Senate Finance, 5/11/26, 1:30pm

[FOREIGN LANGUAGE] I'll send the Finance Committee to order.

It's 1:32.

May 11th. We're in State Capitol, Senate Finance Room. With me today are Chairman Olson, Chairman Steadman, Senator Keehl, Senator Merrick, Senator Kaufman, Senator Cronk, and myself, Senator Hoffman. We have a quorum to conduct business.

We have two items on today's afternoon agenda. First being Senate Bill 110, Museum Construction Grants, and secondly, HB 28, Teacher State Employee Student Loan Program.

Senate Bill 110, Museum Construction Grants, is the first hearing on this piece of legislation. I invite the prime sponsor, Senator Kawasaki to the table to introduce the legislation to the Senate Finance Committee.

Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity. State Senator Scott Kawasaki, District P, representing Fairbanks, Fort Wainwright, and Badger. Senate Bill 110 is to establish a state museum construction and major expansion grant program. Program within a department.

Alaska has a rich culture and history that's worth being shared with both our residents and of course our visitors to our state. Museums are instrumental in sharing our history and preserving our culture. We have similar funds like this in Title 14. We even recently passed a fire station working fund that could provide those types of grants to communities. That would like to enhance their museum experiences.

So Senate Bill 110 would create a similar fund to aid those types of museums. And I'll say that museums serve over 22,000 kids, K through 12, annually, acting as a vital extension to the classroom. For Native communities, museums and cultural centers are places of learning that allow people to connect with their heritage and identity. Alaska's museums contribute over $114 million to the state economy, and for one— for every $1 in government funding received, museums and cultural nonprofits return more than $5 in tax revenues. And with that, I will just say that I hope that you can support Senate Bill 110 today.

Thank you, Senator Kawasaki. Do members of the Finance Committee have Questions of the prime sponsor?

Seeing none, we will go directly to invited testimony. We have Tanya Klukas, the Executive Director of the Maury Thompson Cultural and Visitor Center in Fairbanks, Alaska. She is online. Please identify yourself and proceed with your testimony.

[FOREIGN LANGUAGE] Members of the committee, for the record, my name is Tanya Klukas. I am the executive director of the Morris Thompson Cultural and Visitors Center in Fairbanks, as the chair just indicated. Additionally, I serve on the University of Alaska Museum of the North Museum Advisory Council, and I thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of SB 110. As this bill has worked its way through the committee process, many of you may have already heard about a.

Building, deferred maintenance, and storage challenges for those of us in the museum and cultural institutions realm. These issues remain. What SB 110 offers is something Alaska museums and cultural institutions have not had: a predictable, structured capital matching framework for construction, expansion, and major renovation projects. This bill is about infrastructure. Museums are educational infrastructure.

At Morris Thompson, we serve thousands of students annually through curriculum-aligned programming, cultural education partnerships, and public interpretation. The University of Alaska Museum of the North supports research, development, education, and stewardship of collections that represent Alaska's scientific and cultural record. So infrastructure in the capital sense matters for us. Proper collection storage protects irreplaceable artifacts. Adequate HVAC systems preserve materials for future researchers.

Secure and accessible exhibit space allows institutions to expand our educational programming and our community engagement. Sometimes our needs are less visible, but they are still important. Roofs, parking lots, building systems, and modernization projects can determine if facilities remain functional and accessible. Sometimes even if we remain usable. At Morris Thompson, by the end of 2026, we will have welcomed approximately 2 million people through our doors since we opened in 2008.

We've worked hard to maintain our facility, which was partially funded with an investment of state funds. We've worked responsibly, but wear, weather, and time are realities here in Alaska. We know that significant major projects are ahead of us, as they are for many others across the state. And also, this is not anything new for the committee to hear because entropy is real. The matching structure in SB 110 is important because it creates a framework institutions can use when we pursue federal, philanthropic, and community support.

For many organizations, particularly those outside major population centers, the existence of a defined state program can strengthen broader fundraising efforts and can improve competitiveness for grants that require cost share. SB 110 represents a long-term investment in educational and cultural infrastructure across Alaska. I appreciate the committee's consideration of this legislation, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Members of the Finance Committee, have any questions at this time?

Senator Steadman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm not familiar with the Morris Thompson Visitor Center, so I assume that's owned locally in Fairbanks by the community or the borough. And then, Mr. Chairman, if we can get some help maybe from the bill sponsor just on the delineation between a state museum and museums owned and managed by the communities and what the bill's intent is for— is—. Is— Senator Kawasaki.

Yes, to answer— I think I can— I'll let her answer the question about Morris Thompson Center, which is a downtown Fairbanks facility. But I will say that Senate Bill 110 is agnostic to who owns the institution. We're mostly— these out of the 100+ museums that are expanding over the next 5 years, those museums are either nonprofits, they're owned by the state like the one up in Fairbanks at the University of Alaska campus, or they're tiny, tiny, tiny tiny, like the Hammer Museum in Haines community, small museums, things like that. But pretty much anywhere where people can come to view the arts and the culture and the history of Alaska would be considered a museum. And then the board would be able to adopt regulations to create a transparent and unbiased and equitable process to award those, to make those awards.

Senator Steadman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, when we look at the harbor matching grant fund, those harbors are owned by municipalities and they have enterprise funds to take care of them. You know, the fire hall bill may or may not get signed into law, we don't know, but that's intended for communities also. And I'm not so sure that the way this bill is structured now that that there shouldn't be some— well, that there's opportunity for non-municipal-owned public facilities.

You mentioned nonprofits and so on and so forth, museums, which is a little different mode of operation versus if it was, you know, the City of Nome's museum. Or the city of Fairbanks museum versus the university or versus the state or a particular nonprofit.

Comments? Senator Sackett. Sure. Just through the chair, Senator Steadman. I think by creating this sort of panel that would be creating a scoring mechanism and then having sort of the transparency behind it, you would have We have every type of museum available that would vie for the same amount of funds.

And I think, you know, my hope would be that whoever is in charge of this panel and the panelists that are involved would look to regional differences, would look to differences within ownership of the particular museum, whether it's privately held or publicly held, or even a portion of a museum that's part of a library, for instance, which is already partially funded through our library maintenance and— library maintenance and management fund that currently exists. Thank you, Senator Kawasaki. Do members of the Senate Finance Committee have further questions at this time? Senator Keogh. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Any mention of the Hammer Museum is going to get me on board.

But a question to the sponsor. I guess the one thing that Senator sitting next to me mentioned is that for the harbor grant programs, you do have to submit, I think, your major maintenance plan and your sinking fund— may not call it that— information, but it's the ongoing maintenance plan, including the fiscal. Does the bill as written or as you conceive of it include that in order to qualify for these expansion grants? Senator Kawasaki. Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Yes, in, in Section 1 of the bill, it defines what a museum, museum construction and major maintenance matching program grant will be, and it talks about the amount of square footage, how much storage could be added. It also talks about whether it's a new or old facility, whether they have plans to construct exhibits are, um, that are not connected with the original museum facility. There's a lot of detail that was written in this bill in the Senate Education Committee, and so I, I think that it is covered. There's also part to be eligible under this grant that local government entities should be a part of this grant project, and it says at least 20% of the total proposed grant project cost, and then it says the rest could be made up from private donors, which is what we see, or what we think be really in the end something that could be a lot bigger where we have industries and different organizations or different private businesses say we want to invest in that museum and it has a lot of local support and it's got a lot of state support.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Further questions?

Senator Kaufman. Thank you to the bill sponsor. I'm just curious your In the sponsor statement, it asserts that it's an economic engine returning revenue to the state. Could you just outline the mechanism by which that happens?

One second. I will defer the question to— or defer the answer to my staff. For the record, Matty Hall, staff to Senator Scott Kawasaki. The economic engine is based off of tourism data as well as the fees collected by those museums. This information and that claim was specifically made by the Museums of Alaska on the amount of subsidies that they returned to the amount of revenue that they have been able to return to communities, the 1:5 number.

If we're interested in getting deeper into the number, I can reach out to the Museums of Alaska to provide further information.

Senator Kaufman. Thank you. I'd like to know more about that. I appreciate it. Mr.

Senator Kaufman, further questions? Senator Steadman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Maybe the bill sponsor could help us with the list of the museums around the state. I'm not quite sure how many there actually are.

I'm still a little more comfortable using state monies to help local communities, you know, build a museum or repair their museum at 50% off.

Versus non-publicly held museums. Senator Kawasaki. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Steadman, in the document there is a one-page matrix that contains at least some of the museums. We got the large number of 100+ museums from Museums Alaska, which is— it's sort of the nonprofit trade association for all of the arts and cultural museums across the state.

So that's where we got that information from.

Senator Steadman? That's fine. Further questions?

Seeing none, we will not be holding public testimony today. We will go to Senator Keele for fiscal notes. Senator Keele. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senate Bill 110 has one fiscal note from the Department of Education and Early Development and Museum Operations.

They have a first-year cost of $172,900 of UGF. They had one permanent full-time position. That cost drops by about $16,000 to level at $156,900 in the out years. They note that they would want to create a new fund and would change some regulations. Are there questions on the fiscal note?

Senator Kiel. Mr. Chairman, I don't know if we have anybody from the department available online, but I understand the need for a position to start things off. It seems like less than a full-time job to do what —once a year grant scoring and a little grants administration. Is there anyone from the department who could talk to the possibility of sharing a position, paying overtime, something? I don't believe we do, but we can forward that question on to the department and get a response before we have a hearing, the next hearing on this bill.

Senator Kawasaki. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for the question. The original bill that we had looked at would have housed this community matching grant system within the Department of Commerce, similarly to Senate Bill 140, which was the fire station grant program. That bill escaped the Finance Committee with a simple $10,000 fiscal note because they said that it was an internal program that they would be able to within the Division of Community and Regional Affairs. We would anticipate that if there is a committee substitute, that would transfer the responsibilities rather than through the Department of— Department of— I guess it's in a different division to the Division of Community and Regional Affairs, that it would be a similarly small fiscal note.

Senator Keogh. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Senator Keogh. Closing comments, Senator Kawasaki. I just wanted to thank the members of the Senate Finance Committee for meeting on an afternoon and for hearing this bill.

Thank you, Senator Kawasaki. We'll set this bill aside for further consideration at a later time. That brings us to the second item on today's agenda, which is HB 28, Teacher State Employee Student Loan Program. This is the first hearing on this particular piece of legislation. I invite Representative Sture to the Senate Finance table to introduce the bill to the committee.

Thank you, Co-Chair Hoffman, Co-Chairs Steadman and Olson, and members of the Finance Committee. It's good to be here today. For the record, I am Representative Andy Sture. I represent North Mendenhall Valley here in Juneau, Haines, Skagway, Klukwan, and Gustavus. House Bill before you, number 28, includes several education funding investments intended to inject much-needed support and resources into improving our children's educational achievements.

The bill includes sound policies to attract and retain high-quality teachers, helps kids learn to read and provide career technical education options, helps with energy and transportation costs which can help free up resources for the classroom, and it provides an important adequacy study. A main component of the bill contains a 3-year pilot program to set up a student loan repayment program for certified teachers in special education, English language learner teachers, science, technology, technology, engineering, and math. This bill establishes a student loan repayment program with— for teachers who have student loan debt and who choose to work as public teachers in the state of Alaska. It incentivizes Alaskans to stay in Alaska to teach and also encourages those outside of the state to come home and seek employment here in our schools. This program would repay up to $5,000 per year to the student loans lender to the student's student loan lender for up to 3 years.

It is funded through the Higher Education Investment Fund at $1 million a year. This would not jeopardize the health of the fund. As you know, Alaska is experiencing a teacher shortage and has a high vacancy rate. On roughly the first day of school, we were 350 teachers short. Additionally, we had 285 teachers with an emergency certification.

Our state has had to rely on recruitment from internationally. We have hired 573 teachers who are here on J-1 and H-1B visas. And unfortunately, we have a high turnover rate for teachers and principals at 28% and 35% respectively. This turnover negatively impacts student achievement. And it's really difficult on family, student, and teacher relationships.

So we would like to use this incentive program to maintain our teachers. In addition, this bill, in response to rapidly increasing rising energy costs, would provide a one-time $43.7 million energy relief payment to school districts. This funding will help districts cover the cost of electricity and heating fuel for the upcoming school year without without having to direct money away from the resources and student services. Really important. In addition, the bill would also authorize a 10% increase in state per pupil transportation funding to address the high fuel costs in transportation.

It also advances the top recommendation of the Joint Legislative Task Force on Education Funding by authorizing a comprehensive research-based study of Alaska's education funding system. This study will provide a critical evaluation of current funding factors and the adequacy of base student allocation funding, serving as an important first step towards modernizing Alaska's public education foundation formula. This bill also establishes reporting requirements for Alaska's correspondence study programs and allows the state's only educational resource center to hire retired teachers and certified staff without affecting their retirement benefits. Finally, House Bill 28 repeals the conditional effect language included in House Bill 57 that was enacted in 2025. That language made K-6 reading proficiency grants and additional career and technical education funding contingent on the passage of a highly digitized business tax.

Repealing this provision will allow Alaska school districts to receive $21.8 million in reading proficiency grants and an estimated $9.7 million in additional career and technical education funding beginning in fiscal year 2027 on July 1st, 2026. This bill takes a meaningful step in recruiting and retaining teachers that our schools so desperately need and really our children need. It also provides essential funding and research tools so that we may equip our students with the top quality education they so deserve. Again, thank you, co-chairs and committee members, for considering all these elements in the bill. I do have, um, Carrie Thomas, executive director of the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education, to answer any questions you may have.

She's online, I believe. And we also have two invited testifiers for you today. Thank you for that presentation, Representative Storey. Do members of the Senate Finance Committee have questions? Prime sponsor at this time?

Seeing none, we will go to invited testimony. And the first individual is Bridget Weiss, liaison for UA College of Education Consortium. Please identify yourself and proceed with your invited testimony. See her in person. I am here live and in person.

Good afternoon, Chair Hoffman and members of the committee. For the record, my name is Dr. Bridget Weiss.

Currently serve the University of Alaska as a liaison to the Alaska College of Education Consortium. I have to say that slowly. Prior to this role, I spent 39 years as a K-12 educator, including the last 13 of those years in Alaska, serving students and schools in both Fairbanks and Juneau. Alaska's teacher shortage is a complex challenge that requires a comprehensive, multilayered response. At the University of Alaska, our schools of education are tackling the problem by, uh, embracing new and innovative programming like registered apprenticeship programs and other distinct grow-your-own programs through deep partnerships with our K-12 districts, the Department of Education and Early Development, Alaska Council of School Administrators, and tribal and community partners.

These efforts are grounded in maintaining high-quality educators educator preparation through accredited programs while also strengthening long-term teacher retention. Through my role, I have the privilege, as an example, of facilitating a scholarship program that supports third and fourth year teacher preparation students, as well as graduate students pursuing initial licensure. Over the past 4 years, the university has invested more than $1 million annually in scholarships to cover tuition, fees, and living expenses while during student teaching internships. The school— this school year alone, approximately $1.3 million in university-funded scholarships were awarded. While these investments are significant, they are not nearly enough to fully meet the growing needs in Alaska classrooms.

Our schools need highly qualified educators, and meeting that need will require solutions from multiple sources. House Bill 28 represents one important piece of that solution. In my role, I focus heavily on teacher recruitment and retention. I often think about the excitement that, that students have often as they approach August and they think about the teacher that is going to greet them on the first day of school. My boys are in their mid-30s.

I can still remember that sense of excitement as the school year approached. The idea of classrooms opening each fall without a certified teacher ready to support these eager students is deeply concerning and haunted me as a superintendent. I appreciate Representative Story's longstanding commitment to public education and student success. House Bill 28 addresses several critical workforce challenges in our K-12 system, including the proposed teacher loan forgiveness program. This initiative offers meaningful, relevant support to early career educators, particularly those beginning at the lower end of a salary scale.

Importantly, the program encourages teachers to remain or come to Alaska regardless of where they may have completed their education. Our students need talented, committed educators in our classrooms, and teachers are better able to focus on meeting student needs when their own financial burdens are manageable. As a third-generation Juneauite, I care deeply about the future of education in Alaska and about building and sustaining a strong workforce for our state. The University of Alaska is committed to doing our part But we cannot solve this challenge alone. Alaska continues to need collaborative, creative solutions from many partners to successfully address the ongoing teacher shortage.

House Bill 21 includes a variety of key, responsive, and practical strategies. Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of House Bill 28, and particularly for Representative Andy Storey in sponsoring this bill. Thank you, Bridget Weese. We will go to the Alaska Gateway School District and hear from their superintendent, Patrick Mayer. Please identify yourself and proceed with your invited testimony.

Thank you, Chair Olson and members of the Senate Finance Committee. For the record, my name is Patrick Mayer and I serve as superintendent of the Alaska Gateway School District. I am here today in support of House Bill 28. This legislation recognizes the reality that every school district in Alaska is facing right now. The cost of operating schools, uh, continues with a continuing rise in inflation while districts are being asked to do more with less.

HB 28 does not solve every challenge our schools face, but it provides meaningful and practical support in several critical areas that directly impact children, educators, and communities across the state. First, I would like to speak to the original intent of this bill, the student loan repayment pilot program for teachers recruitment and retention of educators remain among the most serious issues facing Alaska schools. Many districts struggle to fill positions in special education and STEM, uh, fields. In rural Alaska, these challenges can be even more severe, and we advocate to include all teachers to participate in this program. Educators today are often carrying student loan debt, and Alaska is competing nationally for qualified teachers.

A loan repayment program shows Alaska values educate— educators and is willing to invest in attracting and retaining talented professionals in our schools. Even modest incentives can make a meaningful difference when educators are deciding where to build their careers. I want to thank the legislature for recognizing the importance of an education adequacy study. For too long, Alaska's school funding formula has operated without a modern comprehensive review of what it actually costs to provide a constant constitutionally adequate education in today's environment. The cost of energy, transportation, housing, insurance, and delivery of education have changed dramatically over time, especially in rural and remote parts of Alaska.

An adequacy— an adequacy study gives policymakers, educators, and communities a common factual foundation to evaluate whether our current formula reflects the true cost of educating children. That is important because districts across Alaska are making difficult decisions every year about staffing, programs, class sizes, and opportunities for our children. A data-driven review of the formula conducted by nationally recognized experts is long overdue, and HB 28 takes an important step in that process. HB 28 also recognizes the growing financial pressures districts are facing from energy costs. In many parts of Alaska, schools are among the largest public facilities in a community, and keeping those buildings warm and operational is extraordinarily expensive.

Districts cannot simply turn down the heat in the middle of the winter or reduce electricity use when it is necessary to safely operate schools. When energy costs spike due to international conflicts out of our control, districts are forced to redirect money away from classrooms, instructional support, extracurricular programs, and student services. Just to pay utility bills. The one-time energy relief funding included in HB 28 would help districts stabilize budgets and preserve educational opportunities for children instead of cutting programs to absorb uncontrollable operational costs. Transportation costs are another major pressure.

Alaska's geography already creates some of the highest transportation expenses in the nation, and inflation has only intensified those challenges, and it's forced school districts to use general funds to cover transportation expenses. State transportation funding has increased only 20% since 2016, while costs have increased almost 40%. The transportation increase included in HB 28 acknowledges these realities and helps school districts continue providing transportation services to children. We are also in support of the reading proficiency grant funding included in the bill. It would start to right the unfunded mandate imposed by the READS Act.

Educators are working hard to implement the Alaska READS Act and improve literacy outcomes for children. That work requires intervention staff, curriculum assessments, professional development, and additional instructional support. School districts have embraced the goal of improving literacy because we know reading proficiency is foundational to long-term student success. But implementation requires resources. HB 28 allows districts to better support students in developing critical reading skills during the early years by providing $450 to each K-6 student reading at grade level or demonstrating improvement.

I want to emphasize that HB 28 reflects an understanding that public education is not just another budget item. Schools are the backbone of communities across Alaska. They educate our children, employ local residents, support families, and help communities remain viable. When school districts face financial instability, communities also feel those impacts. Children only get one opportunity to move through our education system.

Delayed investments and ongoing uncertainty have real consequences for classrooms, educators, and opportunities for our children. HB 28 provides support that helps districts maintain services while the state works towards longer-term solutions for sustainable education funding. I urge you to support HB 28. Thank you for your time. I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Superintendent Mayer. I don't see any questions at this time. Before we hear closing comments from Representative Story and Senator Keele, can we review the fiscal notes? Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

—List full of fiscal— on House Bill 28. We'll start with the Department of Education and Early Development Foundation Program. While that shows zero, there is an analysis attached showing the district-by-district breakout of the career and technical education grants. And the department notes that they will need to change some regulations. The next fiscal note is also from Education and Early Development.

This one is in pupil transportation. That also shows zero but has attached the district-by-district breakout of the pupil transportation funding.

The third fiscal note I have is Department of Education and Early Development under additional non-foundation funding. They show $43,874,000, so $43,874.0 in our usual notes of UGF for the energy funding, the one-time energy funding in FY '27.

The department— next fiscal note I have, let me just double-check real quickly here, is the Department of Education Early Development, Mount Edgecomb High School. Madison High School shows $426.2 of interagency receipts in year 1 and then $37.8 in the out years. This fiscal note is a little duplicative of the others because it reflects the energy and the other pass-throughs in the other two formulas. So there's not a specific or special Edgcomb amount here. That's why it's interagency receipts.

Next fiscal note, Education and Early Development. Commission on Postsecondary Education under Program Administration and Operations. This shows a first-year fiscal note of $1,045,000, so $1,045,000 total dollars, which bounces up and down just a little bit in the next 2 years. That is for the loan repayment program. And while there isn't a position notation here, I would note that That's to fund 1/3 of one job and 1/4 of another job.

We might have the education folks writing the fiscal note for the last bill take a look at this one. And they do note that they will need to change some regulations. Last fiscal note in the stack, Mr. Chairman, is under fund capitalization. That's the public education fund and the reason that those other two notes that spread money around showed zeros. It's because they come out of the public education fund once capitalized.

That shows $17 million $65,900, so in fiscal note terms, $17,065.9 of unrestricted general fund into the public education fund that funds the pupil transportation and the career technical education money. Mr. Chairman, those are all the fiscal notes we have. I have a question if we have somebody from the department online. I don't see anything for the reading grants that were mentioned here in this stack of fiscal notes. That is correct.

Senator Kiel, we do have— I don't think we have anyone online to answer that question.

So I think we would have to forward that in for comments and provide the answer to that question at the next to hearing on this particular piece of legislation. Are there any other questions that Senate Finance Committee members may want to ask that could be forwarded on for response?

Senator Cronk. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I have a few questions. I'm just going to go through the bill.

Section 1, obviously, this just highlights correspondence programs. Are we going to require this for every school district? Matter of brick and mortar charter schools, boarding schools. Representative Story. Thank you, Co-Chair Olson— sorry, Hoffman.

Co-Chair Hoffman, sorry about that. To Senator Cronk, this is what school districts are already required to do, and so it just puts correspondence schools and students doing the same. It does On Section 2, allow correspondence program students to retain textbooks and other materials including materials purchased through an annual student allotment.

Because we have heard examples that when a student wants to switch correspondence programs, they're required to pay back their books and materials. So this would allow them to retain those books and materials that had been purchased with their allotment. This change was requested in Senate Education. Through the chair. Senator Cronk.

Representative Story, that's fine. All of us rural legislators look alike. Senator Cronk. I'm actually going to skip. I'm going to go to the next question.

When I look at the student loan repayment, back in the day we actually had a forgiveness back in the day that actually required a person to teach, and at the time it was teach 5 years in rural Alaska. So did any discussion about making sure that if we're going to give this repayment to somebody, that at least they have to teach in Alaska 5 consecutive years? Because there's nothing in there— maybe there is and I missed it— that, hey, you can get your degree, we'll give you your money, and you could skip out of town. So if there's something there, that's great. But if not, have we discussed that part?

Senator Stori. Thank you. Through the chair, Senator Cronk. Yes, we have discussed that. How the— you have to work in this current bill, you work a year and then you get your $5,000 paid to your student loan lender.

Then after you work your second year, another $5,000, and then your third year. So you do not get it if you quit in the middle of the year, you would not get it. You have to serve your year. What happened right now, states are moving to the student loan repayment programs versus loan forgiveness. Forgiveness, because unfortunately, if you look at the history of our loan forgiveness program, we actually ended that because we actually ended up losing money on that because many people did not pay back their loans.

Now the idea is you have to have your degree before you get your loan repaid. Before you get your loan repaid. Before, as they were going through the process, they were having payments put towards their degree. And so some students did not finish and they had student loan debt and they did not repay back the debt. And so states are now moving towards repayment.

So most educators, when they go to college, go for 4 years. And as Senator Cronk said, it was a 5-year forgiveness program. Why did you settle on 3 years? Through the chair, this is a pilot program, so I was seeing if it would have the retention going for 3 years, and I thought the million dollars for each of those 3 years would not jeopardize the health of the fund, and so I thought we could get a good indication after 3 years. I would be open to being at 4 or 5 years, but I Settled for 3 years.

Senator Cronk. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess my problem with that is you could just teach a year and you get $5,000 forgiven and you could leave, right? And we've always talked about keeping people here.

So I mean, an idea would be to say you can teach 5 years and then we'll give you your $15,000 or something like that. Just an idea. One other last question. Section 15, it says one-time school energy costs. We talked about this because we're going to have some extreme high energy costs.

But right here it says a school district may use a distribution for any operating purpose. I know when we talked about energy costs, specifically targeting energy costs, and this specifically says you can use it for whatever you like. I guess I'm a little concerned with that language in the bill. Through the chair, Senator Cronka, thank you for that. Like you, I think the way energy costs have been, there's not going to be many districts who will would have any money left over for paying energy costs.

But if they do and they had a targeted need in some other area, it's not like we require them to pay back what the formula was that's disbursed. I do not think in this high cost of energy that that will happen, but I appreciate the question. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Cronk. No further questions for the prime sponsor.

Do you have any closing comments? Representative Story. Thank you. Thank you very much for hearing this bill today. We know teachers really impact student achievement, and the longer you have a relationship with your teacher, I think learning makes gains.

The teacher doesn't have to get you to know you as well. Because they have a relationship with you and with your family. But I also want to say that I wanted to thank the Senate Education Committee. This bill, when it came to.

It was the student loan teacher repayment program. And then based on all the needs that are happening around the state right now, they added many of the components that you see. And I especially appreciate the adequacy study. I have long been wanting to look at the foundation formula and see if we are making the investments in the critical areas and to look at the district cost factors. And many other methods.

So thank you for consideration— considering this. Thank you for those closing comments. We will set this bill aside. That concludes this afternoon's meeting. Our next meeting is scheduled for tomorrow morning at 9:00 AM.

We are adjourned.