Mat-Su legislators praise governor’s veto of HB 69, education bill they see as too expensive

Mat-Su legislators are praising a new education bill being promoted by Gov. Mike Dunleavy as an alternative to House Bill 69, a bill the governor vetoed after it was passed by Democrat-led coalitions controlling the state House and Senate.

HB 69 had a $1,000 increase to the $5,960 per-student Base Student Allocation, or BSA, the formula that guides state funding for schools. However, education policy changes similar to those proposed by the governor in another bill were stripped from HB 69 by the Senate Finance Committees so that the bill, as it passed, had only the $1,000 BSA increase.

Dunleavy felt the $1,000 increase in per-pupil spending is too much given the state’s tight finances, but not coupling more money with changes in policy became a red line for him.

He has made an alternative proposal of a $560 increase to the $5,960 BSA coupled with the changes in policy he wants, so there is likely room for negotiation of a compromise in the weeks remaining before the Legislature’s adjournment in mid-May. The governor isn’t alone in believing $1,000 is unaffordable.

In the vote on overturning the vote last Tuesday, which is require, two leaders in the Senate’s Majority leadership, Sens. Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel, and Bert Stedman, R-Sitka, voted to sustain the veto. Hoffman said he couldn’t support a $1,000 BSA increase without new tax revenues. Stedman has voiced concerns that HB 69 would further expand a projected deficit that is now estimated at more than $500 million.

The override was sustained by a vote of 33 to 27, which is short of the 40 votes needed from the 60 House and Senate members meeting in a joint session held April 22.

The final version of HB 69 would have added over $250 million in annual spending without structural education improvements or a plan to pay for it—placing the state on even shakier fiscal ground amid ongoing deficits and declining revenue.

“There is really no way to sugar coat this; HB 69 was not a good bill. It was rushed, is too expensive and during the entire process the majorities in both the House and the Senate seemed focused on one outcome, give as much money as you possibly can, and don’t worry about improving outcomes,” said Rep. Jubilee Underwood (R-Wasilla).

“That’s not how we craft good policy. I’m sad that the majorities have wasted so much time and effort from stakeholders, when they could have been focused on working towards a compromise solution,” she said.

House Republicans emphasized that education funding must be paired with reforms that actually improve outcomes for Alaskan students. The original version of HB 69 that passed the House contained modest measures toward that goal, but they were stripped out in the final version sent to the Governor.

The governor’s new House Bill 204, the education funding and policy bill which includes the $560 BSA increase along with targeted investments in reading proficiency and homeschool programs, as well as charter school and open enrollment policy reforms.

“We fully support moving quickly on a more responsible and effective solution,” said Rep. Bill Elam (R-Nikiski). “We must give parents public school choice, including brick and mortar, charter, and homeschool options. The power should rest with the people not the system, nor special interest groups.”

However, some of what the governor wants will be resisted by legislators. For example, “open enrollment” between school districts is being criticized because it could create uncertainties if lack of capacity “backs out” local children from a school. Open enrollment within a district seems more acceptable, although some school districts now allow this.

Legislators also question whether Dunleavy will in the end allow a $560 increase to the BSA formula, which makes it more or less permanent, compared with one-time funding of the money outside the formula. Last year the governor vetoed a bill with a $174 increase in the BSA formula but he did allow the same money to be appropriated as a one-time grant to school districts.

Educators say they appreciated the one-time money last year but that year-to-year grants don’t allow ongoing funding for things like hiring more teachers who would be laid off if the money doesn’t come in the following years through the BSA.