Senators Joe Paskvan, Dennis Egan, and Gary Stevens during the closeout hearing of the Senate Finance DEED Subcommittee, March 20, 2012
This blog contains highlights from the Alaska Education Update. The update is issued daily during session and contains detailed summaries of education issues under consideration by the Alaska State Legislature. If there is a hearing on a Monday, a report will, with few exceptions, be released by Tuesday morning. There is also a weekly edition of the update. During interim, reports are issued only when there has been action. Interim action may include hearings, bill signings, the release of the Governor's proposed budget for the next fiscal year, and other items that may be of interest to the education community.

To subscribe to full reports, contact Shana Crondahl at (907) 500-7069 or To subscribe to blog posts, submit your email:

Follow by Email

Monday, April 16, 2012

Capital Budget & Explanation of Education Funding in SB 182

Here is a link to the capital budget:  This is the House Finance version: HCS CSSB 160(FIN).  It was amended on the floor of the house with the addition of $25 million for revenue sharing, but that version is not available on line yet.  Once you pull up the bill, you can do "find" search within it to quickly find specific projects.
Here is SB 182, the education funding package: 
The fiscal notes for the bill have details on how much funding each district will get for the individual provisions of the bill:
Fiscal Note #3: shows how much increased state contribution for education a municipality will get for going to a flat mill rate of 2.65 for required local contribution.  This provision has the most widely varying effect on districts - for those municipalities already funding to the cap, there will be no benefit to the school, although there will be a benefit to the municipality.  For those already at the low end of the local contribution mill rate, there won't be as much benefit, and for REAA's there will be no impact.  For municipalities not funding to the cap, there would then be more money available at the municipality's discretion, should they decide to increase educuation funding.  For instance.....
.....the Fairbanks North Star Borough will have an additional $3,152,759 that they will not have to pay to support schools, because the state will be paying that much more for basic need in their district.  The Northwest Arctic Borough will have an additional $316,439.  Valdez will not see any benefit from this provision.
Fiscal Note #4: shows how much funding districts will get for the pupil transportation provision in SB 182.  There will be additional supplemental funding totalling $8.1 million for FY 12, and a total funding increase of $11.5 million for FY 13.  Using the same examples as above, Fairbanks will get a supplement of $1,582,407 in pupil transportation funding for FY 12, and an increase of $1,958,649 for FY 13.  The Northwest Arctic Borough will get a supplement of $5,410 for FY 12, and $7,684 for FY 13.  Valdez will see a supplement of $46,610 for FY 12, and $61,845 for FY 13. 
The estimates in the above two fiscal notes are estimates, and numbers will have to be firmed up by the Dept. of Education & Early Development. 
DEED also has a spreadsheet showing how much each district will get for the $25 million in one-time funding and the CTE factor of 1.015.  As several examples of the increases from that funding, Fairbanks would get an additional total of $3,281,279 from those two items, the Northwest Arctic Borough would get $843,875, and Valdez would get $176,744. 
As you can see, there is a wide disparity in benefits to individual districts among the different provisions of SB 182.  

No comments: