation;   furthermore,  the   department  could                                                                    
     explain how  they currently allocate grant  funding for                                                                    
     facilities,  which  is  under  a six-year  plan.    She                                                                    
     thought the key term in  the bill was "allowable cost."                                                                    
     Other  than the  adjustment  for a  student count,  the                                                                    
     term is defined by the department in regulation.                                                                           
     8:32:05 AM                                                                                                               
     CHAIR SEATON  directed attention to the  document found                                                                    
     in   the  committee   packet   titled  Legal   Services                                                                    
     Memorandum,   dated   3/30/10,   and   read   [original                                                                    
     punctuation provided]:                                                                                                     
          The last sentence of Art.  II, sec. 19 of the                                                                         
          Alaska  Constitution  prohibits "local  acts"                                                                         
          that   necessitate    appropriations   by   a                                                                         
          political  subdivision   without  a  majority                                                                         
          vote of qualified voters.   I know of no case                                                                         
          interpretation  of  this  provision  but  the                                                                         
          bill's  local contribution  requirement could                                                                         
          certainly be put  to a vote.   Nothing in the                                                                         
          bill  otherwise   circumvents  or  "violates"                                                                         
          bonding   requirements   or  even   specifies                                                                         
          whether  bonding may  or may  not be  used as                                                                         
          for state aid under  AS 14.11.100 even if the                                                                         
       district is a municipal school district.                                                                                 
     CHAIR SEATON  asked for legal  counsel's interpretation                                                                    
     of this language.                                                                                                          
     MS. MISCHEL explained the  general question was whether                                                                    
     the  bill allows  for a  local  contribution without  a                                                                    
     vote, and if it would  violate a bonding mandate or any                                                                    
     other  law.   The answer  is  that this  bill does  not                                                                    
     specify how  the local contribution is  generated.  She                                                                    
     did  not  know if  Art.  II,  sec.  19, of  the  Alaska                                                                    
     Constitution would  be implicated  because she  was not                                                                    
     certain  if  a decision  by  a  school board  would  be                                                                    
     construed as a local act,  and would require a majority                                                                    
     vote.    She  stated  that would  be  the  conservative                                                                    
     approach.   Realistically, both bonding and  a vote for                                                                    
     local  contribution  are  limited to  municipal  school                                                                    
     districts.   Thus,  the  bonding  requirement and  vote                                                                    
     requirement are  limited to municipal  school districts                                                                    
     that  can generate  that  type  of local  contribution.                                                                    
With  regard to  regional educational  attendance areas                                                                         
(REAAs), there is no presupposition  in the bill on how                                                                         
the  funds  may  be  generated.    However,  under  the                                                                         
existing  grant program,  AS 14.11.008,  federal impact                                                                         
aid is  used, which she  thought could be used  in this                                                                         
instance, too.                                                                                                                  
8:35:33 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR SEATON  questioned the  legality of  obligating a                                                                         
substantial  local  contribution  to  be  matched  with                                                                         
state  and  federal  funding, without  a  vote  of  the                                                                         
MS. MISCHEL said she did  not know.  She suggested that                                                                         
the governing  body seek the advice  of their municipal                                                                         
counsel,  but advised  that  the conservative  approach                                                                         
would be to take a vote.                                                                                                        
8:36:30 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER  commented  that the  choice  to                                                                         
incur  debt is  the  school district's  responsibility.                                                                         
He  stated  that  he  did   not  want  to  lead  school                                                                         
districts to  "doing something they shouldn't  do," but                                                                         
he thought  it was  something "they  deal with  all the                                                                         
time."   He surmised the stair-step  approach of 90-80-                                                                         
60 percent is  to allow for a response  to the stimulus                                                                         
money; however, the  stimulus money is not  going to be                                                                         
available.    He  then  asked  whether  the  stair-step                                                                         
percentage  language  should  be  removed  since  legal                                                                         
counsel  advised  that  "allowable   cost"  has  to  be                                                                         
defined  by   regulation.    He  suggested   that  "for                                                                         
approved projects" on page 2,  line 4, could be changed                                                                         
to "for allowable costs."                                                                                                       
MS. MISCHEL  said the percentages probably  do not need                                                                         
to  be specified,  but the  suggested  change may  make                                                                         
implementation difficult  because it  would be  hard to                                                                         
tell from the legislation  what level of commitment the                                                                         
state and local entities  would be making when applying                                                                         
for  the  grants.    There  was not  a  lot  of  detail                                                                         
included in  the bill  regarding eligibility,  or other                                                                         
potential  federal requirements,  because they  seem to                                                                         
be "a moving target" at  this time.  She suggested that                                                                         
the state could refer in  the bill to a federal funding                                                                         
     formula  in a  general way,  but she  cautioned against                                                                    
     leaving it blank.                                                                                                          
     8:39:21 AM                                                                                                               
     MR. KITO  offered to describe how  the existing program                                                                    
     8:39:45 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE  P. WILSON  asked  whether  he would  be                                                                    
     describing  the current  grant program  or the  charter                                                                    
     school program.                                                                                                            
     MR. KITO  replied that he  would describe  the existing                                                                    
     grant  program   for  all   school  facilities.     The                                                                    
     applications  are  received  once per  year,  reviewed,                                                                    
     scored, and  prioritized.   The projects  appear before                                                                    
     the  legislature  and  funds are  appropriated  by  the                                                                    
     legislature.   The  EED administers  the program  on an                                                                    
     annual  basis thus,  in a  given  year, the  department                                                                    
     receives  a  certain  amount of  funding  for  specific                                                                    
     projects.   When he reviewed  HB 393, he  identified an                                                                    
     estimate of  a "flat  funding amount."   Therefore, the                                                                    
     state of  Alaska would  have an  established facilities                                                                    
     funding program  for charter schools-the  "$1 program"-                                                                    
     that  could  provide  an estimated  amount  of  $10-$20                                                                    
     million  per year.   Beginning  with a  flat amount  of                                                                    
     money per  year, the funds  would be spent  on approved                                                                    
     projects.    He related  his  understanding  that in  a                                                                    
     program   in   which   $10   million   per   year   was                                                                    
     appropriated,  the  federal  government  would  pay  90                                                                    
     percent in  the first year,  with the state  paying the                                                                    
     "per-pupil" allocation, and  the school district making                                                                    
     up  the  balance.   That  funding  level  would  remain                                                                    
     constant, but  the federal participation  would decline                                                                    
     as the program moved forward.                                                                                              
     8:42:25 AM                                                                                                               
     MR. KITO, in response to  Chair Seaton, related that in                                                                    
     the third year, the  federal reimbursement amount would                                                                    
     be  at about  40 percent  of the  total program,  or $4                                                                    
     million of  $10 million.  Furthermore,  the state share                                                                    
     would  be  $1 per  student,  and  the local  share  the                                                                    
     balance remaining.                                                                                                         
CHAIR SEATON  said, "So  I think  the lesson  there is,                                                                         
get in first."                                                                                                                  
8:43:00 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked  at what stage a project                                                                         
must be  before it  is presented  to the  department by                                                                         
the school district.                                                                                                            
MR. KITO answered that for  the EED's standard program,                                                                         
the project can  be in any stage,  from pre-planning to                                                                         
design development  drawings.   As the  regular program                                                                         
is highly competitive, scoring is  higher for a project                                                                         
that has already completed advance  work.  He could not                                                                         
anticipate how many applications  the EED might receive                                                                         
for the  charter school program,  but he did  not think                                                                         
the department would need to  see as much advance work.                                                                         
He  thought  that the  school  district  might come  in                                                                         
during the planning stage to try to gain some support.                                                                          
8:44:14 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE   P.   WILSON   asked   whether   school                                                                         
districts without a  good tax base, and  that could not                                                                         
afford to  complete advance work,  ever "rank  near the                                                                         
MR.  KITO  assured  the  committee  that  several  REAA                                                                         
districts are  able to perform  advance work  and score                                                                         
well.   He stated that the  amount of work is  only one                                                                         
part of  the metric, and projects  with other important                                                                         
factors can still  "move up the list"  because the list                                                                         
is "fairly  well distributed" and  is based  on several                                                                         
criteria.   In  further response  to Representative  P.                                                                         
Wilson, he  opined all schools  have an  opportunity to                                                                         
qualify.   With respect to charter  school programs, he                                                                         
added that many  of the charter schools  are located in                                                                         
areas  with  a  larger  tax base  and  the  ability  to                                                                         
prepare  advance work.    However,  the charter  school                                                                         
facilities  program may  not be  as competitive  as the                                                                         
regular   program   due   to  the   lower   number   of                                                                         
8:46:41 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ   asked  whether  the   state  is                                                                         
required  to have  stair-step  federal  funding, or  if                                                                         
     Alaska  could receive  "one time"  federal funding  and                                                                    
     then  decide  how  and when  to  allocate  the  funding                                                                    
     within the state.                                                                                                          
     MR.  KITO agreed  with legal  counsel  that the  actual                                                                    
     stair-step percentage does not need  to be in the bill,                                                                    
     but the federal program is  defined that way.  Thus, if                                                                    
     the state applies for the  federal grant and is awarded                                                                    
     the grant, the grant  would be administered under those                                                                    
     terms for the charter school facility program.                                                                             
     REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ  surmised the state does  not need                                                                    
     to allocate the  funds over five years,  but could fund                                                                    
     a project in the full amount.                                                                                              
     MR.  KITO clarified  that he  assumed that  the program                                                                    
     would  be  at  a   certain  level  with  federal  funds                                                                    
     decreasing over time.   He said he  considered that the                                                                    
     program would be an overall program grant.                                                                                 
     8:48:12 AM                                                                                                               
     CHAIR SEATON presented a scenario  in which the federal                                                                    
     government granted  $100 million per year,  to a state.                                                                    
     The first year  the program would require  a 10 percent                                                                    
     state  or  local match;  the  second  year the  program                                                                    
     would require  a 20 percent  match; the third  year the                                                                    
     program would  require a  40 percent  match.   He asked                                                                    
     whether  that is  the method  in which  the grants  are                                                                    
     administered, with the commitment  from state and local                                                                    
     funding of $100 million for five years.                                                                                    
     MR. KITO  said, "My understanding actually  is that the                                                                    
     federal government program is  a five-year program, but                                                                    
     they're assisting  the state in developing  the state's                                                                    
     permanent facilities funding program."                                                                                     
     8:49:43 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE  P.  WILSON  observed that  the  current                                                                    
     state process to  build a facility is  a six-year plan.                                                                    
     She  asked for  clarification of  the process  year-by-                                                                    
     MR.  KITO  answered  that the  existing  program  funds                                                                    
     projects  on  a  per-project  basis.   He  described  a                                                                    
     scenario  in   which  ten  charter   school  facilities                                                                    
projects  were anticipated  each year.   Assuming  each                                                                         
project  cost  is the  same,  eight  projects would  be                                                                         
funded  by  the federal  government  and  two would  be                                                                         
funded by  the state  in the first  year, and  then the                                                                         
federal funding would stair-step  down.  The first year                                                                         
the state  would obligate  all of  the funding  for the                                                                         
approved projects;  the next year the  state would fund                                                                         
the next group of projects,  rather than fund a portion                                                                         
of a  project per  year.  Thus,  each project  would be                                                                         
fully funded in the year that it was approved by EED.                                                                           
8:52:03 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR SEATON  reiterated his  understanding of  how the                                                                         
funding  would be  distributed to  the state.   In  his                                                                         
scenario,  the federal  government  would approach  the                                                                         
state to  fund a permanent  program at $50  million per                                                                         
year,  and  the  federal   government  would  cover  90                                                                         
percent of the  cost in the first year,  and 80 percent                                                                         
in the  next year,  and 20 percent  in the  fifth year.                                                                         
The state would be  expected to continue this permanent                                                                         
program at  the $50 million  per year level  with local                                                                         
participation.   Therefore,  the federal  funding would                                                                         
use a stair-step process, the  state would cover $1 per                                                                         
student, and  municipalities would cover  the remaining                                                                         
MR. KITO concurred.                                                                                                             
8:53:29 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  GARDNER questioned  how long  the state                                                                         
would promise to continue the program.                                                                                          
MR.  KITO  answered  that the  intent  of  the  federal                                                                         
stair-step funding  was to  help establish  the program                                                                         
for  facilities   funding  for  charter   schools,  but                                                                         
whether the state decided to  continue with the program                                                                         
after  the  federal  participation   would  be  at  the                                                                         
state's  discretion.    The federal  government  cannot                                                                         
require continuation.                                                                                                           
8:54:36 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE P.  WILSON concluded  that approximately                                                                         
50  percent  of the  charter  schools  failed or  never                                                                         
     opened.  She asked what  would happen to the funds when                                                                    
     schools fail.                                                                                                              
     MR. KITO  said his  experience is  that if  the program                                                                    
     builds  a facility  for a  school district  that serves                                                                    
     charter school  students and the facility  is no longer                                                                    
     needed for  that purpose, the school  district would be                                                                    
     required to keep  the facility open for  public use for                                                                    
     a certain period of time.                                                                                                  
     8:57:16 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER made  a motion  to adopt  HB 393                                                                    
     (Amended)   labeled  26-LS1550\A.2.     [The   document                                                                    
     labeled  House Bill  No. 393  (Amended), 26-LS1550\A.2,                                                                    
     was the working document  with Amendment 1 incorporated                                                                    
     CHAIR SEATON  objected for  the purpose  of discussion.                                                                    
     He  reiterated that  Version A.2  of the  bill includes                                                                    
     the language contained in proposed Amendment 1.                                                                            
     REPRESENTATIVE KELLER  observed that  the heart  of the                                                                    
     change is on  page 2, line 5, which  adds the language,                                                                    
     "projects for  which an assumption  of responsibilities                                                                    
     has  been made  under  AS 14.11.020."   The  additional                                                                    
     language  addresses  the  concerns about  whether  this                                                                    
     funding   is   appropriate.     Furthermore,   removing                                                                    
     "approved project"  clarifies that  the approval  is on                                                                    
     the basis  of AS  14.11.020, and indicates  the project                                                                    
     has  gone   through  the  process  and   is  under  the                                                                    
     jurisdiction of the local school district.                                                                                 
     9:00:01 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE  GARDNER referred  to page  2, line  21,                                                                    
     and said she did not understand the distinction.                                                                           
     CHAIR SEATON directed attention  to the document in the                                                                    
     committee packet  titled, "Sec 14.11.020  Assumption of                                                                    
     responsibilities."    He   explained  this  is  current                                                                    
     statute    that    outlines    the    assumption    for                                                                    
     responsibilities  by   a  municipality  or   REAA,  and                                                                    
     specifies "who's  going to own these  facilities, who's                                                                    
     going to  approve the facilities,  who's going  to come                                                                    
     forward and  be the  10 or  80 percent  responsible for                                                                    
     matching...."  He then referred  to page 2, line 21, of                                                                    
Version  A.2,  noting  "approved  for  funding  by  the                                                                         
department"  was deleted,  and  asked if  this was  the                                                                         
major maintenance  grant program.  He  further asked if                                                                         
that meant  each project would apply  for grant funding                                                                         
individually, instead of establishing a state program.                                                                          
MR. KITO said  he did not have much time  to review the                                                                         
language,  but   he  offered  that  the   reference  to                                                                         
assuming responsibilities  under AS 14.11.020  "gets to                                                                         
the question  of whether or not  there's local approval                                                                         
of  a  project."    He  was unsure  of  the  effect  of                                                                         
removing "approved."  He then  gave a scenario in which                                                                         
three projects  at $2 million  each were  submitted and                                                                         
said  he was  not  certain under  the amended  language                                                                         
whether  EED  could   prioritize  which  project  would                                                                         
receive assistance.                                                                                                             
9:02:53 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  SEATON  expressed  his  understanding  that  the                                                                         
purpose  of the  federal  grant is  to  create a  state                                                                         
program   for  building   facilities;  thus,   removing                                                                         
"approved  for  funding  by  the  department"  language                                                                         
would  eliminate the  program  and provide  only for  a                                                                         
separate project.                                                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER  related  that it  was  not  the                                                                         
intent of  the bill  to eliminate  the decision  by the                                                                         
department on  the disbursal of  funds, but  to clarify                                                                         
that a local entity was responsible for the project.                                                                            
9:04:48 AM                                                                                                                    
MS.  MISCHEL  agreed  that  page  2,  line  21,  should                                                                         
continue  "approved for  funding and  assumed under  AS                                                                         
14.11.020."  She reiterated that  the program itself is                                                                         
not well  spelled out in  this legislation  and advised                                                                         
that the application process  should not be eliminated.                                                                         
There is an option for  school districts to go directly                                                                         
to the  federal government  to apply, although  to keep                                                                         
EED as the gatekeeper of  the program, there would need                                                                         
to   be  some   sort  of   approval  mechanism.     She                                                                         
recommended a conceptual amendment.                                                                                             
9:06:16 AM                                                                                                                    
     REPRESENTATIVE KELLER  moved Conceptual Amendment  1 to                                                                    
     Amendment 1,  which would delete  the language  on page                                                                    
     2,  line 8,  and  wherever  appropriate throughout  the                                                                    
     CHAIR SEATON  objected for  the purpose  of discussion.                                                                    
     He opined  the result  of Conceptual Amendment  1 would                                                                    
     be   to  make   the  program   "just  like   the  major                                                                    
     maintenance kind of program."                                                                                              
     9:07:30 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE KELLER indicated his agreement.                                                                             
     9:07:34 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE    GARDNER   surmised    that   although                                                                    
     districts can go directly to  the federal government to                                                                    
     apply for these grants,  Conceptual Amendment 1 ensures                                                                    
     the EED  will serve as  a gatekeeper to  prioritize the                                                                    
     MR.  KITO advised  that school  districts cannot  apply                                                                    
     directly for this block of funding.                                                                                        
     9:08:29 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE   GARDNER   concluded  that   Conceptual                                                                    
     Amendment  1   gives  the  [department]   authority  to                                                                    
     prioritize applications.                                                                                                   
     MR.  KITO indicated  that  if  the department  received                                                                    
     more applications than  it has money to  fund, it would                                                                    
     be able to prioritize the applications.                                                                                    
     9:09:02 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE  P.  WILSON  observed  that  instead  of                                                                    
     having one list of schools  to be built, there would be                                                                    
     two lists.                                                                                                                 
     MR. KITO clarified that there  would be a separate list                                                                    
     for   charter  schools.     In   further  response   to                                                                    
     Representative  P.  Wilson,  he acknowledged  that  the                                                                    
     selection process is a difficult  one.  For the regular                                                                    
     program,   the   department  follows   its   regulation                                                                    
     process, but when the state  builds a school for a very                                                                    
small number  of students, an  extra level  of scrutiny                                                                         
determines the stability of  the student population for                                                                         
small schools.  He  anticipated that the charter school                                                                         
facility program would have  assurances from the school                                                                         
district and the charter school  that they are aware of                                                                         
their  local  obligations  for  the  operation  of  the                                                                         
school, prior to the approval of the project.                                                                                   
9:11:58 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  SEATON  removed   his  objection  to  Conceptual                                                                         
Amendment 1  to Amendment  1.   There being  no further                                                                         
objection, Conceptual  Amendment 1  to Amendment  1 was                                                                         
9:12:41 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR SEATON  confirmed that  Amendment 1,  as amended,                                                                         
identified as 26-LS1550\A.2,  was before the committee,                                                                         
and removed his objection.                                                                                                      
9:13:13 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ  objected   for  the  purpose  of                                                                         
discussion.     She  then   asked  whether   the  local                                                                         
assumption   of   responsibility    in   the   proposed                                                                         
legislation was  the same as for  the major maintenance                                                                         
MR. KITO affirmed that an  existing part of the statute                                                                         
allows  school districts  to assume  responsibility for                                                                         
school  construction  and major  maintenance  projects.                                                                         
In further  response to  Representative Munoz,  he said                                                                         
his  understanding is  that there  is  not a  statewide                                                                         
appeal  process  for  the authorization  of  a  charter                                                                         
school facility that  does not have the  support of the                                                                         
local school district.                                                                                                          
REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ   clarified  that   her  question                                                                         
concerns an  approved charter  school that  applies for                                                                         
new  construction,  or  a major  or  minor  maintenance                                                                         
project,  without  the  support  of  the  local  school                                                                         
district.   She asked  whether there is  an opportunity                                                                         
for the  charter school to appeal  the local district's                                                                         
decision  directly to  the department  or to  the State                                                                         
Board of  Education & Early Development  (state board).                                                                         
     Representative   Munoz  suggested   that  one   of  the                                                                    
     criterion of a strong charter  school law is to provide                                                                    
     a charter school with the  ability to appeal to another                                                                    
     authority.  For example,  a charter school facility may                                                                    
     be denied for political reasons.                                                                                           
     MR. KITO said he would research her question.                                                                              
     9:17:00 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER referred to  the document in the                                                                    
     committee  packet   from  Dean  Kern,   director,  U.S.                                                                    
     Department  of  Education,   to  Paul  Prussing,  dated                                                                    
     7/29/09,  and called  attention to  page 4.   She  read                                                                    
     [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                           
          Local school boards and  the state board both                                                                         
          have to approve  a charter school application                                                                         
          (p.20), and the state  board will not approve                                                                         
          without  the  local  board  doing  so  first.                                                                         
          There does  also not seem  to be  any appeals                                                                         
          process in place.                                                                                                     
     9:18:38 AM                                                                                                               
     CHAIR  SEATON  noted  this discussion  is  directed  at                                                                    
     Amendment 1, that makes the  "municipality in which the                                                                    
     charter school  is located ...  financially responsible                                                                    
     for that  charter school, but it  also establishes that                                                                    
     it's a program through the department."                                                                                    
     9:18:48 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE   MUNOZ   directed  attention   to   the                                                                    
     document   in  the   committee  packet   titled,  "Sec.                                                                    
     14.11.020,     Assumption     of     responsibilities,"                                                                    
     paraphrasing from  the document, which read  as follows                                                                    
     [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                           
          (a)   The   assembly    or   council   of   a                                                                         
          municipality that  is a school district  or a                                                                         
          regional school  board may, by  resolution or                                                                         
          majority  vote   of  the  body,   assume  the                                                                         
          responsibilities  relating  to the  planning,                                                                         
       design, and construction of a school....                                                                                 
REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ noted  that charter  schools fund                                                                         
planning,  design,  and   construction  by  alternative                                                                         
means.    She  expressed  her concern  that  the  local                                                                         
assembly  would  take  from   the  charter  school  the                                                                         
responsibilities    for     planning,    design,    and                                                                         
9:20:37 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  SEATON  agreed  that   the  question  exists  of                                                                         
whether  the  state   should  consider  making  charter                                                                         
schools  independent of  public schools.   The  options                                                                         
are:  (1)  the charter school is  the responsibility of                                                                         
the  school district  and a  subset of  public schools;                                                                         
(2)  the charter  school is  independent of  the school                                                                         
district, is  not affiliated with the  school district,                                                                         
and  has the  ability  to appeal  and  "go around"  the                                                                         
school  district.   He  pointed  out  that Amendment  1                                                                         
addresses  the  assumption   of  responsibilities  made                                                                         
under the  current structure of laws  regarding charter                                                                         
schools.     Chair  Seaton   opined  the   creation  of                                                                         
independent  charter schools  would require  a separate                                                                         
9:22:32 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ  removed  her objection.    There                                                                         
being  no further  objection Amendment  1, as  amended,                                                                         
was adopted.                                                                                                                    
9:23:16 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  SEATON restated  House Bill  No. 393  (Amended),                                                                         
26-LS1550\A.2,  was  the  working document  before  the                                                                         
committee.   He  then  opened public  testimony on  the                                                                         
9:24:06 AM                                                                                                                    
LORETTA  NARDI,   President,  Partnership   for  Alaska                                                                         
Charter Schools,  Inc., informed the committee  she was                                                                         
representing parents,  teachers, and  administrators of                                                                         
charter  school students  throughout  the  state.   She                                                                         
expressed  her appreciation  for  the committee's  work                                                                         
and noted  that charter schools have  proven themselves                                                                         
during ten  years of  operation in  Alaska.   Ms. Nardi                                                                         
said that  charter schools use  operating funds  to pay                                                                         
     for  facilities-unlike traditional  public schools-thus                                                                    
     diverting  operating  funds  from  students.    Charter                                                                    
     schools are often housed in  leased facilities and need                                                                    
     assistance  to secure  and  maintain their  facilities.                                                                    
     Federal  grants for  school  facilities are  available;                                                                    
     however,    charter   schools    presently   are    not                                                                    
     competitive,  and   she  appreciated   the  committee's                                                                    
     recognition  of legislation  that  will strengthen  the                                                                    
     charter  school laws  so that  Alaska  can compete  for                                                                    
     federal grants for charter  school facilities and other                                                                    
     9:26:46 AM                                                                                                               
     JOHN     WEETMAN,    Assistant     Superintendent    of                                                                    
     Administration,   Matanuska-Susitna    Borough   School                                                                    
     District, stated  his support for HB  393, paraphrasing                                                                    
     from  a  prepared  statement,  which  read  as  follows                                                                    
     [original punctuation provided]:                                                                                           
             Good Morning, my name is John Weetman and                                                                          
          I   am   the  Assistant   Superintendent   of                                                                         
          Administration for the  Mat-Su Borough School                                                                         
          District. Thank  you for this  opportunity to                                                                         
          testify on House Bill 393.                                                                                            
             I strongly support House Bill 393 and                                                                              
          believe  it  will significantly  benefit  the                                                                         
          Mat-Su   Borough   School   District's   five                                                                         
          charter      schools,     that      represent                                                                         
          approximately   1000   students,  and   their                                                                         
             I do believe that House Bill 393 will                                                                              
          assist the  State of Alaska and  local school                                                                         
          districts in improving  the ability to secure                                                                         
          future  Federal start  up and  implementation                                                                         
          funds for Alaskan Charter Schools.                                                                                    
             Next year, the five charter schools in the                                                                         
          Mat-Su Borough School  District will pay over                                                                         
          $1,000,000 in rent;  many of these facilities                                                                         
          were never designed  for student learning and                                                                         
          safety.   I  do believe  that House  Bill 393                                                                         
          will assist the State  of Alaska in improving                                                                         
          its   ability   to  secure   future   Federal                                                                         
          facility funds  for Alaskan  Charter Schools,                                                                         
     thus allowing rent dollars  to go directly to                                                                              
     students' education.                                                                                                       
        House Bill 393 will remove the cap which                                                                                
     limits the  number of charter schools  in the                                                                              
     state of Alaska and  creates a mechanism that                                                                              
     establishes    and   administers    per-pupil                                                                              
     facilities aid  programs for  Alaskan charter                                                                              
        Charter schools offer parents and children                                                                              
     choice within the  public school system. They                                                                              
     provide  smaller  learning communities;  they                                                                              
     assist in  drop out prevention  and increased                                                                              
     graduation rates.   The children, parents and                                                                              
     community members  of Alaska  charter schools                                                                              
     are deserving of  facilities that provide and                                                                              
     a safe,  affordable learning  environment for                                                                              
     their children.                                                                                                            
        In conclusion, House Bill 393 creates                                                                                   
     legislation that  benefits Alaska's children.                                                                              
     I  thank  all of  you  for  your time  and  I                                                                              
     applaud   your  efforts   in  assisting   the                                                                              
     students  of Alaska.    A  special thanks  to                                                                              
     Representative  Keller  for  sponsoring  this                                                                              
9:29:12 AM                                                                                                                    
BARBARA GERARD, Administrator,  Academy Charter School,                                                                         
informed the committee that  across the state community                                                                         
and state  leaders have  expressed support  for charter                                                                         
schools.   She described the difficulties  of procuring                                                                         
a suitable facility  for a charter school  after it has                                                                         
been  approved.   Such difficulties  include finding  a                                                                         
building  for 150  students that  meets codes  for fire                                                                         
and environmental  safety, and equipping  the building,                                                                         
all  without start-up  or  implementation funding  from                                                                         
the federal government that could  total up to $400,000                                                                         
per  school.   Ms.  Gerard opined  that charter  school                                                                         
organizers  face  a  monumental   task  to  open  their                                                                         
school.    However,   the  proposed  legislation  would                                                                         
remove "the  cap" and  increase the  state's likelihood                                                                         
that Alaska's charter schools  would win federal start-                                                                         
up  and  implementation  grants, as  well  as  facility                                                                         
funding grants.   Ms. Gerard encouraged  the passage of                                                                         
     HB 393  to strengthen Alaska's charter  school law, and                                                                    
     provide  avenues  to  funding  sources  and  innovative                                                                    
     opportunities for education.                                                                                               
     9:31:45 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ recalled  that there  was federal                                                                    
  funding available to charter schools in the '90s.                                                                             
     9:32:20 AM                                                                                                               
     MS. GERARD  stated that Alaska earned  federal start-up                                                                    
     funds in the  amount of $145,000 at  one time; however,                                                                    
     the application  process has changed, and  four or five                                                                    
     years  have passed  since Alaska  charter schools  have                                                                    
     been  granted  funds.   The  language  of  the  state's                                                                    
     charter  school legislation  undermines the  scoring of                                                                    
     9:33:32 AM                                                                                                               
     CHAIR  SEATON asked  for the  location  of the  Academy                                                                    
     Charter School.                                                                                                            
  MS. GERARD answered that the school is in Palmer.                                                                             
     9:33:52 AM                                                                                                               
     CHAIR SEATON closed public testimony.                                                                                      
     9:34:22 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE  BUCH asked  about the  bill's five-year                                                                    
     impact on the local community.                                                                                             
     REPRESENTATIVE KELLER  expressed his confidence  in the                                                                    
     local  school board  and  municipality  to "work  those                                                                    
     things out."   He spoke  of the school  facility crisis                                                                    
     in Wasilla and said the  bill creates an opportunity to                                                                    
     alleviate  the  shortage.     In  further  response  to                                                                    
     Representative  Buch,  Representative Keller  said  the                                                                    
     proposed legislation  would not  place an  undue burden                                                                    
     on the  community, but  is a  positive tool  with which                                                                    
     the local community can construct schools.                                                                                 
     9:36:52 AM                                                                                                               
REPRESENTATIVE   P.  WILSON   questioned  whether   the                                                                         
community must show its willingness by a vote.                                                                                  
9:37:34 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  SEATON  referred back  to  the  document in  the                                                                         
committee  packet from  Legal  Services dated  3/30/10.                                                                         
The  memorandum  noted  that  the  Alaska  Constitution                                                                         
prohibits  "local  acts"  without a  majority  vote  of                                                                         
qualified voters.   In addition, Legislative  Legal and                                                                         
Research  Services advised  that although  the proposed                                                                         
legislation does  not require a vote,  the conservative                                                                         
approach on local  acts of a large  financial impact is                                                                         
to have a vote.                                                                                                                 
9:39:03 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  P. WILSON  asked,  "Could this  proceed                                                                         
the  way it's  written,  without a  vote  of the  local                                                                         
9:39:22 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ  assumed leases  and  maintenance                                                                         
were  included.   She  asked  whether  leases would  be                                                                         
taken to a vote of the  local community or to the local                                                                         
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER stated  that local  school board                                                                         
members have close contact  with their constituents and                                                                         
represent the community well on issues.                                                                                         
9:41:15 AM                                                                                                                    
CHAIR  SEATON  reminded   the  committee  the  projects                                                                         
aspect was amended  out of the bill; in  fact, the bill                                                                         
would  establish a  program for  a  grant process  from                                                                         
state government.   He reviewed  how the  program would                                                                         
grant federal  funds to  charter schools  and reimburse                                                                         
local municipalities at various rates.                                                                                          
9:43:31 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE P.  WILSON observed charter  schools can                                                                         
get money  for construction,  major maintenance,  or to                                                                         
pay a lease.                                                                                                                    
     CHAIR SEATON concurred, and added  that the funds could                                                                    
     be  used towards  facility  acquisition costs,  whether                                                                    
     for the purchase, or lease, of a facility.                                                                                 
     9:45:00 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ suggested  the costs  of a  five-                                                                    
     year  lease   could  be   estimated  on   the  school's                                                                    
     application for funding.                                                                                                   
     9:45:16 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE  GARDNER pointed  out  that the  funding                                                                    
     approval  process is  competitive and  difficult.   She                                                                    
     warned  that lease  operating costs  would not  compete                                                                    
     with the cost of purchasing a building.                                                                                    
     9:45:59 AM                                                                                                               
     CHAIR SEATON  asked for comment from  the department on                                                                    
     state aid  for costs  of charter  school "construction,                                                                    
     lease, and major maintenance."                                                                                             
     9:46:24 AM                                                                                                               
     EDDY  JEANS, Director,  School  Finance and  Facilities                                                                    
     Section, Department of  Education and Early Development                                                                    
     (EED), informed the committee that  the language in the                                                                    
     bill was taken directly out  of a federal program, thus                                                                    
     the intent  of the  federal program  is that  the state                                                                    
     program   will   provide   some  funding   for   leased                                                                    
     facilities.   He opined this  component of the  bill is                                                                    
     not to pay  the lease, but to pay for  renovations of a                                                                    
     lease,  which  is  not  allowed   by  the  state  major                                                                    
     maintenance  program;  in  fact, renovations  are  only                                                                    
     paid for at district-owned facilities.                                                                                     
     9:47:09 AM                                                                                                               
     CHAIR  SEATON   confirmed  the  understanding   of  the                                                                    
     9:47:34 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ said  the state's  interpretation                                                                    
     should  follow the  more  expansive federal  intention,                                                                    
and allow the  money to be used for  leases, instead of                                                                         
a more restrictive interpretation.                                                                                              
MR. JEANS  advised that a  lease must be  considered an                                                                         
operational cost.   He stated,  "I see  the operational                                                                         
cost  as  a separate  item  versus  the maintenance  or                                                                         
rehabilitation of  a facility.  You're  always going to                                                                         
have operational costs, and that's what a lease is."                                                                            
9:48:53 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ  cited the situation of  the local                                                                         
charter school,  which pays its  lease out of  the base                                                                         
student  allocation  (BSA).   If  the  federal  program                                                                         
allowed  the school  to use  federal funding  to offset                                                                         
this cost, the state process should also.                                                                                       
MR. JEANS agreed  that the lease cost comes  out of the                                                                         
BSA;  however, operational  costs  for facilities  come                                                                         
out of every  school's BSA and are borne  by the school                                                                         
district through the foundation program.                                                                                        
9:50:08 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ stressed  the difference  is that                                                                         
the charter  school does not  have a  facility provided                                                                         
by the district and  is paying for operational costs-in                                                                         
addition  to  the  facility-out   of  its  per  student                                                                         
9:50:57 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  GARDNER asked  for the  purpose of  the                                                                         
provision in the proposed  legislation that removes the                                                                         
cap of 60 charter schools.                                                                                                      
9:51:42 AM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  KELLER stated  removing the  cap is  to                                                                         
improve  Alaska's  chances  at   winning  grants.    Of                                                                         
course,  this  change  would also  enhance  educational                                                                         
MR.  JEANS,   referring  to  the   previous  discussion                                                                         
regarding bonding to cover the  local share of the cost                                                                         
of a  facility, noted  that when the  department enters                                                                         
into a grant agreement with  a school district, it does                                                                         
     not   release   state    or   federal   funds   without                                                                    
     confirmation of the participating  share from the local                                                                    
     district.    He  acknowledged   that  each  project  is                                                                    
     evaluated  at the  local level,  and small  projects do                                                                    
     not necessarily  go before the  public for a  vote, but                                                                    
     large  scale  projects  do,  even   though  it  is  not                                                                    
     required.   The department will require  evidence and a                                                                    
  guarantee of the source of the local contribution.                                                                            
     9:53:50 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE P.  WILSON asked whether  the department                                                                    
     would hire personnel to administer the program.                                                                            
     MR.  JEANS  advised  there are  one  and  one-half  new                                                                    
     positions as indicated by the fiscal note.                                                                                 
     9:54:42 AM                                                                                                               
     CHAIR SEATON  remarked that  project funding  cannot be                                                                    
     supplanted on the local or the federal level.                                                                              
     9:55:22 AM                                                                                                               
     REPRESENTATIVE  MUNOZ  moved  to   report  HB  393,  as                                                                    
     amended,    out    of   committee    with    individual                                                                    
     recommendations  and  the  accompanying  fiscal  notes.                                                                    
     There being  no objection,  CSHB 393(EDC)  was reported                                                                    
     from the House Education Standing Committee.                                                                               

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
HB 393 Sponsor Statement.pdf HEDC 3/12/2010 8:00:00 AM
HEDC 3/15/2010 8:00:00 AM
HEDC 3/24/2010 8:00:00 AM
HEDC 3/29/2010 8:00:00 AM
HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 393
Support public.pdf HEDC 3/12/2010 8:00:00 AM
HEDC 3/15/2010 8:00:00 AM
HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 393
Charter School Stats.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
Charter School App.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
Charter School App sec 2.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
Charter School Rating Temp.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
Charter School Rating Temp sec 2.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
Charter School Regs.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
2009 USDOE EED application reveiwer comments.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
CS facilitites Fed Reg..pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
Charter Facility Guidance.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
Charter School Status 3-17-2010.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
HEC 3.15.10 responses HB393.doc HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
CS HB 206 (EDC) April 22 workdraft.pdf HEDC 1/20/2010 8:00:00 AM
HEDC 3/29/2010 8:00:00 AM
HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
HB 206
HSGR10WMPT07.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
10MScoringGuide07.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
10RScoringGuide07.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
10WScoringGuide07.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
AK-PracticeTest-Gr10_TAD.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM
HSGR10RPT07.pdf HEDC 3/31/2010 8:00:00 AM