Legislature(2017 - 2018)ADAMS ROOM 519

04/18/2018 09:00 AM House FINANCE

Note: the audio and video recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.

Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as

* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
-- Recessed to a Call of the Chair --
<Bill Hearing Canceled>
-- Public Testimony --
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
Heard & Held
-- Public Testimony --
+ Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled TELECONFERENCED
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 216(FIN)                                                                                                 
"An  Act  relating  to  the calculation  of  state  aid  for                                                                    
schools that  consolidate; relating to the  determination of                                                                    
the number  of schools in  a district; and providing  for an                                                                    
effective date."                                                                                                                
9:39:42 AM                                                                                                                    
SENATOR  NATASHA VON  IMHOF,  SPONSOR,  thanked members  for                                                                    
hearing the  bill and the House  for working on HB  406, the                                                                    
companion bill.  She indicated that the  request was brought                                                                    
forward to  the legislature  by several  of the  large urban                                                                    
school districts in Alaska who  were facing the challenge of                                                                    
student  migration out  of their  districts, leaving  under-                                                                    
utilized  school  buildings  with excess  capacity.  Current                                                                    
state  law inadvertently  discouraged school  consolidation.                                                                    
Analysis   showed  that   districts  that   might  want   to                                                                    
consolidate  schools  found  that  any  savings  experienced                                                                    
through   reduced    labor   and   operating    costs   were                                                                    
detrimentally offset through the  reduced income received by                                                                    
the  district  when students  were  absorbed  into a  larger                                                                    
Senator von  Imhof explained that currently  the school size                                                                    
cost  factor contained  in AS  14.17.450  was an  adjustment                                                                    
factor applied  to the base  student allocation  (BSA) which                                                                    
gave  smaller  schools more  money  per  student and  larger                                                                    
schools less money  per student under the  theory that small                                                                    
schools were less efficient with  higher operating costs per                                                                    
student.  For  districts  that  might  like  to  consolidate                                                                    
schools, the  fact that they  were effectively  punished via                                                                    
the  state funding  formula for  school consolidation  meant                                                                    
that many were  unwilling to even have  a conversation about                                                                    
consolidation.  Senate Bill  216  addressed  the issue.  The                                                                    
bill  provided   a  4-year  consolidation   transition  that                                                                    
allowed  a  school district  to  gradually  move from  their                                                                    
current state aid  amount to a lower state  aid amount after                                                                    
the consolidation  of schools.  It was voluntary  and simply                                                                    
another  tool for  districts to  use if  they chose  to. The                                                                    
purpose  of  the  bill  was  to  encourage  and  incentivize                                                                    
districts  to   look  for   excess  capacity   within  their                                                                    
districts  through  potentially   consolidating  schools  by                                                                    
holding  harmless the  state revenue  received  for 2  years                                                                    
followed by a step  down in revenue in years 3  and 4 so the                                                                    
district had  time to repurpose  the asset and  reabsorb the                                                                    
associated operating  costs. She had relayed  the essence of                                                                    
the  bill and  indicated her  staff would  continue with  an                                                                    
explanation and a review of the PowerPoint.                                                                                     
9:42:44 AM                                                                                                                    
JONATHAN  KING, STAFF,  SENATOR  VON  IMHOF, introduced  the                                                                    
PowerPoint  presentation:  "SB   216:  School  Consolidation                                                                    
Transition."  He  was also  available  to  walk through  the                                                                    
sectional analysis after the presentation if needed.                                                                            
Mr.  King began  with the  school size  adjustment chart  on                                                                    
slide  2:   "Alaska's  School  Size  Factor   Adjustment  AS                                                                    
14.17.450(a)." He indicated that  the figure showed Alaska's                                                                    
school  size factor  adjustment in  AS 14.17.450(a).  It was                                                                    
part of the  school funding formula used  to provide smaller                                                                    
schools with slightly more money  than the state provided to                                                                    
larger  schools.  He  explained  that  for  each  individual                                                                    
school  the  state  counted  the  number  of  students,  the                                                                    
unadjusted   average  daily   membership   (ADM).  For   the                                                                    
individual school  the state located  where they sat  on the                                                                    
curve.  The curve  provided the  multiplier used  inside the                                                                    
school  funding adjusted.  He noted  that the  shape of  the                                                                    
curve went  up on the  left-hand side  and went down  on the                                                                    
right-hand side.  In terms of  funding, in a  smaller school                                                                    
kids counted for more than kids in larger schools.                                                                              
9:44:06 AM                                                                                                                    
Mr.  King moved  to the  graph on  slide 3:  "Effect of  the                                                                    
School  Size  Factor  on   Consolidation:  Example  1."  The                                                                    
problem  the bill  tried to  address  could be  seen on  the                                                                    
slide.  The curve  followed exactly  the same  curve on  the                                                                    
prior slide. However, it showed  the distribution of schools                                                                    
inside  the  Anchorage  School District.  The  district  was                                                                    
large enough  to provide  a large range  of schools  and the                                                                    
same  shaped curve  as before.  He highlighted  the 2  green                                                                    
dots  on   the  page.  He   presumed  that  the   2  schools                                                                    
represented  by the  green dots  wanted  to consolidate  and                                                                    
that the space  in one of the existing  facilities was large                                                                    
enough  to  bring  the  kids from  the  other  school  over.                                                                    
Currently, there were  2 schools; one with  755 students and                                                                    
one with 798 students.  Their school size factor adjustment,                                                                    
according  to statute,  was equal  to  1.06 and  1.05 -  the                                                                    
multipliers  that their  ADM received  in the  state funding                                                                    
formula  prior  to  consolidation.   In  combining  the  two                                                                    
schools, they  became the  red dot further  to the  right of                                                                    
the curve  marked by the  numbers 0.95 (the  new multiplier)                                                                    
and   1553   (the   new    number   of   students).   Before                                                                    
consolidation,  the  2  schools would  have  received  $11.8                                                                    
million  in state  aid. After  consolidation  with the  drop                                                                    
down to the curve to  the right, they received $10.6 million                                                                    
in state  aid. There  was a difference  of $1.2  million. At                                                                    
the same  time, they ended up  with a drop in  local funding                                                                    
because  the  maximum  amount  of  funding  a  school  could                                                                    
receive was a  function of the total  basic need calculation                                                                    
for the  state. The schools  lost an additional  $250,000 in                                                                    
local  funding.  The  hurdle for  the  school  district  was                                                                    
whether it  would save more  than $1.5 million.  The funding                                                                    
the school  would receive  from state  and local  sources by                                                                    
combining the 2  schools was $1.5 million.  The question was                                                                    
whether the  school would save  $1.5 million. If  not, there                                                                    
would be  a net  loss to the  school district.  He suggested                                                                    
that when school districts did  the calculations, they found                                                                    
that their drop in funding  was greater than their estimated                                                                    
savings, at least in the short run.                                                                                             
9:47:03 AM                                                                                                                    
Mr. King continued to slide  4: "What the Bill Does: Section                                                                    
1." He  relayed that Section  1 removed the  disincentive by                                                                    
providing  a  4-year  transition  period  for  consolidating                                                                    
schools. In  years 1  and 2, the  school would  preserve 100                                                                    
percent  of the  pre-consolidation per  student funding.  In                                                                    
the prior example  where the two schools  were combined, for                                                                    
the  first 2  years  after consolidation  their school  size                                                                    
adjustment factor would  be held stable at 1.06  and 1.05 on                                                                    
the prior slide.  In year 3, the  consolidated schools would                                                                    
start  transitioning   to  the   post-consolidation  funding                                                                    
amount.  They would  receive the  post consolidation  amount                                                                    
plus  66 percent  of  the difference  between  pre and  post                                                                    
consolidation. In  year 4 they  would receive 33  percent of                                                                    
the  difference  plus the  base  amount.  After year  4  the                                                                    
school would receive standard funding  as provided for in AS                                                                    
Mr.  King reviewed  slide 5:  "What  the Bill  Does Not  Do:                                                                    
Section 1." The bill did  not change the school size funding                                                                    
formula in  AS 14.17.450.  The curve  would not  be affected                                                                    
and would  not change  anything for  those schools  that did                                                                    
not   consolidate.  For   example,   if   Fairbanks  had   a                                                                    
consolidation and Mat-Su did not,  there would be no funding                                                                    
effect  to  Mat-Su. It  would  only  affect Fairbanks.  Even                                                                    
within  Fairbanks,  it  would only  affect  the  portion  of                                                                    
funding  that was  associated with  the schools  involved in                                                                    
the consolidation. The  calculations associated with schools                                                                    
that  were  untouched  by consolidation  and  did  not  have                                                                    
boundary issues  would not be included.  The legislation did                                                                    
not  encourage  districts  to  build  new  schools  for  the                                                                    
purposes of  consolidating existing schools. He  noted there                                                                    
was a  prohibition within SB 216  to use a new  facility. An                                                                    
existing facility had  to be used. It did  not allow schools                                                                    
to reopen  or reconsolidate  in order to  take inappropriate                                                                    
advantage of  the consolidation transition. In  other words,                                                                    
there were limits  on going back and forth.  One thing heard                                                                    
in public  testimony was  that there was  no better  way for                                                                    
the school  districts to get  more money than by  staying at                                                                    
the status quo.  Under the status quo,  school districts had                                                                    
the incentive to have the  smallest schools possible because                                                                    
they received  the most funding  associated with  the curve.                                                                    
The goal  was to move away  from the status quo,  change the                                                                    
thinking  about  the  status  quo,  and  make  consolidation                                                                    
potentially  more  attractive.  The tool  was  available  to                                                                    
school districts who wanted to use it.                                                                                          
Senator von Imhof  added that in Section 1 the  bill was not                                                                    
costing  the  state  any  additional  funds.  In  fact,  she                                                                    
pointed out that there should be  savings in year 3 and year                                                                    
4  when   the  state   began  to   drop  down   the  revenue                                                                    
calculation.  In year  5, the  state would  be paying  a new                                                                    
revenue calculation  which would  be much  less that  it was                                                                    
currently. She emphasized  that consolidation was voluntary.                                                                    
The goal  was for schools  to have 4  years to figure  out a                                                                    
way to  repurpose the school.  The bill did not  address how                                                                    
to repurpose the school. It  was entirely up to the district                                                                    
and the  board to determine  each specific property  and how                                                                    
they wanted to handle it. She  had found, that for a typical                                                                    
elementary  school  in  the Anchorage  School  District  the                                                                    
savings would  eventually be  about $600,000.  She suggested                                                                    
that  if a  high school  were to  theoretically close  or be                                                                    
consolidated,  the savings  would  be about  $1 million  per                                                                    
school in  the Anchorage  School District.  The goal  was to                                                                    
use  existing infrastructure  more  efficiently rather  than                                                                    
constructing new buildings.                                                                                                     
Mr. King noted that the  savings numbers were per school per                                                                    
year rather than in total.                                                                                                      
9:52:24 AM                                                                                                                    
Mr. King advanced  to slide 6: "What the  Bill Does: Section                                                                    
2."  He  reported  that Section  2  provided  single  school                                                                    
communities to  fully utilize the  capacity of  the existing                                                                    
K-12  buildings that  they  had. There  was  a provision  in                                                                    
AS 14.17.905  that stated  that in  communities where  there                                                                    
was  a single  K-12  school, they  would  lose funding  when                                                                    
their  ADM  exceeded  425   students.  Currently,  under  AS                                                                    
14.17.905, the funding formula for  a rural community with 1                                                                    
K-12 school  with 1 to  425 students stated that  they would                                                                    
be treated as  if there were 2 schools. In  other words, the                                                                    
number of  students, 425, would be  divided in 2 to  equal 2                                                                    
schools  of about  212 students  each. The  result would  be                                                                    
that  the schools  moved up  the  curve from  slide 2  which                                                                    
provided more funding.  When going from 425  students to 426                                                                    
the school would  be treated as 1 school.  He suggested that                                                                    
the movement  down the curve from  212 to 426 was  a loss of                                                                    
hundreds of  thousands of dollars  to that  school district,                                                                    
an  unintended consequence  of hard  coding the  425 number.                                                                    
Section 2 changed it so  that when the schools reached above                                                                    
425 ADM they  would continue to be treated as  2 schools. He                                                                    
wondered why the  state would want to do  that. He suggested                                                                    
that  under the  current situation,  when the  student count                                                                    
went from 425 to 426, all  of a sudden, maintaining the K-12                                                                    
school  became   less  desirable.  It  also   increased  the                                                                    
incentive to  build a new  school in  order to have  2 brick                                                                    
and mortar  schools to maximize  funding under  the existing                                                                    
state statute. It  was much less expensive for  the state to                                                                    
remove  the  artificial  barrier  of  425  students  keeping                                                                    
districts in schools with capacity  greater than 25, than it                                                                    
was to build a new school for tens of millions of dollars.                                                                      
Senator von  Imhof explained that  the provision  came about                                                                    
when exploring the legislation  for larger school districts.                                                                    
The particular  issue was brought  to her attention  and was                                                                    
the  reason  for  Section  2.  She noted  that  it  was  for                                                                    
communities with  a single K-12  school. It was  specific to                                                                    
the  type of  school  as  well as  a  specific  size of  the                                                                    
community. The  definition of "Community"  was in  the bill.                                                                    
It was  for communities  that meet the  criteria. Currently,                                                                    
only one community qualified. She  did not want the state to                                                                    
pay  for another  new  school costing  tens  of millions  of                                                                    
dollars when  an existing building  had excess  capacity and                                                                    
was working fine for the community.                                                                                             
Mr. King indicated there was  another example, but it was up                                                                    
to the  will of  the committee  if members  wanted to  see a                                                                    
more  detailed example.  Co-Chair  Foster  thought that  the                                                                    
committee was okay without the more detailed example.                                                                           
Mr.  King offered  to walk  through the  sectional analysis.                                                                    
Co-Chair Foster encouraged him to do so.                                                                                        
9:57:21 AM                                                                                                                    
Mr. King read the sectional analysis for SB 216:                                                                                
     Section 1: AS 14.17.410(b)                                                                                                 
     Adds new  language to AS  14.17.410(b)(1) to  provide a                                                                    
     "consolidation   transition"  that   allows  a   school                                                                    
     district  to gradually  move from  their current  state                                                                    
     aid  amount   to  a  lower   state  aid   amount  after                                                                    
     consolidation  of schools  and describes  how and  when                                                                    
     the consolidation transition can be used.                                                                                  
          (H) Specifies how state aide during the                                                                               
          transition period will be calculated. The "pre-                                                                       
          consolidation"  and  "post-consolidation"  formula                                                                    
          remains the  same; the bill  will only  change how                                                                    
          quickly   the  "post   consolidation"  amount   is                                                                    
          Consolidation  Years  1  & 2:  The  district  will                                                                    
          receive the  same funding  as if  the consolidated                                                                    
          school was still separate schools.                                                                                    
          Consolidation  Year 3:  The district  will receive                                                                    
          66% of  the difference  between funding  from pre-                                                                    
          consolidation and post-consolidation.                                                                                 
          Consolidation  Year 4:  The district  will receive                                                                    
          33% of  the difference  between funding  from pre-                                                                    
          consolidation and post-consolidation.                                                                                 
          Sections (I)    (L)  specify conditions  where the                                                                    
          "consolidation transition" may not be used.                                                                           
          (I)  When  the  "transitional"  state  aid  amount                                                                    
          would  result  in  lower funding  than  under  the                                                                    
          traditional funding formula.                                                                                          
          (J) When  a school  district is  already receiving                                                                    
          additional  state aid  due  to  the Hold  Harmless                                                                    
          Clause in AS 14.17.410(b)(1)(E).                                                                                      
          (K) If a new facility  was constructed in order to                                                                    
          consolidate schools.                                                                                                  
          (L) If the school  was reopened and reconsolidated                                                                    
          within the past seven years.                                                                                          
          (M)   Requires  the   district   to  provide   the                                                                    
          necessary  information  and calculations  for  the                                                                    
          Department of Education  and Early Development for                                                                    
          verification, including a  student count by school                                                                    
          for the schools involved in the consolidation.                                                                        
          Section 2: AS 14.17.905                                                                                               
          Adds a  new subsection  that allows a  school that                                                                    
          services grades K-12 in a  single building and has                                                                    
          an  average daily  membership  (ADM) greater  than                                                                    
          425  to be  considered  two  separate schools  for                                                                    
          calculating state aid.                                                                                                
     Section 3: AS 14.17.410(b)                                                                                                 
     Makes this Act applicable to schools which consolidate                                                                     
     on or after the effective date of this bill.                                                                               
     Section 4: Effective Date                                                                                                  
     Provides for an immediate effective date.                                                                                  
Mr. King was available for questions.                                                                                           
Co-Chair Foster reviewed the list of available testifiers.                                                                      
10:01:18 AM                                                                                                                   
Co-Chair  Seaton referred  to Section  L regarding  a school                                                                    
being  reopened and  reconsolidated  within  the past  seven                                                                    
years.  He  asked  if  the language  meant  just  under  the                                                                    
proposed  program. Mr.  King responded  only  if the  school                                                                    
received the funding transition under the proposed program.                                                                     
Co-Chair Seaton  presented a hypothetical scenario  in which                                                                    
a school  was currently closed  and was reopened.  He though                                                                    
the school could qualify for  the change for reconsolidation                                                                    
for  the  following  year.  Mr. King  replied  that  he  was                                                                    
correct. If  there was a  school that was  currently closed,                                                                    
reopened,  reconsolidated,   and  closed  again,   it  could                                                                    
qualify under  the section. He  had heard from  the district                                                                    
that it  took about 2 years  to reopen a school  and 2 years                                                                    
to close  a school. It  was a painful process  for districts                                                                    
and  for families  involved. Families  got very  attached to                                                                    
schools, particularly with schools  that had been opened for                                                                    
a while. Although the bill  was creating an additional tool,                                                                    
it did not  mean that consolidation was a done  deal. It was                                                                    
something  for  districts  to  consider,  but  there  was  a                                                                    
political process  to go  through to do  so. There  would be                                                                    
significant  costs associated  with reopening  a school.  He                                                                    
thought it was important to consider the pragmatic hurdles.                                                                     
10:04:13 AM                                                                                                                   
Co-Chair Seaton  asked for a  breakdown of cost  savings. He                                                                    
asked for information about the  savings associated with the                                                                    
closing of a school and repurposing it.                                                                                         
Mr. King referred  to slide 8 which presented  an example of                                                                    
5  schools shrinking  down  to  4. The  example  was of  the                                                                    
Anchorage  School  District.  He  noted  the  district  cost                                                                    
factor in the yellow box of  1.00. In the very lower box, if                                                                    
the  Anchorage  School District  was  to  take 5  elementary                                                                    
schools  and  consolidate them  down  to  4, their  loss  in                                                                    
funding would  be about $800,000. He  thought Representative                                                                    
Seaton  was  asking  what  the   savings  would  be  to  the                                                                    
districts. He had  the information in his  office. It showed                                                                    
that a district would lose  a principle, operating costs for                                                                    
the building, and custodial support  staff. The cost savings                                                                    
would be about  $500,000 to $600,000. The  district would be                                                                    
in  the  hole  $200,000  even  accounting  for  closing.  He                                                                    
highlighted  the issue  of transportation  costs. There  had                                                                    
been  questions  in  other  committees  about  having  fewer                                                                    
schools and larger boundary areas  resulting in more time on                                                                    
the bus for students. There  was a question about elementary                                                                    
students spending  40 minutes per  day each way on  the bus.                                                                    
The  Anchorage School  District  had testified  that it  was                                                                    
committed  to making  sure kindergarteners  were on  the bus                                                                    
for an  age appropriate amount  of time, which  meant adding                                                                    
additional   transportation   costs.  In   this   particular                                                                    
example, based on  what was provided to  Senator von Imhof's                                                                    
office,  the   additional  transportation  costs   would  be                                                                    
$400,000. He conveyed that the  school district would be out                                                                    
at  total  of $500,000  to  $600,000.  The Anchorage  School                                                                    
District had  been very willing  to show its modeling  as to                                                                    
its decision-making process.                                                                                                    
Co-Chair Seaton asked Mr. King to provide the information.                                                                      
Co-Chair Foster asked, "That was who again?"                                                                                    
Mr.  King  responded  that  it   was  the  Anchorage  School                                                                    
District. Dr.  Bishop, who was  online, and her  staff would                                                                    
be able to testify on the issue when they testified.                                                                            
10:08:40 AM                                                                                                                   
DR. DEENA BISHOP, ANCHORAGE  SCHOOL DISTRICT, ANCHORAGE (via                                                                    
teleconference), was happy to answer  any questions. She had                                                                    
sent in  her written testimony.  She indicated that  the key                                                                    
was the  operational side. She  spoke of  Anchorage recently                                                                    
passing a bond initiative. She  was aware that the bond debt                                                                    
reimbursement  program  at the  state  was  on hiatus  until                                                                    
2020. She suggested  that while the bill  was addressing the                                                                    
operational costs of a school  and the movement to close it,                                                                    
Anchorage had a number of  facilities that were built in the                                                                    
1950s, 1960s,  and 1970s. She  reported that about 44  to 45                                                                    
percent  of the  district's facilities  were built  prior to                                                                    
the  1970s. The  district  was finding  buildings that  were                                                                    
used for life  and had to put money into  them. The district                                                                    
was  happy  to  put  money into  them  which  the  community                                                                    
supported. However,  the district wanted to  be responsible.                                                                    
If and when  the state bond debt reimbursement  came on, the                                                                    
district  would ask  the  state for  support  in making  its                                                                    
public schools more efficient.                                                                                                  
Dr.  Bishop continued  with her  testimony relaying  some of                                                                    
the  questions the  district  received  in prior  testimony.                                                                    
Many  questions were  about how  to gain  in the  system and                                                                    
whether  school districts  would participate.  She felt  the                                                                    
district was  taking the hard  road to be responsive  to the                                                                    
community. People loved their schools.  She was aware of how                                                                    
the  city had  grown in  different areas  and where  the new                                                                    
buildout would be.  There might be new  investment needed in                                                                    
other areas  and some reduction  in other  parts. Presently,                                                                    
there was  a report  about the district  being able  to find                                                                    
efficiencies in a  couple of schools. The  bill would assist                                                                    
the school district in the  type of transition that would be                                                                    
a 2-year  process. The  district wanted kids  to be  able to                                                                    
matriculate out, while at the  same time having high quality                                                                    
education. The district would never  receive more money that                                                                    
it received presently. In the  end, it would always be less.                                                                    
She reported that  it was difficult to  convince a community                                                                    
to do it to itself. She  reported that the district had been                                                                    
modeling the issue out to  many schools within the district.                                                                    
The models  found the district  with less money in  the end.                                                                    
In    terms   of    the   district's    accountability   and                                                                    
responsibility to  the state about capital,  she thought the                                                                    
district   needed   to   start   thinking   bigger.   Having                                                                    
acknowledgement through  legislation would help to  make the                                                                    
transitions  good places  to be  for teachers,  parents, and                                                                    
10:12:20 AM                                                                                                                   
Representative   Guttenberg  asked   Dr.   Bishop  how   she                                                                    
responded  to the  criticism that  the  school district  had                                                                    
decided to  move to  smaller schools  because of  more money                                                                    
coming in per  student. He indicated she had  taken a gamble                                                                    
that failed. He had heard it was a bail out.                                                                                    
Ms. Bishop responded  that she could continue  to keep small                                                                    
schools.  She   testified  that  Anchorage's   schools  were                                                                    
neighborhood schools. The  district had grown substantially.                                                                    
The district  was putting  up schools  because in  the 1970s                                                                    
and 1980s it  was growing so much. Anchorage  was larger and                                                                    
more spread out,  but there was not a gamble  to build small                                                                    
schools. They  were schools with  400 kids. They  were large                                                                    
schools, as  Anchorage was an  urban district.  The argument                                                                    
was  about  making  good decisions  because  enrollment  was                                                                    
declining.  She could  keep schools  at 50  percent capacity                                                                    
and  the funding  would  continue to  come  from the  state.                                                                    
However, she did  not feel it was right. She  was willing to                                                                    
stand  up and  say the  district believed  in education  and                                                                    
wanted education for the  twenty-first century. The district                                                                    
did not  want to ask tax  payers to put revenue  into taking                                                                    
care of a building the  district did not need. She suggested                                                                    
that  the  district was  looking  at  sharing resources  and                                                                    
pulling staff together to bring  more opportunities to kids.                                                                    
She was  looking at the  situation as  a cup half  full. She                                                                    
would  love  to  speak  to  anyone that  thought  it  was  a                                                                    
failure.  She argued  that  if things  were  left alone  the                                                                    
state would  not be  keeping account  of its  own resources.                                                                    
She  relayed  that in  Anchorage  the  state was  paying  60                                                                    
percent of the district's bill.                                                                                                 
Co-Chair   Foster  recognized   Representative  Tilton   and                                                                    
Representative  Thompson  at  the table  and  Representative                                                                    
Harriet Drummond in the audience.                                                                                               
10:15:25 AM                                                                                                                   
Vice-Chair Gara  thanked Dr.  Bishop for  being so  vocal on                                                                    
behalf of Alaska's students. He  thought the bill made sense                                                                    
for the reasons  that were stated. However,  he wondered how                                                                    
the  legislature  could pass  a  bill  which benefited  some                                                                    
school districts but not others.  His district would benefit                                                                    
but, for  example, Lake and Peninsula  School District would                                                                    
not. It was not  the fault of the bill, as  it was trying to                                                                    
create a problem in the  foundation formula. He asked if Dr.                                                                    
Bishop  preferred to  have the  bill  content be  part of  a                                                                    
package  that  perhaps  included  an increase  to  the  base                                                                    
student   allocation   or   an    upgrade   to   the   pupil                                                                    
transportation formula.  He wondered  about the best  way to                                                                    
provide equity  to schools  across the  state and  a quality                                                                    
education. He wondered  if it would be better to  have it as                                                                    
part of a package with other things included as well.                                                                           
Ms. Bishop responded that school  districts around the state                                                                    
would benefit  from an education omnibus  bill that included                                                                    
smart thinking  about investment in education  whether it be                                                                    
transportation  or the  BSA. The  Anchorage School  District                                                                    
subsidized  transportation  in  the  amount  of  about  $2.5                                                                    
million  per   year  to  provide   the  bussing   system  in                                                                    
Anchorage. In  addition, looking  at investing  in education                                                                    
overall with  an increase in the  BSA and a full  package of                                                                    
education would  be favored. She advocated  for a curriculum                                                                    
bill as  well. She did  not think the  bill did any  harm to                                                                    
districts such  as the Lake  and Peninsula  School District.                                                                    
She was aware  that the Lower Yukon  School District favored                                                                    
the  bill.  She  was  happy to  have  a  conversation  about                                                                    
supporting school districts in many different ways.                                                                             
Vice-Chair Gara thought  the points in the  bill made sense.                                                                    
However,  even  with  the  bill,  unless  there  were  other                                                                    
changes, Anchorage faced about  100 additional staff losses.                                                                    
He asked if he was correct.                                                                                                     
Ms. Bishop  responded that the  school district had  over 90                                                                    
reductions in  the current year.  She elaborated that  50 of                                                                    
the  reductions were  certified  staff including  principle,                                                                    
teachers,  and  counselors. She  opined  that  it took  more                                                                    
money  to do  business  in Alaska.  She  believed the  state                                                                    
should invest  in education,  as it  was the  cornerstone of                                                                    
democracy. She  could not speak  enough about  investment in                                                                    
education.  The operations  and the  BSA were  key paramount                                                                    
Vice-Chair Gara agreed  that the legislation was  a piece of                                                                    
the puzzle  and understood  the inequity the  bill attempted                                                                    
to correct. He appreciated Ms. Bishop's testimony.                                                                              
10:20:29 AM                                                                                                                   
Representative Pruitt  thought the bill was  very important.                                                                    
He  asked Ms.  Bishop if  she  expected a  savings of  about                                                                    
$647,000 with the reduction of one school.                                                                                      
Ms.  Bishop  responded,   "Absolutely."  She  indicated  the                                                                    
district  had   done  some  scaling   out  of   numbers  and                                                                    
elementary was about a $600  savings in the long run looking                                                                    
out 5 years.  Middle schools ranged between  $800 and $1000.                                                                    
She indicated that  the savings was a  moving target because                                                                    
of  the ADM  and  the  formula. She  suggested  that if  the                                                                    
school district was to look  at bringing a building offline,                                                                    
there would be an initial input  of funds to be able to move                                                                    
furniture  or repurpose  another  area.  The district  would                                                                    
have  to upgrade  a  space to  an  acceptable condition  for                                                                    
classroom use.  She also  mentioned not  wanting to  give up                                                                    
long-term maintenance  for a school  not in use,  because it                                                                    
was  still   responsible  for  maintaining  the   space.  In                                                                    
Anchorage, the school buildings were  owned by the city. She                                                                    
suggested  that future  bonds might  help  with re-use.  The                                                                    
school  district was  also considering  moving  some of  the                                                                    
charter  schools that  were  renting  facilities into  other                                                                    
school facilities not  in use. She thought  another piece of                                                                    
legislation  offered first  use  of a  facility for  another                                                                    
purpose.  The school  district was  exploring using  some of                                                                    
the facilities  for other purposes  such as  preschools. The                                                                    
district  was  looking  at  how  to  utilize  facilities  to                                                                    
support education in the entire  city. She concluded that as                                                                    
part of  a long-term plan, it  would be best not  to have to                                                                    
immediately  put  revenue  into   a  building  for  capital.                                                                    
Instead, the  district could work out  the operational costs                                                                    
over time. She  thought the district would try  to provide a                                                                    
2-year   buffer  to   matriculate  kids   out  of   primary,                                                                    
secondary,  and middle  school. The  district would  want to                                                                    
work with the  city, parents, teachers, and  students on the                                                                    
issue. She believed  the district could find  savings in the                                                                    
long-term. The  school district's model  was built off  of a                                                                    
long-term plan.                                                                                                                 
Co-Chair  Foster indicated  that floor  session would  begin                                                                    
momentarily. The  committee would  resume later in  the day.                                                                    
He recessed the meeting to a call of the chair.                                                                                 
10:25:10 AM                                                                                                                   
1:36:37 PM                                                                                                                    
Representative  Grenn  stated  there   had  been  spurts  of                                                                    
building elementary  schools. He  asked when the  last batch                                                                    
had  been built.  Ms. Bishop  answered it  had been  over 10                                                                    
Co-Chair Foster OPENED public testimony.                                                                                        
DR.  LISA  PARADY,  EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,  ALASKA  COUNCIL  OF                                                                    
SCHOOL  ADMINISTRATORS, spoke  in support  of the  bill. She                                                                    
relayed  that  although  the  bill  impacted  the  Anchorage                                                                    
School District  and the Lower Yukon  School District, there                                                                    
were potentially  other school districts that  would use the                                                                    
legislation  as  a  tool and  had  indicated  interest.  The                                                                    
reason  her entity  supported the  bill was  because it  was                                                                    
voluntary. She appreciated Dr. Bishop  and Dr. Picou looking                                                                    
at efficiencies in their districts  and what they need to be                                                                    
doing  to support  their local  communities.  She hoped  the                                                                    
committee  would consider  the bill  as another  flexibility                                                                    
tool  to provide  for  school districts  if  they deemed  it                                                                    
necessary for their communities.                                                                                                
Vice-Chair  Gara   thanked  Dr.  Parady  for   her  work  in                                                                    
education.  Since she  represented many  different officials                                                                    
across the  state and because  she was testifying  on behalf                                                                    
of the bill,  he assumed that the officials  from areas that                                                                    
would not  benefit from the  bill believed in  lifting other                                                                    
boats up. He asked if he was correct.                                                                                           
Ms.  Parady  replied  that  across  the  state  the  council                                                                    
recognized that  each district  was doing  whatever possible                                                                    
to look at their efficiencies and  what they needed to do in                                                                    
support of  their students.  There was  a general  amount of                                                                    
support  for   school  districts   across  the   state.  The                                                                    
districts were supportive  of doing what was  best for their                                                                    
local communities.  The recognition of local  control, which                                                                    
was held dearly,  was true with the  current legislation. If                                                                    
the  bill  was mandatory  she  would  feel differently.  She                                                                    
continued  that  the  fact  that   the  bill  benefited  the                                                                    
Anchorage  School District  and potentially  other districts                                                                    
and did  not cause  harm to  other districts,  the districts                                                                    
supported each other. She added  that the bill had been well                                                                    
thought out by the districts seeking the bill.                                                                                  
1:42:29 PM                                                                                                                    
Representative   Guttenberg  asked   about  what   a  school                                                                    
district could do in a  situation where inefficiency existed                                                                    
for   a  long   time   and  where   reorganization  into   a                                                                    
consolidation program should be  applied. He did not believe                                                                    
the state  had any tools  to address a situation  where even                                                                    
though  a school  fell below  a certain  level or  a certain                                                                    
attendance  record,  it was  still  more  cost effective  to                                                                    
remain  as-is, even  with inefficiencies.  Ms. Parady  would                                                                    
have to  think about the  response; she was not  prepared to                                                                    
make a recommendation presently.                                                                                                
Co-Chair Seaton was  concerned about unintended consequences                                                                    
or uses.  He had mentioned  subsection l under Section  1 of                                                                    
the  bill. The  section  indicated that  if  the school  was                                                                    
reopened  and reconsolidated  in  the previous  7 years,  it                                                                    
would not be  able to use the tool. He  wondered if any flex                                                                    
schools  or   magnet  schools  had  closed,   reopened,  and                                                                    
reconsolidated.  He asked  if Ms.  Parady was  aware of  any                                                                    
circumstances where his example would  be the case. The last                                                                    
thing  he  wanted to  do  was  create legislation  in  which                                                                    
people could take advantage of  a system for something other                                                                    
than what it was intended.                                                                                                      
Ms.   Parady  thanked   Co-Chair   Seaton  for   considering                                                                    
unintended   consequences.  She   was  not   aware  of   any                                                                    
unintended consequences with SB  216. She believed Mr. King,                                                                    
in  his   work  with  the  districts,   had  considered  the                                                                    
different  consequences. She  reiterated that  the safeguard                                                                    
was that  the bill was  voluntary. She added  that regarding                                                                    
subsection L,  she was not  aware of any  specific situation                                                                    
that currently applied. She offered to follow-up.                                                                               
Co-Chair Seaton appreciated Ms.  Parady following-up with an                                                                    
answer to his question. He wanted  the intent of the bill to                                                                    
be  clearly  stated. He  was  not  opposed to  tweaking  the                                                                    
language  of  the  bill  to  ensure  it  was  as  clean  and                                                                    
effective as possible.                                                                                                          
1:47:27 PM                                                                                                                    
Representative  Ortiz  asked  if  there  was  any  potential                                                                    
impact  particularly  in  rural areas  where  school  choice                                                                    
issues were a concern. He asked  if the bill had been vetted                                                                    
by  members   of  the  association  and   whether  they  had                                                                    
expressed any concerns. Ms. Parady  replied that she was not                                                                    
sure there  would be the capacity  to use the bill  in rural                                                                    
areas. She was  unaware of any situations  that would impact                                                                    
the rural areas. In  meetings with superintendents recently,                                                                    
she reviewed the  bills that were moving  in the legislative                                                                    
session and  did not hear  any concerns expressed  about the                                                                    
bill. She  reiterated that Dr. Bishop  had done considerable                                                                    
work and had a very  good understanding of her district. She                                                                    
had advocated  that for the  Anchorage School  District, the                                                                    
legislation  was  appropriate.  There were  other  districts                                                                    
that saw the  legislation as a potential tool  but would not                                                                    
be mandated. Currently,  the bill would support  a couple of                                                                    
the school districts represented  by the council. There were                                                                    
also other  districts that thought  the bill provided  a new                                                                    
tool. She did  not see any negative impact  to rural Alaska.                                                                    
The bill  was a flexible  tool. The school  districts needed                                                                    
many tools.                                                                                                                     
Representative  Kawasaki spoke  about  a  decline in  school                                                                    
enrollment in  Fairbanks in recent  years. The city  was now                                                                    
expecting a  ramp up  in enrollment. He  asked if  there had                                                                    
been  consideration of  the cyclical  nature of  enrollment.                                                                    
Ms.  Parady   deferred  to   Dr.  Karen   Gaborik  regarding                                                                    
Representative  Kawasaki's  question   about  Fairbanks  and                                                                    
rolling  enrollment.  She  also  deferred  to  Mr.  King  on                                                                    
Mr.  King  replied  that  the school  districts  had  to  be                                                                    
looking  forward.  In  the  case  of  the  Anchorage  School                                                                    
District  and the  Mat-Su  School  District, they  conducted                                                                    
forward-looking  projections of  their expected  enrollment.                                                                    
Kids did  not show up  instantaneously. They had to  be born                                                                    
first. The state had birth  records and records of Permanent                                                                    
Fund Dividend  (PFD) enrollments.  The state could  see what                                                                    
was  coming. He  noted  that twice  per  year the  Anchorage                                                                    
School District  looked ahead 6  years. He relayed  that the                                                                    
professionals  managing  the  systems   were  aware  of  the                                                                    
issues. He reiterated that it took  2 years to open a school                                                                    
and  2  years to  close  a  school. He  believed  long-range                                                                    
thinking was  required and  reminded members  that districts                                                                    
had to go  through a public process. He thought  it wise for                                                                    
a school district to consult  with its citizens. The process                                                                    
lent  itself  to  long-range thinking.  The  bill  contained                                                                    
provisions  that  did  not  allow a  school  to  reopen  and                                                                    
reconsolidate  a school  earlier  than 7  years. However,  a                                                                    
significant  portion  of the  timeframe  was  just what  was                                                                    
needed  to  start  the  planning.   He  did  not  think  the                                                                    
districts  would be  switching  schools on  and  off like  a                                                                    
light because of the tool provided in the bill.                                                                                 
1:53:50 PM                                                                                                                    
Representative  Guttenberg  provided   an  example,  Rampart                                                                    
School.  Rampart, Alaska  was forced  to close  their school                                                                    
because   of  going   below  the   student  minimum.   Young                                                                    
leadership came  in and brought  people back.  They reopened                                                                    
the school and the community  was vibrant again. He wondered                                                                    
if  there were  traditional dollars  available for  shutting                                                                    
down and then  reopening again. He asked how it  worked in a                                                                    
case such as his example.                                                                                                       
HEIDI  TESHNER, DIRECTOR  OF SCHOOL  FINANCE, DEPARTMENT  OF                                                                    
EDUCATION AND  EARLY DEVELOPMENT,  reiterated Representative                                                                    
Guttenberg's question  that if  Rampart was closed  and then                                                                    
reopened because  they had enough students,  would they come                                                                    
to the  department requesting permission to  reopen and have                                                                    
it counted on  the attendance list in October.  A minimum of                                                                    
10 students would be required to open the school.                                                                               
Representative Guttenberg asked  if transitional support was                                                                    
available after  shutting down a  school then  reopening it.                                                                    
He  relayed a  number  of  things were  needed  to reopen  a                                                                    
school.  He  asked  if  transitional  funds  were  available                                                                    
following a forced shutdown in  order to reopen. Ms. Teshner                                                                    
replied that typically the school  district would go through                                                                    
a process  of determining whether  to reopen a  school. They                                                                    
would go through  the process of finding  funding and hiring                                                                    
teachers.  The state  did not  have anything  in the  way of                                                                    
statutes  or the  transitional funding.  They would  have to                                                                    
find money through revenues.                                                                                                    
Representative  Guttenberg   surmised  that  there   was  no                                                                    
support.  One day  they  were  open and  one  day they  were                                                                    
closed. Ms. Teshner answered in the affirmative.                                                                                
Co-Chair  Seaton acknowledged  Representative Gary  Knopp in                                                                    
the audience.                                                                                                                   
Vice-Chair Gara stated  there was a four-year  step down. If                                                                    
a district consolidated a school,  it might suffer a penalty                                                                    
by receiving  less funding under the  foundation formula. He                                                                    
understood the committee  was trying to resolve  the loss of                                                                    
funds for some  of the school districts, He  did not believe                                                                    
the 4-year  step down magically  indicated the  school would                                                                    
find the  exact amount  of efficiencies to  make up  for the                                                                    
loss. He thought that at worst,  it was a way for schools to                                                                    
figure  out how  to adjust  their finances  over the  4-year                                                                    
timeframe. It was unclear how  much efficiency would be made                                                                    
up in 4 years. At worst, it  was a way for schools to figure                                                                    
out how to  adjust their finances: At best,  they would find                                                                    
efficiencies. He was not sure  the district would be able to                                                                    
find  the exact  amount of  efficiencies in  4 years  with a                                                                    
step down.  He asked  if he  understood correctly.  Mr. King                                                                    
replied in the affirmative. There  was nothing to say that 4                                                                    
years was the perfect number.  He had not heard any negative                                                                    
testimony about a 4-year period.  It seemed like 4 years was                                                                    
a reasonable  number. It was  another tool in the  tool box.                                                                    
The bill  was voluntary  and gave districts  the opportunity                                                                    
to go through  the process as they saw  fit. Vice-Chair Gara                                                                    
thought it would  be impossible to hold  someone to modeling                                                                    
more precisely.                                                                                                                 
1:59:09 PM                                                                                                                    
ANDREW LEAVITT, LOWER YUKON SCHOOL DISTRICT, MOUNTAIN                                                                           
VILLAGE (via teleconference), read a letter from the school                                                                     
     Dear Senate Education Committee Members,                                                                                   
     I   have   been  a   teacher,   a   principal,  and   a                                                                    
     superintendent in  both rural and urban  Alaska for the                                                                    
     past  twenty years.  On behalf  of the  Regional School                                                                    
     Board,  the   families  of   the  Lower   Yukon  School                                                                    
     District,  and  the staff  of  the  Lower Yukon  School                                                                    
     District, this  testimony is in support  of Senate Bill                                                                    
     216: SCHOOL FUNDING FOR CONSOLIDATED SCHOOLS.                                                                              
     We are in support of  Senate Bill 216 for the following                                                                    
        1. Hooper Bay is a growing community with a                                                                           
          population of  1275. The Hooper Bay  School is the                                                                    
          largest school in LYSD.  The current enrollment is                                                                    
          at  449,  well  beyond  the 425  specified  in  AS                                                                    
        2. Every school in Alaska is funded proportionately                                                                   
          according  to its  ADM during  a twenty-day  count                                                                    
          period. According  to the  current language  of AS                                                                    
          14.17.905, Hooper  Bay School  is the  only school                                                                    
          in  Alaska that  actually  gets  penalized for  an                                                                    
          increase in student enrollment.                                                                                       
        3. In current form, the provision in AS14.17.905                                                                      
          that calculates  funding for a school  with an ADM                                                                    
          over  425 as  one  school instead  of two  schools                                                                    
          would equate to a reduction  in revenue of $1 M. A                                                                    
          reduction  in school  funding of  this size  would                                                                    
          have a very detrimental  impact on children in the                                                                    
          Lower Yukon School District.                                                                                          
        4. The Senate Bill 216 provision correction of AS                                                                     
          14.17.905  in Sec  2 would  hold  the children  of                                                                    
          LYSD harmless from  the unintended consequences of                                                                    
          legislation  that  was  written in  2001.  In  the                                                                    
          original   language   of    AS   14.17.905,   this                                                                    
          unintended   consequence   was  anticipated,   and                                                                    
          Hooper   Bay   was   specifically   mentioned   in                                                                    
     For these reasons and many  more the Lower Yukon School                                                                    
     District supports  Senate Bill  216 and thanks  you for                                                                    
     elevating the  unintended consequences of  AS 14.17.905                                                                    
     that would have the delirious  impact on the quality of                                                                    
     education offered  to the children  of the  Lower Yukon                                                                    
     School District.                                                                                                           
     Dr. Rob Picou                                                                                                              
Co-Chair Foster asked Mr. Leavitt  to pass on regards to Dr.                                                                    
Picou. He  was aware the  doctor had been online  earlier in                                                                    
the day.                                                                                                                        
2:01:49 PM                                                                                                                    
AT EASE                                                                                                                         
2:02:04 PM                                                                                                                    
REPRESENTATIVE  HARRIETT  DRUMMOND, CHAIR,  HOUSE  EDUCATION                                                                    
COMMITTEE  (via  teleconference),  relayed  that  the  House                                                                    
Education Committee  passed the House companion  bill HB 406                                                                    
sometime  previously.  She  thought some  of  the  questions                                                                    
posed in the  meeting had been interesting.  She spoke about                                                                    
her past  experience as a  school board member.  She relayed                                                                    
that in  the nine-year  period she served  on the  board the                                                                    
Anchorage  School  District's  population grew  from  40,000                                                                    
students to  about 50,000 students.  In that  9-year period,                                                                    
the  Anchorage School  District  built  nearly $500  million                                                                    
worth of  school buildings  including new  school buildings,                                                                    
expansions, renovations, and additions.                                                                                         
Representative Drummond reported that  she participated as a                                                                    
school  Board Member  in 2  district-wide boundary  changes;                                                                    
the middle schools and the high  schools. It had been one of                                                                    
the  most  tumultuous  periods   for  the  Anchorage  School                                                                    
District. The  district built 2  new middle  schools, Mirror                                                                    
Lake  Middle School  and Goldenview  Middle  School, with  a                                                                    
bond  issue that  passed in  1994. The  boundary change  for                                                                    
middle  schools was  not as  difficult because  some of  the                                                                    
middle  schoolers had  new schools  to go  to. However,  the                                                                    
high school  boundaries had to  change because many  of them                                                                    
were overcrowded  and some had  space. The district  had not                                                                    
built new  high schools  in the  9-year period.  The process                                                                    
was terrible because the district  was moving kids around to                                                                    
even  out  the  population between  schools.  She  expressed                                                                    
sympathy  for   Dr.  Bishop  in   having  to   make  similar                                                                    
transitions like the proposed  consolidation of 5 elementary                                                                    
schools  to 4.  Often parents  purchased their  homes to  be                                                                    
close  to a  particular  school. It  was  difficult for  the                                                                    
district to have to tell those  parents that it was going to                                                                    
close that school and their children  would have to get on a                                                                    
bus  to go  to school  a couple  of neighborhoods  away. She                                                                    
opined  that   it  was  disconcerting   and  a   problem  in                                                                    
communities. She  understood Dr.  Bishop's wish to  take the                                                                    
transition slowly.                                                                                                              
Representative   Drummond   continued  to   elaborate   that                                                                    
teachers   traveled  with   their  students.   The  school's                                                                    
administration  positions  went  away  once  the  transition                                                                    
process of a consolidation was  complete. She noted that the                                                                    
Anchorage School District had  the largest square footage of                                                                    
real estate  in the state  of any single  institution. There                                                                    
were  over 90  schools and  several facilities  and support.                                                                    
She advised  proceeding very carefully with  seeking to make                                                                    
large changes.                                                                                                                  
JIM  ANDERSON,  CHIEF  FINANCIAL OFFICER,  ANCHORAGE  SCHOOL                                                                    
DISTRICT,  ANCHORAGE (via  teleconference), clarified  areas                                                                    
of concern that  had been expressed. There  was a perception                                                                    
that Anchorage had  done some poor planning in  the past and                                                                    
was  the reason  the district  was looking  at consolidating                                                                    
schools.  However,   it  had  more   to  do   with  changing                                                                    
demographics and  a declining student  population. Anchorage                                                                    
had  lost  more  than  2,200   students.  The  schools  were                                                                    
originally built based on the  population needs at the time.                                                                    
The district  had not opened  up a new elementary  school in                                                                    
about 20  years or a new  high school in about  10 years. He                                                                    
also noted the  topic of whether Anchorage  would attempt to                                                                    
close a  school, open it back  up in 2 years,  close it, and                                                                    
reopen it in  2 years. He conveyed that the  amount of time,                                                                    
effort,  and energy  to  get  ready to  close  a school  was                                                                    
incredibly time  consuming. He could not  imagine a scenario                                                                    
where it would occur.                                                                                                           
2:07:42 PM                                                                                                                    
Co-Chair Foster CLOSED public testimony.                                                                                        
CSSB 216(FIN)  was HEARD and  HELD in committee  for further                                                                    

Document Name Date/Time Subjects
SB 102 - Higher Education Investment Fund excerpt from Treasury report 1-23-18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 102
SB 102 - Higher Education Fund Projection - 6.21% return woSB102.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 102
SB 102 - Higher Ed Fund SB 102 - 6.21% return wSB102.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 102
SB 102 Sectional Analysis ver A 04.16.2018.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 102
SB 102 Sponsor Statement 4.16.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 102
SB 104 Letter of Support ACSA 4.14.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 104
CSSB 104 IEP Explanation SFIN Request 4.14.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 104
CSSB 104 Sectional Analysis 4.16.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 104
SB 104 Letter of Support Kenai Peninsula Borough School District 4.14.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 104
SB 104 Letter of Support MSBSD 4.14.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 104
SB 104 Sponsor Statement.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 104
SB 216 School Consolidation Presentation-House Finance.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 216
SB216 CS FIN Summary of Changes All Versions.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 216
SB 216 Sectional Analysis Ver. T 04.13.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 216
SB 216 Sponsor Statement 03.21.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 216
SB 216 Basic Middle School Consolidation Example 041818.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 216
SB 216 Basic Elementary School Consolidation Example 041818.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 216
SB 102 TelAK letter 4.16.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 102
SB 102 DRS Techonologies Letter 4.16.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 102
SB 102 Adak Letter 4.16.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 102
SB 102 Cordova Telephone Cooperative Letter 4.16.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 102
SB 102 Alaska Communications Letter 4.16.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 102
DEED HFSC Budget Overview LAM 1.31.18.pdf HFIN 4/18/2018 9:00:00 AM
SB 102