NEW! (posted Oct. 14, 2010)
Resolutions Committee Workbook 2010 (doc)
Draft AASB Belief Statements and Core Resolutions with amendments proposed by the Board of Directors and member districts for consideration by the Resolutions Committee on Nov. 11, 2010.
AASB Resolutions Discussion Paper - Oct. 11, 2010 (doc)
This document is intended for use with “Resolutions Committee Workbook 2010,” the draft AASB Belief Statements and Core Resolutions that will be reviewed by the Resolutions Committee on November 11th at the AASB Annual Conference. Various changes proposed by the AASB Board of Directors and our member school districts are explained in this discussion paper.
Add your comment or question with the "Add New Comment" link
at the bottom of this page
FUNDING
2.1 SUSTAINED, RELIABLE AND ADEQUATE EDUCATIONAL FUNDING FOR ALASKA’S STUDENTS THROUGH A NON-VOLATILE FUNDING SOURCE
The sustainability, reliability and adequacy of Alaska’s funding for public education are of highest concern to the Association of Alaska School Boards. AASB urges the Legislature to develop a fiscal plan that provides a long-term approach to funding the costs of public education and other services upon which Alaska’s students and their families depend.
Rationale. The State of Alaska provides a wide range of services to a diverse population spread over a logistically complex area. Providing these services historically cost more than the state has received in recurring revenue. A long-term plan that ensures reliability of funding for education and other state services that impact the delivery of education, regardless of variation in volatile resource markets, is needed to provide a stable business climate and to ensure the citizens of necessary services. Adopted 2002, Amended 2004 (Sunset Nov. 2012)
2.2 URGING THE LEGISLATURE TO INCREASE THE 20 PERCENT BLOCK GRANT FOR SPECIAL NEEDS
AASB urges the Alaska Legislature to adjust the 20 percent block grant for special needs and intensive services, including vocational (career and technical), bilingual, gifted learning, and special education funding (AS 14.17.420) to recognize that additional funds are needed for the multiple services funded by this category of formula spending. AASB suggests that the grant be increased to 25 percent immediately pending determination by the Education Committee of the true full amount necessary to adequately fund these services.
Rationale. The enactment of SB 36 in 1998 changed the foundation program for K-12 education to provide 20 percent block grants to districts for all special education, vocational technology, bilingual and bicultural programs, and gifted and talented programs. In reality, most districts consume their block grants for special education, leaving little if any funding for vocational and other programs. In 2010, the Alaska Legislature discussed incremental increases to the block grant up to 23 percent, with the intent that additional funds be dedicated to career and technical education. An increase in block grant funding for vocational (career and technical), gifted and talented, and bilingual/bicultural programs would help revive these services in many districts. Adopted 2008 Amended 2009 (Sunsets 2013)
2.2(a) FULLY IMPLEMENT INCREASES TO THE DISTRICT COST FACTOR AND INTENSIVE NEEDS SECTIONS OF THE FOUNDATION FORMULA AND BEGIN IMMEDIATE REVIEW OF THE DISTRICT COST FACTORS
AASB urges the Legislature to accelerate already scheduled increases to Intensive Needs (AS 14.17.420(1)) and District Cost Factor (AS 14.17.460) sections of the foundation formula so that they take affect in full as soon as possible. In view of recent cost increases for delivery of these mandated services, the foundation formula should more accurately reflect these cost increases. AASB calls for the legislature to conduct a review of District Cost Factors to ensure their accuracy. This review process should include School Board members, administrators and business managers from a cross section of Alaska communities.
Rationale. The District Cost Factor is intended to create equity among districts with varying built-in costs of doing business. The Intensive Needs factor is intended to create equity by recognizing the extreme cost differential in providing mandated services to special educations students with intensive needs. Inasmuch as the Legislature has recognized that these inequities exist and has adopted a phased approach to address them, the Legislature should immediately mitigate these inequities by going directly to the fully phased-in factors. Any review of the costs associated with education in Alaska’s rural communities should be inclusive of those who are engaged in providing these services. Adopted 2008 Amended 2009 (Sunsets 2013)
2.3 URGING CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES IDENTIFIED BY THE JOINT LEGISLATIVE EDUCATION FUNDING TASK FORCE
AASB urges the 26th Alaska Legislature to give careful consideration to a variety of education issues that were recommended for referral to the new standing Committees on Education in the report of September 1, 2007 by the Joint Legislative Education Task Force. Those issues include:
1. Charter and correspondence schools and home-schooling
2. Special needs block grant
3. Vocational technology programs
4. Required local effort and federal Title VIII Impact Aid
5. Moore v. State of Alaska decision and order
6. Overlapping timing for state and school district budget cycles
7. Innovative or best practices grants
8. Voluntary Pre-K programs
9. Alaska Military Youth Academy funding
10. National Forest Receipts program Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act
In addition, AASB encourages the 26th Alaska Legislature to examine the need for revising and updating AS 14.17.450, school size factor, to address the growing cost of operating schools.
Rationale. The task force report noted that education and school funding issues merit regular and continuing attention from a standing committee. With passage of SCR 15 in the 2008 session, the House and Senate each created a standing Committee on Education, which should have the time, resources and staff to give careful consideration to the issues that were identified by the task force for referral. AS 14.17.450 was enacted in 1998 and needs to be examined closely. Adopted 2008 (Sunsets 2013)
2.4 FINANCIAL SUPPORT OF STATEWIDE STRATEGIES FOR ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
The Association of Alaska School Boards urges the Alaska Legislature to provide the financial support necessary for public education, the Department of Education & Early Development, universities and other agencies to fully realize the potential of a standards-based educational system focused on increasing student achievement. To ensure a successful standards-based educational program that helps students meet and go beyond standards, the Association of Alaska School Boards supports additional funding for the following strategies:
1. Increased learning time and credit recovery programs through an expanded day or extended school year and/or remediation efforts like summer school to increase learning.
2. Professional/technical assistance to align curriculum with standards, instruction and assessments.
3. Enhanced teacher preparation and professional development.
4. Teacher/administrator recruitment to attract highly qualified professionals to come and stay in Alaska.
5. Accommodation of special needs students.
6. Early entry opportunities.
Rationale. Over the years, many forums have identified a variety of statewide strategies to help meet student performance standards. Some students who have not completed credits will not be able to graduate on time (within the four-year plan) and will be considered dropouts. Summer school and other credit recovery programs would expand opportunities to graduate on time with a full diploma.
In addition, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 requires all students to meet high standards. Special Education students often require specific learning strategies, specialty trained educators and support staff, as well as additional time and resources. These strategies are critical to increase achievement, but also require increased funding. Adopted 2000, Amended 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2008, 2009 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.5 AASB ADVOCACY ON INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES IN EDUCATION ACT (IDEA)
Following passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, AASB will monitor and advocate the following:
1. Increased funding to fully fund the federal mandate.
2. Resolution of differential treatment and discipline for special education students.
3. Provision for adequate staffing/teacher preparation.
4. Establishment of post-secondary educational programs to train additional individuals as certified special education teachers and related services providers (i.e. school psychologists, physical therapists, and speech therapists).
5. Decrease in current high staff turnover.
6. Provision for teacher liability/legal protections for advocates.
7. Placement of students and delivery of services.
8. Mediation between school districts and parents when disagreements develop over student placements.
9. Reduction of massive required paperwork.
Rationale. AASB joins with the National School Boards Association in urging Congress to fairly and fully fund this federal mandate. IDEA was enacted in 1975 when the federal government committed to paying for each child with disabilities an amount equal to 40 percent of the national average cost of educating students with disabilities. According to the National School Boards Association, federal funding accounts for approximately 18% of the necessary funding. The remainder comes directly from the regular instructional program of local school districts. The total under-funding of IDEA was estimated at $8.3 billion in Fiscal Year 2008.
Local school officials must be empowered to preserve a productive and safe learning environment free of undue disruption or violence. Consistent discipline requirements and procedures are the keys to a safe environment. Issues such as discipline and excessive paperwork are having a negative impact on educators; as a result fewer certified personnel are willing to teach in special education programs. Adopted 2000. Amended 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2005, 2009 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.6 FUNDING STANDARDS-BASED EARLY LEARNING PROGRAMS IN ALASKA
AASB supports legislation to add additional funding for the planning and programming of voluntary early learning and family support programs for all pre-school children as an important long-term investment in Alaska’s future workforce and citizenry.
Rationale. State and local performance standards set high expectations in mathematics, reading and writing for children age 5 through 7. Research indicates that earlier education is critical for many children to successfully reach those expectations. With the enactment of federal No Child Left Behind legislation, the legislature will be responsible for paying the cost of missing the opportunity to reach children at the age when the greatest gains in mental development are possible. Even in communities which have Head Start programs, the program is usually unable to accommodate all children who qualify. Strict Headstart income requirements deprive many pre-schoolers who could benefit from the program. Appropriately housed early learning programs should be an integral part of district curriculum. Inclusion of early learning in a school has an impact on facilities planning and would be a wise use of state funds.
The state offers only very limited pilot funding for early-learning education. Many communities do not meet the qualifications for federal Head Start or early-learning funding and sources of present federal funding are uncertain. Most existing early-learning programs cannot afford certificated early-learning teachers. Amended 2001, 2002, 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.7 FUNDING FOR INTENSIVE NEEDS PRE-SCHOOL AND OTHER INTENSIVE NEEDS STUDENTS ENROLLING POST-COUNT DATE
AASB supports prorated funding for 3-year-old preschool students with intensive needs who turn three years old after the October count date, thereby becoming eligible for enrollment and enrolling in public school after state funding has become fixed. Extra pro-rated funds must also be provided for all other intensive needs students enrolling after the count date.
Rationale. IDEA ’97 requires that public schools enroll students with disabilities at age three. These students typically require not only special education services but also extensive related services (speech therapy, occupational therapy, physical therapy). Preschool students with disabilities whose third birthday falls after the October count date incur costs to the district that are not typical of other students enrolling after the count date. The district is required to provide all services identified by the IEP team. Currently, districts receive no funding for these costly services for those intensive-needs children who turn three years old after the state’s October count date.
Other intensive-need students who move to a district after the October count date pose a similar financial challenge. The cost to provide federally mandated services to a single intensive needs child is many times the cost of services to a non-special needs child. Districts cannot be expected to absorb the costs of services for intensive needs children who first enroll after the count date under a budget that provides no funding to satisfy this federal requirement. Supplemental funding for post-count date intensive needs students is critical. At the same time, districts that have lost intensive needs students through transfers have already entered into binding contracts with staff and cannot easily avoid that continued cost. Adopted 2003, Amended 2004, 2005, 2006, 2009 (Sunset Nov.2013)
2.8 FOLLOWING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PRIORITY LISTS FOR NON BONDED PROJECTS
AASB supports following the priority lists for non-bonded projects as presented by the Department of Education and Early Development and providing funding with no adjustments, deletions, or additions that would not otherwise be of an emergency basis. AASB strongly encourages the legislature and administration to make significant progress on eliminating the statewide capital project and major maintenance backlog. Enactment of AS 14.11.025 (State aid for School construction in regional educational attendance areas) by the 26th Alaska Legislature was a good step in that direction and is applauded by AASB.
Rationale. The Capital Improvement Projects list goes through a very comprehensive prioritization process developed and implemented, based on need, by the Department of Education and Early Development. AASB encourages the Legislature to follow the prioritized lists and recognize that fluctuations in enrollment cause many districts to face varying economies of scale when maintaining educational facilities. The creation of the school fund for REAA facility construction in 2010 will enable the state to create a pool of funding, up to $70 million a year beginning in mid-2012, for construction and major maintenance in rural Alaska. Adopted 2000, Amended 2001, 2004, 2008, 2009 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.9 LOCAL CONTRIBUTION IN THE SCHOOL FUNDING FORMULA
AASB supports retaining in the school funding formula the local option of establishing a local contribution based on 45 percent of basic need for borough and municipal school districts.
Rationale. The current education funding formula was developed with statewide support for all school age children. It allows for a minimum local contribution of the lesser of 4 mills or 45% of basic need. Adopted 2001, Amended 2004, 2005 (Sunset Nov. 2011)
2.10 EDUCATION ENDOWMENT
AASB lends its full support to the concept of a properly funded and well-managed educational endowment to help secure stable and full funding for education to be used for public elementary and secondary education.
Rationale. The funding of public K-12 education in our state is an annual appropriation from the General Fund and is subject to the shifting funding priorities of administrations and legislatures, and the variable level of state revenues. Budgetary cycles have increasingly failed to provide a stable and secure funding source for Alaskan students. An educational endowment will provide a proven, relatively secure, and dedicated fiscal resource to support future public education funding for our state, and allow long-range education planning with confidence in the availability of that resource. Amended 1998, 1999, 2002, 2007, 2009 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.11 INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY
Because of the global economy of which our youth will be a part, AASB urges the state and federal governments to ensure that all classrooms are provided affordable and equitable broadband access to the national information infrastructure. AASB urges the Legislature
a. to implement appropriations or matching grants for instructional technology that would address hardware and software purchases, communication, infrastructure and training needs of students and staff, and, specifically to fund continuation and expansion of the AASB Consortium for Digital Learning to build empirical evidence regarding benefits of integration of technology into instruction over time. Appropriations by the Alaska Legislature in 2006 and 2008 have enabled about half of the state’s school districts to pilot intensive digital learning for some of their students as members of the AASB Consortium for Digital Learning.
b. We request the Legislature to join us in urging Congress to fully fund either the provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (E-rate program) or a robust educational technology substitute that protects the Universal Service Fund to help provide affordable telecommunications to rural areas.
Rationale. Alaskan students are growing up in a digital age that is allowing access to all global markets. If our students are to thrive in this ever-increasing global economy, K-12 schools must have the tools and trained staff to provide the appropriate education. Currently, a number of schools have seen many of their technology purchases become obsolete, outdated, and inoperable. Teachers are unable to effectively integrate technology in the classrooms due to lack or inadequacy of equipment and/or training. Current school district budgets cannot provide adequate funds to meet existing or future instructional technology needs.
Equality in educational opportunity has always been a goal of the Association of Alaska School Boards. Future economic viability will not depend as much on physical presence, but rather the ability to import, transmit or convey ideas and information electronically. Today’s globally competitive economy requires that all schools have access to modern technologies–Internet access, computers, distance learning–that can open new doors of educational opportunity for our school children. Appropriations by the Alaska Legislature in 2006 and 2008 have enabled about half of the state’s school districts to pilot intensive digital learning for some of their students as members of the AASB Consortium for Digital Learning. Amended 1998, 1999, 2001, 2004, 2006, 2008 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.12 SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION DEBT RETIREMENT FOR BONDED INDEBTEDNESS
AASB calls upon the Legislature and the administration to fully honor the statutory all past commitments for bonded indebtedness reimbursement by appropriating all funds necessary to satisfy that commitment and applauds the 26th Legislature’s indefinite extension of to meet future school construction needs by extending beyond November, 2010 and continuing to fully fund the school debt reimbursement program. AASB strongly encourages serious consideration to reducing the burden of district bonded indebtedness during times of increased state revenues.
Rationale. Article 7, Sec. 1 of the Alaska State Constitution states that the Legislature shall establish and maintain a system of public schools open to all children. Under AS 14.11.100 the State of Alaska commits agreed to repay school districts at set percentage rates for school construction bonded indebtedness in past years. Extending that program into the future will helps meet school construction needs in areas of the state that are able to bond. Over the past years of high growth many regions of the State have bonded for school construction with the expectation that the State would honor its obligation. Amended 1998, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.13 REVENUE SHARING
Municipalities play a large part in financing education and providing community services necessary to student learning. The Association of Alaska School Boards supports restored and increased funding for Municipal Revenue Sharing & Assistance, such as SB 72 adopted by the 25th Alaska Legislature in 2008. AASB recognizes that an increase in community support cannot substitute for necessary increases in direct education funding.
Rationale. Support for this program is essential. Without revenue sharing, which was vetoed in 2003, communities were forced to raise taxes to meet the cost of state mandates. Passage of SB 72 restored the program with $60 million in general funds for distribution to communities annually over the next three years. As the level of state revenue collected under AS 43.55.011(g) fluctuates, payments to local governments may go up or down. Revenue sharing as a proportion of the state budget is near its historic low point. Statehood was premised on the notion that state-owned resources would generate tax or other revenue and that this money would be shared with local government because local government could not survive without it. Adopted 1999, Amended 2000, 2001, 2004, 2007, 2008, 2009 (Sunset: Nov. 2013)
2.14 PUPIL TRANSPORTATION
AASB urges the State of Alaska to fully fund pupil transportation to keep up with rapidly rising fuel and other operating costs, and provide funding for districts with increased transportation needs due to special circumstances and/or student growth. Getting students safely to and from school is a vital part of public education. AASB supports the revision of AS 14.09.010 to remove the cap and provide adjustments to the transportation grant program reflective of transportation mandates and operating expenses.
Rationale. Passage of HB 273 by the 25th Alaska Legislature recalibrated the state formula for transportation funding to recognize FY 2007 actual costs. In addition, HB 273 inserts a new inflation adjustment (AS 14.09.01(c)) to provide for annual increases to recalibration beginning in October, 2009. However, HB 273 inserts a new inflation factor addressed only to the CPI, which understates the unprecedented increase in the cost of fuel. Adopted 2000, Amended 2001, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2008 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.15 FUNDING FOR SCHOOL DISTRICT-OPERATED REGIONAL BOARDING HOME PROGRAMS
AASB supports providing adequate funding for locally controlled and operated, regional boarding high schools throughout the state.
Rationale. The number of students requesting enrollment at Mt. Edgecumbe School exceeds the space available. Passage of a boarding schools/charter school law in 1997 (ASL Ch. 113) allows for the creation of boarding schools specifically not funded by the state. AASB would like to see that changed to provide students with the option of attending locally controlled regional boarding high school operated by a school district. Amended 1997, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.16 FUNDING FOR TRANSIENT STUDENTS IN SCHOOLS
The Association of Alaska School Boards supports development of a funding mechanism for compensating schools for students entering after the October count date without harming a school that loses a student for which it has already incurred costs.
Rationale. Each year, students throughout Alaska enroll in boarding and other schools around the state. Often, students leave schools immediately following the October count. These students generally return to their home districts. Other districts face large influx of military-dependent and resource development project students. The untimely arrival of students after the count date puts the receiving school districts at a financial disadvantage. Districts receiving students after the October count must bear the financial responsibility for educating these students without corresponding funds. Districts losing students after the count date have already committed themselves to legally binding contracts and cannot easily adjust spending levels to account for the loss of those students. Adopted 2002, Amended 2003, 2008, 2009 (Sunset Nov. 2012)
2.17 INSURANCE COSTS
AASB urges the Alaska State Legislature to take action through increased funding to mitigate increases in insurance costs.
Rationale. Insurance costs are draining badly needed resources for the classrooms and will continue to do so unless steps are taken to mitigate these uncontrolled increases, which only add to the administrative overhead of all districts. The cost of health and liability coverage, in particular, has added to escalation of fixed costs faced by districts. Adopted 2002, Amended 2003, 2006, 2007 (Sunset Nov. 2012)
2.18 STATUTORY GROUNDS FOR REDUCTION IN FORCE
Every Alaska school board must be able to make responsible decisions about how to allocate district resources to provide a high-quality education program that meets the needs of students. The Association of Alaska School Boards supports clarification of the law explicitly to allow the use of projections of enrollment, costs and revenues as valid bases upon which to develop a plan for reduction in force under AS 14.20.177. The Association also supports clarification of the law to recognize that school boards have discretion to decide when a reduction in force is necessary for the following year.
Rationale. Under the current wording of AS 14.20.177, NEA-Alaska has argued and at least one Superior Court judge has ruled that reductions in enrollment or revenue must have already taken place in order to reduce staff. In addition, NEA-Alaska has argued and a Superior Court judge has ruled that a school board’s judgment regarding the necessity of a reduction in force is not its to make; instead, a school district must prove that a reduction in force is necessary.
A school district’s ability to respond quickly to a drop in enrollment or negative change in its financial picture is already significantly limited by the fact that mid-year layoffs of teaching staff are not permitted under AS 14.20.177. Neither is an increase in costs a basis for mid-year layoffs. However, school boards should be able to respond to both actual and projected declines in enrollment or funding by developing plans to reduce staff for the following year. School boards should also have the ability to reduce staff in the following year in response to costs increases that are not offset by increases in funding.
A school board’s judgment that a reduction in force is necessary is the kind of policy decision that the public elects school boards to make. Adopted 2003, Amended 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.19 INCREASED FORMULA FUNDING
AASB calls on state policy makers to appropriate funding adequate to meet the increasing needs of Alaska’s youth, increasing requirements of state and federal law and inflationary increases in costs.
Rationale. The Joint Legislative Education Funding Task Force was charged with examining school district cost differentials and the existing formula for distributing state aid for education. At a minimum, full implementation of the Task Force recommendations needs to be accelerated to July 1, 2010 Appropriating an adequate amount to fund education is a legislative responsibility. The primary responsibility for school boards is allocation of those funds. Unlike many school boards throughout the nation, Alaska school boards do not have fiscal autonomy.
School boards know from experience that “full funding” of the education funding formula by state policy-makers does not necessarily equate to “adequate” funding. Our success as a state in meeting the requirements of NCLB will require an investment in people, processes, and accountability measures.
Our parents and communities are calling for decreased class size, additional support for at-risk students, adequate textbooks and teaching materials, and updated technology, all of which require additional funding. The state needs to provide funds to prevent declines in current educational services and to provide for strengthening into the future. Adopted 2003, Amended 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.20 LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL RELIEF FOR ONGOING TRS AND PERS EMPLOYER RATE INCREASES
The Association of Alaska School Boards supports the cost-share legislation passed by the 25th Alaska Legislature requiring the state to pay 87.44 percent of employer costs under the Teachers’ Retirement System and 78 percent of the costs under the Public Employees Retirement System. AASB endorses the use of state revenue or other funding sources, and particularly the recent $500 million settlement with Mercer, to retire the unfunded liability of the public employee retirement systems.
Rationale. Districts simply do not have the capacity to handle the massive unfunded liability of the state’s retirement programs. The passage of SB 125 in 2008 established the cost-share approach that freezes district employer costs for retirement benefits at 12.56 percent under TRS and 22 percent under PERS. At the same time, the unfunded future liability for both systems remains in excess of $8 billion over the next two decades, according to actuarial estimates in 2008. Because the recent $500 million settlement with Mercer was specifically based on a claim that flaws in Mercer’s advice to the state was a significant contributing cause of the unfunded liability, the settlement proceeds should be devoted to reducing that liability. Amended 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.21 MODIFICATION OF MINIMUM INSTRUCTIONAL EXPENDITURE REQUIREMENT
AASB requests repeal of the Minimum Instructional Expenditure requirement, (AS 14.17.520) to reflect reasonable thresholds appropriate for districts of various sizes and cost levels.
Rationale. While AASB members place the highest priority on funding instruction, the requirement that all districts must spend at least 70% of the district budget on expenditures for teachers and for instruction is arbitrary and does not reflect state and federal mandates and other non-instructional expenses, and ignores the needs and wishes of the community.
For many remote school districts, the minimum instructional expenditure requirement is unrealistic and does not reflect the fiscal reality of sharply increasing energy and other operating costs faced by all school districts.
The State Board of Education & Early Development regularly grants waivers of the minimum instructional expenditures requirement to more than half of Alaska’s school districts, recognizing the impacted districts had no fiscal capacity to comply with the law. The administrative burden of making annual waiver requests absorbs critical instructional dollars at the district level as well as needlessly using up statewide administrative resources for review. The EED Board voted in January, 2007, (see resolution 01-2007) to request that the Legislature repeal the 70 percent rule as a waste of resources and duplicative of existing systems for assuring student achievement. Amended 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008 (Sunset Nov. 2013)
2.22 ENERGY COST RELIEF
AASB urges the Alaska State Legislature to take action, through increased or supplemental funding to mitigate the huge increase in energy costs facing all school districts due to higher fuel prices. The relief should be based on actual energy costs and be part of an overall program to address conservation of energy, development of alternative energy programs and deferred maintenance of public facilities and buildings.
Rationale. The State of Alaska has benefited from sustained, high yields of oil revenue, but for consumers of energy, higher prices have depleted funding for other needs. As one of the state’s largest consumers of energy, public schools deserve the same consideration as municipalities, which have received financial assistance from the state to help defray increased fuel cost. The cost of fuel has risen significantly over the last three years, placing a hardship on schools and biting deeply into the maximum administrative cost share. This relief should be based on actual energy cost.
Possible relief measures should include initiating an Energy Cost Increase Factor in the foundation formula and/or providing supplemental funding in the year the cost is incurred, thereby putting funding back in the classroom. Adopted 2005. Amended 2008 (Sunsets 2010)
2.23 RELIABLE AND EFFICIENT SERVICE BY THE ALASKA MARINE HIGHWAY SYSTEM
AASB urges the State of Alaska to provide or subsidize frequent, reliable and efficient ferry service to all Southeast, Southwest, and Southcentral communities served by the Alaska Marine Highway System.
Rationale. School districts in Southeast and Southcentral Alaska depend on ferry access to provide transportation to and from other communities for numerous academic and athletic activities. The lack of frequent and dependable scheduled ferry service often makes it difficult or impossible to utilize the AMHS in school-sponsored trips. The only alternative for many of the communities served by the AMHS is to arrange travel by air, which markedly increases transportation costs and in some cases causes trips to be canceled entirely. Adopted 2006, Amended 2007, 2008 (Sunsets 2011)
2.24 FORWARD FUNDING FOR SCHOOLS
AASB supports forward funding for schools. At a minimum, the Base Student Allocation (BSA) should be established at least one year ahead to This would provide sufficient time for school districts to prepare and submit their budgets in a timely manner without spending unnecessary time and resources revising budgets based on legislative action after the local budget process has begun. The Education Fund, AS 14.17.300, must also be maintained and increased replenished for this purpose.
Rationale. The 25th Alaska Legislature took a major step towards implementing forward funding by building increases into the funding formula for three fiscal years. The 26th Legislature chose to appropriate money from the Education Fund to fill a budget hole in FY 2010. In the second session, the Legislature replenished the Fund. With the Education Fund replenished and maintained, starting with the 2011 session, the Legislature would needs to fund only one year at a time, but will ensure would be funding a full fiscal year in advance. The 26th Legislature chose to appropriate money from the Education Fund to fill a budget hole in FY 2010.
When state oil revenues start to decline, the amount spent on education might also decline, but local school districts would have a full fiscal year to prepare for the reduction in revenue. Forward funding will provide fiscal stability for districts so they can make long-term decisions, reduce administrative cost and enable school districts to focus on student instruction rather than constant budget revisions.
While early funding of the education budget – i.e., a signed education funding bill within the first 30 days of the session – would also reduce the administrative burden on school districts, the legislature does not receive its revenue projections in time to accomplish that goal. Forward funding – establishing both the BSA and setting aside sufficient funds to cover it a full year in advance – would eliminate the pressure for passage of the education appropriation early in the legislative session. Adopted 2006, Amended 2007, 2009 (Sunsets Nov. 2011)
2.25 RECONSTITUTION AND ACTIVE MANAGEMENT OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOL LAND TRUST AND PERMANENT FUND
AASB supports additional research into reconstitution of the Alaska Public School Land Trust, active management of the trust and working with Alaska PTA and other educational stakeholders to that end.
Rationale. A promise was made to Alaska public school children on March 4, 1915, when “An Act to reserve lands to the Territory of Alaska for educational uses, and for other purposes,” (38 Stat. 1214, Public Law 63-330/Chapter 181, 63 Congress, Session 3) was approved by Congress and signed by President Woodrow Wilson. PL 63-330 requires when federal lands are surveyed, Sections 16 and 36 in each township shall be and were reserved for the support of common schools in Alaska. Adopted 2007 (Sunsets Nov. 2012)
2.26 SUPPORTING EXCELLENCE IN SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING AND MATH INSTRUCTION
AASB recognizes and supports national efforts to increase the nation’s scientific and engineering talent pool in Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) fields. AASB urges the Governor and the Alaska State Legislature to establish a fund to invest strategically in STEM education, focusing on professional development, materials and equipment needed for active, hands-on learning for K-12 students in classrooms across the state.
Rationale. The Alaska Department of Education & Early Development has added science standards and testing requirements and the No Child Left Behind Act is scheduled to add this requirement in 2010. There is growing recognition that the U.S. must increase its commitment to science and math to retain its competitive advantage in the world. Students learn science best by actively engaging in the practice of science. Teachers need professional development and science resources to offer students outstanding hands-on, active learning opportunities in the sciences. Science classroom equipment and consumable supplies are unique and expensive. Skyrocketing energy costs and increasing operating costs consume school budgets, limiting the ability of districts to address long-deferred expenses such as science curriculum and equipment. Excellence in STEM fields is vital to Alaska’s and the nation’s long-term economic prospects. Adopted 2008 (Sunsets Nov. 2013)
2.27 URGING REVISIONS TO THE STEP-DOWN HOLD-HARMLESS CLAUSE FOR REDUCTIONS IN ADM
AASB urges the Alaska Legislature to revise from 5 percent to 2.5 percent the hold-harmless threshold (AS14.17.450) for reductions in average daily membership.
Rationale. Passage of HB 273 by the 25th Alaska Legislature included a provision that if a school district’s ADM adjusted for school size decreases by 5 percent or more from one fiscal year to the next, the school district may use the last fiscal year before the decrease as a base fiscal year to offset the decrease. The provision includes a step-down clause holding districts harmless for a portion of the ADM decrease during the next three fiscal years, if the 5 percent enrollment decline continues and none of the decline is attributable to a loss of students caused by a boundary change under AS 29.
Under AS14.17.250, school districts that experience enrollment declines of anywhere between 2 and 5 percent would be impacted severely because they would not qualify for the step-down provision. Adopted 2008 (Sunsets Nov. 2013)
2.28 SUPPORTING A REDUCTION IN THE ADM THRESHOLD FOR K-6 AND 7-12 SCHOOLS
AASB urges the Legislature to amend AS 14.17.905 to reduce to no higher than 41 the community ADM threshold for counting the K-6 ADM and 7-12 ADM as separate schools.
Rationale. The current threshold of 101 ADM for counting K-6 and 7-12 as separate schools was established before the NCLB requirement to have “highly qualified” teachers teaching in all core academic areas. Given the numerous requirements for graduation, it is virtually impossible for small secondary schools to employ teachers who are “highly qualified” in multiple core academic areas if their funding is reduced by not being funded as a separate school. As currently written, AS14.17.905 does not recognize the financial requirements imposed on small schools to employ “highly qualified” secondary teachers. The Alaska Association of School Administrators has expressly endorsed the 41-student threshold. Adopted 2008 Amended 2009 (Sunsets Nov. 2013)
2.29 URGING THE STATE TO MITIGATE THE IMPACTS OF EXCESS FACILITY SPACE IN DISTRICTS
AASB urges the Alaska Department of Education & Early Development or other appropriate agencies to investigate the financial impacts on school districts when reduced enrollment leaves excess school facility infrastructure, and to make recommendations to mitigate the burden on per-student funding posed by facilities no longer required for reduced enrollment.
Rationale. School districts report instances of excess facility infrastructure that were built before the advent of state guidelines for construction or because of declining enrollment or both. In some cases, schools have been closed because ADM fell below 10. Excess space must be insured, operated and maintained regardless of whether the funds generated under the foundation formula are sufficient. Even closed schools must be insured and should incur some operation and maintenance expenses to ensure that they will be usable if ADM should later warrant reopening them. Adopted 2008 (Sunsets Nov. 2013)
2.30 REQUESTING THE STATE TO AUDIT ALL SCHOOL BUILDINGS AND CREATE A FACILITY MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT LIST
AASB urges the Alaska Legislature to fund a statewide audit of all K-12 public school facilities to determine which buildings require major maintenance or replacement and which should be retrofitted to be the most energy efficient and sustainable for the 21st Century. The audit should be conducted at least every five years by the Department of Education & Early Development with special attention to Alaska’s unique construction requirements and the need to mitigate Seasonal Affective Disorder through proper lighting.
Rationale. School districts now submit to the state annually a six-year plan of maintenance and building replacement needs. From those lists, EED establishes a priority list for facility replacement and major maintenance. However, the EED priority list does not give the Legislature a complete picture of the condition of all school facilities in Alaska. A regular auditing process would give EED and the Legislature a schedule of replacement and maintenance projects statewide needed in the next three years, five years and 10 years. Adopted 2008 Amended 2009 (Sunsets Nov. 2013)
2.31 RECOGNIZING THE ONE-TIME NATURE OF THE FEDERAL ECONOMIC STIMULUS FUNDING FOR EDUCATION
The $171 million received by school districts statewide through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 will be put to good use during the next two years in expansion of Title 1 and IDEA services. State Fiscal Stabilization Funds may be used for a wider variety of programs. We also stand accountable for properly investing the money in advancing the education of Alaska public school students and meeting mandates previously under-funded by the federal government. Alaska school districts also recognize the one-time nature of the economic stimulus program.
Rationale. This resolution confirms the position previously stated in a letter AASB sent to the State. Adopted 2009 (Sunsets Nov. 2014)
2.32 URGING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A FUNDING POOL TO HELP FUND TRAVEL FOR STUDENTS TO ATTEND STATE-LEVEL COMPETITIONS
AASB recognizes that a comprehensive public education includes extracurricular activities such as sports and the arts. Involvement in interscholastic activities has been shown to increase academic achievement. As such, the opportunity for students to participate at state-level tournaments, festivals and competitions is one of the educational experiences we want and endeavor to have our children experience. Due to the ever increasing costs associated with travel and lodging for school districts to attend state-level competitions, AASB urges the Alaska School Activities Association, the Alaska Legislature and the Governor to work together to establish a funding pool to help school districts fund travel for students to attend state-level tournaments, festivals or competitions.
Rationale. Travel expenses to state- level tournaments and competitions are not normally budgeted by school districts. The preponderance of the burden to fund travel for extracurricular activities has fallen to parents and rural communities that are facing more difficult economic issues and fewer available dollars to support these opportunities. The ASAA and the state should help by establishing a funding mechanism to help students to attend state-level competitions. Adopted 2009 (Sunsets Nov. 2014)
2.33 REQUESTING AASB TO EXPLORE CREATION OF A CENTRAL PURCHASING AGENCY
AASB is requested to explore the feasibility of helping to create a statewide central purchasing agency to improve the ability of school districts to acquire educational materials, supplies, services, equipment and technology.
Rationale. The average Alaska school district is too small to create a purchasing benefit with suppliers. And due to budgetary pressures, Alaska school districts too often decide to reduce spending on materials and technology. Maine, New Hampshire and Michigan are among the states that have created savings for their districts, staff and students through purchasing agencies that combine the spending power of school districts. Adopted 2009
2.34 URGING THE LEGISLATURE TO ANNUALLY FUND VOCATIONAL (CAREER AND TECHNICAL) EDUCATION OUTSIDE OF THE BLOCK GRANT
AASB urges the Legislature to fund Vocational Education outside of the block grant under AS14.17.420 to recognize the importance of education for vocational, career and technical, and trade programs in our schools. Vocational, career tech, and trades offerings help engage students, provide an effective alternate platform for academic education while helping students learn about and focus on a potential career path in middle and high school that would prepare them for vocational education and jobs in our state. AASB suggests that a separate continuing grant for Vocational (Career and Technical) Education be authorized without decreasing the block grant that currently exists.
Rationale. The enactment of SB 36 in 1998 changed the foundation formula for K -12 education to provide 20 percent block grants to districts for all special education, vocational technology, bilingual and bicultural programs, and gifted and talented programs. In reality, most districts consume their block grants for special education, leaving little if any funding for vocational and other programs. A separate grant for vocational technology would help increase offerings in many districts. By continuing to keep the funding for vocational education in the block grant the current formula does not provide adequate funding, as special education needs are paramount. In addition, bilingual and bicultural programs and gifted and talented would be strengthened. This also recognizes that districts are hearing their legislators’ concerns of providing more career tech awareness and opportunities in schools. Adopted 2009 (Sunsets Nov. 2014)
(NEW) 2.35 SUPPORTING STATE FUNDING FOR SCHOOL MEALS
AASB supports an adequate financial appropriation from the state to strengthen and expand the National School Lunch and Breakfast Program in Alaska so that school breakfast programs and a sustainable lunch may be available to all children at all schools throughout the state.
Rationale. No child should go without breakfast. The lack of adequate nutrition affects the cognitive and behavioral development of children. Food insecurity, meaning a lack of access at all times to enough food for a healthy, active life, was reported among 15 percent of Alaska children, compared with 11 percent of Alaska adults, in a 2006 study (the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey). The problem is more acute in rural Alaska, where nearly one child in four experienced food insecurity.
The National School Breakfast Program decreases food insecurity in children by providing five healthy meals a week. In Alaska schools, 40 percent of students qualify for free/reduced school meals; of these 45,000 students, 15 percent, or about 7,000 children, do not attend schools that offer a breakfast program. In all, more than 100 public schools in Alaska did not sponsor or offer the federal School Breakfast Program in the 2008-09 school year, due primarily to a lack of funding.
