Senate Education, 4/27/26, 3:30pm

Good afternoon, everyone. I call this meeting of the Senate Education Committee to order. It is 3:32 PM here on Monday, April 27th. We are meeting in the Belz Committee Room here in the gorgeous State Capitol building located in downtown Juneau. I just remind folks who are here in the room, if they could please mute their cell phones.

Documents for today's meeting have been uploaded to BASIS, that is akleg.gov. They've also been distributed to members, and of course there are additional copies right there by the door. Mike has added a QR code to hopefully save some trees. We are moving into the 21st century, folks. Members present today are Vice Chair President Stevens, Senator Keel, myself, Senator Lukey Geltobin.

Senator Yunt is excused, and we expect Senator Bjorkman to join us. At some time in the near future. Please let the record reflect we do have a quorum to conduct business. I want to thank Zach from the Juneau LIO for moderating today's meeting and Mary Gwen with Senate Records for joining us to document today's meeting as well. On the agenda today, we have the second hearing for Senate Bill 232, Personal Collection of Certain Fossils.

We will also have the second hearing for Senate Bill 66, State Tribal Education Compacts. First item on the agenda is the second hearing for Senate Bill 232 sponsored by Senator Rob Yunt. We are joined by his legislative aide, Ryan McKee, here today. On March 20th, we held the first meeting— excuse me, we had the first hearing for the bill and took public testimony. My office did not receive any additional comments.

Mr. McKee, do you have any final comments you'd like to make? Yes, thank you. For the record, Ryan McKee, staff to Senator Yunt. Just to address a couple of the questions. I think it was on what would happen if someone died.

So we talked to Ledge Legal, so I figured I'd just give you guys the overview. So the— when a person who's done the collection passes, they can put it in a will, they can give it to the family members. However, whoever receives the fossils, the— all the requirements that are put into this legislation right now, they'd still have to abide by them. And so if they did violate those statutes or anything, they'd be held to the same penalties that the person who collected them were. So that is still covered regardless of where they end up.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. McKee. I appreciate you following up on that question. Are there any additional comments or questions from committee members? Seeing none, it is my will— if it's the committee's will, I would like to move Senate Bill 232 from the Senate Education Committee.

President Stevens. Madam Chair, I move to report Senate Bill 232, work order 34-LS1118/n, from the Senate Education Committee with individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal note. The Senate Education Committee gives legislative legal authority to make technical and conforming changes to the bill. Without objection, Senate Bill 232, work order 34-LS1118/n, is reported from the Senate Education Committee with individual recommendations and attached zero fiscal note. We will take a brief at ease to sign the committee report.

Thank you. Thank you. Brief at ease.

We're back on the record here in Senate Education. It is 3:37 PM and it is Monday, April 27th. Our next item on our agenda today is the second hearing for Senate Bill 66, State Tribal and Education Compact, sponsored by Governor Dunleavy. Today we will receive a more detailed analysis and review the fiscal Joining us today are the Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development, Dr. Dena Bishop. We are also joined by compacting consultant for the department— excuse me, for the Department of Education and Early Development, Dr. Joel Isaac.

Welcome to both of you. If you could please identify yourself for the record and begin when you are ready. Thank you. For the record, my name is Dena Bishop, the Commissioner of Education for the Department of Education and Early Development. Thank you.

[FOREIGN LANGUAGE] Joel Isaac. My name for the record is Joel Isaac, and I'm a compacting consultant for the Department of Education and Early Development. And before us today, we have our, the sectional analysis or sectional summary that I'm going to do a kind of a brief overview. And then there's additional documents that were provided that provide that crosswalk that I touched on on Friday for seeing from the color-coded languages, the legislative report language, and then the black text is the draft bill or the bill language. And as we jump in, I just wanted to share the appreciation for the time that we have on this topic.

And every time we got in the negotiations to a sticking point, one of the questions we would ask is, is this what's best for kids? So I wanted to share that as we go into the bill language, that that was the driver behind this work, is what is this what's best for kids? Is this transformational? On Friday, we talked more about the transformation, and today we're going to see what that looks like in action, but also what are those we can put our finger on, we can read how this works. So with that, I'm going to jump in.

So Section 1 amends the uncodified law by adding a new section that outlines the legislative intent, and then also outlines— I'm going to paraphrase some of this because we have the further detailed documents that are a little bit easier to kind of show the cross-reference to each other, but that this is for 7 years. So it's a minimum— maximum of a 2-year startup for a school to come online and then a 5-year window to operate the school. So that's why that's a 7-year window for a 5-year pilot. Section 2 amends the uncodified law by adding the new section, and it grants the commissioner the authority to negotiate and execute compacts with the identified federally recognized tribal partners, and it has the Chapter 43 SLA 2022. On Friday, we talked about SB 34.

That's that enrolled number that I briefly said on Friday that we have— that's— we'd have our enrolled number. So just be aware that's that connection to SB 34.

Subsection B, this is where it starts to get into the teeth or the meat, if you will. It outlines all the— some of the required components of the demonstration, and then there's 11 provisions that are listed in in this bill. You can see a lot of them being met in the draft compact document that was part of the legislative report. So that's kind of seeing how some of the legwork splices together. That's where you would see that in action is the draft compact itself.

And then subsection C, the state's— a demonstration for the State Tribal Education Compact must be in effect by June 30th, 2028. That's that 2-year window that I talked about for a school to come online. And then subsection D defines the participating tribe, and again, that's those 5 tribal partners that went through the negotiation process as part of SB 34. Section 3, and you'll note this is all an uncodified law throughout, and that was that mechanism that we had talked about on Friday so that it keeps a fireproof wall between Title 14 but allows this uncodified to work with it. And so you're going to see this is the section and a couple more that that do the integration between the two without separating the protection.

So it requires the, the STEC school must operate in accordance with the terms of the compact, and there is a draft compact that's included in the bill packet. Subsection B: The school is exempt from all statutes and regulations applicable to state board— or school boards, except for statutes and regulations made applicable in Section 2 of this act or in legislation enacted or regulations adopted after the effective date. So that's the mechanism we were talking about with the uncodified law and dovetailing in. And you'll see throughout how that, that works and that the functioning as a school district that we talked about on Friday makes it to where it's clear that the Tribally Compact of Public Schools still have to follow public law around education. Subsection C, this outlines the operation and management of the state-tribally education compacted public schools as if they were a school district.

That's that key piece of this uncodified law mechanism working. And then it outlines the requirements related to school operations. And I'm going to kind of briefly go through these because I think it's helpful for those listening and also for us in this conversation when I say just like, oh, like a school district, to kind of jog our memories of like, what does that mean? So I'm not going to read the whole paragraph, but I'm going to highlight.

This includes parental rights, compulsory attendance, the school term, day and session, and school holidays, literacy and early reading information, and then miscellaneous applications of school district operations, transportations of students and requirements for annual fiscal audit authorization, or authorizing cooperation with other school districts, prohibition on discrimination based on sex and public education, school safety and school discipline regulations adopted by the State Board of Education, early development, if to implement this paragraph, that are applicable to school districts and their schools, additional requirements. So just remember, these are still public schools. They're still under the state board. For the purposes of regulatory processes, includes state aid to public schools. So that's that section of Title 14, the BSA Foundation Formula.

It's still following that law. It includes sick leave, teacher certification, employment, and retention of teachers, the teacher retirement system, and authorizing collective bargaining by certified employees. So that's the teacher piece. We've mentioned on Friday as well that like teachers can, can go back and forth between an existing school district and the state tribally compacted public school. This is the section that really kind of shows that.

And finally, it outlines the requirements for students in education programs, and this is for students with disabilities. It covers the sexual abuse and sexual assault awareness and prevention, and then establishing health education program standards and bilingual/bicultural education. Section D or subsection D, allows the State Board of Education and Early Development to, upon request of the STEC school, waive requirements in AS 14-20-020(b). And that really, this is about the teacher certification, the fees associated with that, and that you see it has specialized knowledge the tribes feel relevant in order to obtain a teacher certificate or subject matter expert limited teacher certification. So those things are some of the questions that came up on Friday.

This is where it lives in the bill. It's with those teacher certification pieces. And may I— this is Dina Bishop for the record. There was a question, President Stevens, that you had last week in regard to certification and the last sentence on there. Certificates issued in this section do not require a request from the school board.

Those two new or different types of certification, Type I and Type M, are those types of certificates that must be at the request of a school district once someone's hired. The other types that Chair Tobin and I went through, Type A, B, and C, are ones that individuals request. So those were the differences, and hence that line is in there in regard to that. But the law determines that the local school board has to request it, and, and that's just a little change there.

[FOREIGN LANGUAGE] For the record, thank you, Commissioner. Subsection E outlines the STEC school may not engage in secular activities, charge tuition, or restrict enrollment. This is the key piece that makes it very clear that we're following Constitution. Those are constitutionally protected or prohibited— protected to be free and open, where these activities are not permitted in public schools. As far as using for funding purposes.

Subsection F, and this is that requires the STEC school have a physical location only in the school district that the board— where that school would be operated for the board of the department has consulted with under the process for SB 34, unless the school is a correspondent school. So that is the current law allows for correspondent schools of like a school district to have a correspondent school, and so a STEC school functioning as a school district can have a correspondent correspondence school. So that's what that language is talking about, is the way that correspondence schools happen or programs happen in our state is with school boards, local school districts. And Dr. Isaac, just under that particular section, and maybe I'm reading this wrong, so please, uh, help clarify my misunderstanding. So the subsection F starting on page 4, line 26, unless a demonstration state tribal education compact school is established as a correspondence school, the physical location of the school must be within the boundary of a school district.

So if it— if a state and tribal compact school was established as a correspondent school, it does not need to physically be in a school district or in Alaska. The, uh, Joel Isaac, for the record to the chair, the section of law that this is anchoring into is that a student who lives in Alaska outside of the geographic boundary of that school district currently can enroll in a correspondence program if it's like statewide in nature. For example, like through Galena, um, that's one of the like a homeschool program. This is already something that happens, so it's not creating new parts of Title 14. It's that these are the parts of Title 14 that exist, and we're notching into that, and that they have to negotiate that as part of their compact agreement from the beginning so it's not a surprise later on.

So just so I can make sure I am clarity and to know the intent, uh, is that a state and tribal education compact must, even if it is a correspondence school, have its incorporation in the state and that it cannot be located in Washington and then provide services to Alaskans in this state. [Speaker:JOE ISER] Joe Iser, for the record to the chair, yes, it has to be in Alaska and it's in that geographic— headquartered in that geographic associated where the tribe is physically. [Speaker:HEIDI DECKER-MAURER] Thank you. That's good clarity. And we will ask as we go through this, our legislative legal department as to ensure that the language clearly enumerates that intent.

Thank you. Moving on, Julissa, for the record, subsection G, uh, to the, to the chair of the committee, it requires that the STEC act as the employer for teachers in the school for the purposes of participation in the teacher's retirement system, and that a teacher employed by a STEC school is a member of the plan. So we talked about that on Friday. Again, this allows the teachers to go back and forth seamlessly if they migrate between school districts as they do today. Subsection 8 designates the federally recognized tribe or tribal organization as a school district and that the, the STEC as a public school for the purposes of providing appropriate public education for each child with disabilities.

As such, a governing body or school board is established by the tribe or tribal organization. This is that governance piece that we talked about on Friday, but it makes it clear that these schools are open to all students and are required to provide those services like other school districts are for students with disabilities and other, other ADA-compliant type of provisions in law.

Section 4 adds a new section for facilities, and this is facilities of a STEC must conform to the applicable laws concerning public access, health, safety, and fire code. Section 5 is a new section regarding funding. And this is— the legislature may appropriate the funds to a STEC in the same manner as a regional education attendance area. This includes state aid and grant funding. For the purposes of federal aid, a STEC school is known as a local education agency.

That's a key piece to dovetail in with federal appropriation language. The federal Every Student Succeeds Act uses local education agency, not school district. And so we're using the federal terminology here to align so there's the seamless flow and keeps the state eligible for funding and those tribally compacted public schools eligible for public funding. And this is Dina Bishop for the record. This language mirrors Mount Edgecomb's language in the— insofar as it's recognized as an LEA even in itself.

July, is it, for the record. Section 6 adds a new section regarding, regarding reporting, and this is the— each STEC school shall report to the commissioner data required for all federal and state funding sources, including attendance, assessment, and all data reports in the state and federal report cards to the public, as well as the annual report to the legislature. We talked briefly about that on Friday, but that's one of those pieces of making sure that this process puts us— keeps us in compliance with the federal regulations as well. Section 7 authorizes the department and the Board of Education to adopt implementation regulations. Section 8, there's a sunset.

This is a pilot, so it's authorizing authorization of the demonstration STEC program on July 1st of 2000— or 2036 is the one that would sunset. And then the Section 9 is the immediate effective date.

Thank you. Are there questions from committee members?

I don't see any. I do have one question. As I was looking through and trying to follow through the different sections on pages 3 and 4, and I did note that I don't see the sections related to correspondence, IEPs, allotments, and I may have missed it, but I'm assuming as under that section on page 4, if a state and tribal compact school would like to establish as a correspondence, the intent is to ensure that they also follow state statute regarding the— I'm going to use the word IEP again. I mean individual education plan for the public who's listening along and doesn't know all of our acronyms. And student allotments, and then also applicable statutes with reporting requirements.

For the record, this is Dina Bishop, and yes, and in the general section it calls for that for special education for all students, and then subsection F requiring the SECS schools to have a physical location. This mirrors Title 14, and again, to call it out that it's not all the provisions of Title 14 that we presently have would be carried through in the STECs, so that if there was an interest in operating a correspondence school by a STEC, which would be an LEA, they would have to go through the same processes as everyone else for approval, and that their school district, for instance, Nome, could not operate its STEC school outside of the of Nome in order to do it for their tribe. Outside of that tribal land, they would not be able to operate it. They wouldn't be able to open a tribal school here in Juneau for those reasons. To the chair, Joel Isaac, for the record, there are two parts of the bill that also connect in with Title 14.

It's in on page 3, line 1, a demonstration state tribal education compact school as if the school were a school district. That ties into the definition 14-17-990. And so that's that piece I was talking about where you're not seeing every provision of Title 14 included in this bill. You're seeing two, at least two spots where definitions are explicitly connected, um, as a way to make sure it's compliant with that without having to basically cite all of Title 14. In a bill.

And then also the other piece with the correspondence has to do— sorry, I was just looking at where you pulled it out from the bill language. That was the main definition. The two are tight, so I appreciate when they flip through pages. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. And as I mentioned before, when we have public hearings, it helps us set the public record so that when or if there are any questions, folks can go back and listen so they can understand the intent of the bill sponsor. As we all have known, there have been times where there were drafting errors or mistakes made and intent was not honored because there is a different interpretation long after we all leave state service. Dr. Isaac. Joel Isaac, for the record to the chair.

The piece on bill page 4, line 29, there is a definition that dovetails. This is in that cross-section. The definition I was blanking on before is Title 14-60.010, and that's that definition that connects in with the geographic pieces we were previously discussing. So those are those two definitions, the geographic and then making sure you're accountable to as a school district is. Thank you.

Uh, President Stevens. Oh, thank you, Madam Chair. I, uh, just, uh, amazing how far we've come and all the work that's been done. I really appreciate that. We're talking about a 5-year demonstration program and then 2 years to plan it and get to that point.

What happens after that? What happens if it's a roaring success and we want to continue these schools? What has to be changed in this? What do you have to prepare to move that next phase? Are you— are we okay just the way we are?

Thank you. Joe Isaac for the record. To the Chair and President Stevens, thank you for that question. The process would be additional legislation would be required to make it permanent. So using the words from SB 34 as a demonstration proof of concept, SB 66 is the pilot.

So it's in action. And then once we see the success of this, we being our entire state, the legislature would have to pass new legislation and either repeal that sunset clause or make it permanent by— and there's different ways ways that that could happen. It could be by keeping it in uncodified law, or it could be making it into codified law under Title 14. So it gives the time to see which pieces are working well, and if there were tweaks that needed to be made before it would become codified law, or if those tweaks just need to keep living in uncodified law. That's the process that would be needed.

And I think that's one of the pieces that we talked about for— I think about this as like a pilot being research, The research questions that are being asked is how do we address the funding, how do we address instruction, and how do we address governance? And then you have to report those findings, and there's the vehicle for reporting, and the legislature gets that information and either agrees like, hey, this is a success, let's make it permanent, or it's, hey, we want to tweak this, let's keep it going and address these things, which they could do sooner than at the end of this bill sunset clause, or they could wait till the in the end, it's the legislature's will for how they would like to do that. Thank you. Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Isaac.

That's helpful to understand. So I want to dig into the funding piece, because right now the way that our state funding system works is that when a student enrolls in a different institution, and particularly in this, they're enrolling in a different school district, using Nome as the example, as that's the one I often fall back on just for my own personal experience, is that that would remove those dollars from the Nome Public School System. And move those into a different district. Uh, because it's a 5-year program, is there concern or worry that if there is a, an inability for the legislature to draft new legislation or remove the sunset date, that the Nome Public School will then have such significant attrition, or potentially attrition, uh, and lose teachers and support services and not be able to provide services to those incoming students? How do we kind of find the, the right balance Thanks for that.

Joel Isaac, for the record, to Chair Tobin, I really appreciate the question. We met with superintendents this morning, and the commissioner and I were talking through this, and we met with AASB two weekends ago, I believe it was, with the tribal partners to kind of talk through this question, and superintendent from Nome was there, and we've been having ongoing conversations about this. So I'm going to kind of go from backwards to forwards, if you will. So if we go about to The premise is that the talent, the education is staying in the community. So let's say that the compacting school were to shutter for any reason down the line.

There's still teachers who meet state certification standards requirements in that community. So if, as long as the students don't like leave the state somehow, those students are still in the community. So if they have to move or if the compacting school were to dissolve, those students could still go to the Nome Public— in this case, that example for Nome, the Nome Public School District schools, and they're still teaching talent in the community that could be hired because they meet all— they can— it's structured to go back and forth between school districts. So that funding doesn't leave the community. And since they're both like the Compact School is a public school and the Nome Public School is a public school, it is not reducing the amount of funding coming into the community.

Community. That's the key mechanism for this. So if something were to happen, we had those conversations with the superintendents, we kind of gamed them out, if you will, legally, like what happens if the compact terminates, whether in the pilot or down the road. We wanted to make sure that there wasn't such a wave of disruption that it became insurmountable for kids to be able to receive education. So that's really the premise of this, is to be able to provide that, that protection and then also keep it local.

And then within the community for that, I think the kind of the first part of your question about what does this look like as students— we're having a public school over here, and then we have the existing public school system here, and now we're adding to our system, but we're not adding more students per se. There might be students who are not currently enrolled who might enroll, but I think your question isn't necessarily addressing that. That's part of, of the math, if you will, when we're looking at like how do we calculate the impact So I just want to add that piece to the consideration. But as far as moving back and forth between the two, it's looking at what are those shared availabilities within the community of like school space. So looking at shared use agreements for school buildings so that it's the fun— again, the funding coming into a tribal public school is not leaving the community.

So it still costs the same amount to operate fuel in that same— that building whether or not it's whether it's the tribal school or whether it's the existing public school. Commissioner, I think you would like to add to that. Thank you, Dr. Isaac. And to the chair's question, I think just given where Dr. Isaac and I sit in our daily jobs every day, I interpreted your question differently. And I interpreted it as— and I wanted to add that these considerations did come up as well— that if there's another option in Nome outside of the school district, that— and it's another school district— technically the way it's operated on paper, then students are leaving one school district and that school district for which they left would lose teachers.

And so that's how I interpreted it, which is generally in Alaska, you know, the concerns with limited resources. I do like to share that I do see and I learned that options for parents and children, I think of them as an abundance thing that when, You know, I have one child and I didn't think that I could love my second child as much, but I can. You know, like we can operate in a system of abundance. But in that, the success of the local school district is still a priority for tribes because they have other children, other tribal children as well as other public education children in the community. And we did discuss at least during this trial period, because if it doesn't work or does, to put in some type of a hold harmless so that the local districts feel whole and that they would come into this with a feeling of abundance to help young people in their communities rather than taking away.

We do not want this to look like we're stripping anything. What we want to do is that we are adding knowledge to public education. We're adding place to public education. And it would be important that local districts do that too. And sometimes when you sit in a place where you have to make the ends meet financially, it doesn't feel that way.

So we we would, and that is in our notes in regard to our public testimony, in regard to the 27 times that we met, that did come up and, and we do have some footnotes of that in the documents. And so that was one of the solutions that during this time to see where are things settling out, but certainly because the tribes themselves are already operating schools, in many cases there already is this shared space, shared services. And so we would want to expand on that. And the one thing that the tribal leaders in these education things have shared with me, and I would really mirror, I look at her name, the gal testified from Fairbanks, Kowalski, to operate, to honestly have that freedom in that tribe because charter schools are like, okay, we still have this, but I'm still giving you permission. Can they own that permission?

Which I believe they do already, and this would ensure that our state recognizes that as well. So that's how I took your question. So if it was not correct, you have both ends answered. Thank you, Dr. Bishop. I was going to ask about hold harmless.

Would it trigger hold harmless and some of just the financial dynamics of the expectation of how this would work? And I think I also am curious a little bit around record retention. Which we— it's more of an administrative thing. We can talk about that later, especially when you have students who are moving into one system, and if there's a potential for a COMBAC school to not continue forward, what is the record retention policy and how do we ensure that students graduate and they have all the requirements that they need as they're entering back into the— a school district that they were not enrolled in to begin with? And that's just an administrative question I can follow up with at a later date.

Are there other questions?

Seeing none, let's move on to the fiscal notes. We—. Oh, I apologize. We are joined by Heather Heineken, the Department of Education and Early Development Director of Finance and Support Services, who is online, I believe. Excellent.

And Ms. Heineken, when you are ready, if you could walk us through the fiscal notes. All right, thank you so much, Chair Tobin and Senate Education Committee members. For the record, my name is Heather Heineken, and I serve as the Director of Finance and Support Services for the Department of Education and Early Development. Today, I'll provide an overview of the Department of Education fiscal notes associated with Senate Bill 66, the State Tribal Education Compact. And there are 3 fiscal notes related to this bill that were prepared by the department.

The first bill is the Foundation Program Allocation, which is OMB component number 0141, sorry. This bill creates the ability for the Department of Education and Early Development to enter 5-year State Tribal Education Compacts with participating tribes. Funding for tribally compacted public schools would follow the State Foundation formula as set out in AS 14-17-410 using the district cost factor of the associated school district. 5 Tribes have expressed interest in the pilot program with the following projected student counts. Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska, which is near the Juneau School District, has a projected 100 ADM, or average daily membership.

Ketchikan Indian Community, which is in conjunction with the Ketchikan School District, would be 200 ADM. King Island Native Community and Village of Solomon, which is Nome Public Schools area, is 120 ADM. The K'nik Tribe, which is in the Mat-Su School District area, would be 300 ADM plus 300 correspondence ADM. These are the projections that they gave us. And the final one is Kargi Academy, and I apologize if I said that pronounced that incorrectly. And that's near the North Slope Borough School District with also 100 ADM projection.

And the Tribally Compacted Schools would receive a one-time startup grant in their first operational year set at 45% of the base student allocation. And for 2027, with a base student allocation of $6,660, the total estimated cost includes a one-time startup grant of $5,960,700. The Foundation Formula funding would be $13,277,900, and the total would be $19,238,600. This particular fiscal note is a zero-dollar fiscal note because the funding mechanism is a general fund transfer to the Public Education Fund. And the financial impact for '27 through '32 is captured in the PEF, which we're going to go over in just a minute.

And then, pupil transportation, we included that fiscal note, which is OMB component number 0144. And this bill authorizes the Department of Ed to allocate transportation funds under AS 1409 on a per-pupil basis within each district. The funding impact is expected to be neutral as any transportation grant provided to a Tribally compacted public school would be offset by a corresponding decrease in funding the associated school district to potential student transfers. This is also a zero-dollar fiscal note because it's— the funding mechanism is a general fund transfer to the Public Education Fund. And then the third fiscal note, the Public Education Fund, which is OMB component number 2801, outlines the financial impact for the PEF, which is the funding mechanism for Foundation Program and Pupil Transportation allocations.

As previously stated, there are 5 tribes that have expressed interest in participating in the pilot program. Each tribally compacted school will receive this funding following the formula under AS 14-17-410, along with the one-time startup grant in 2027, which is set at 45% of the BSA, which is $6,660. So, by district, we have Tlingit Haida would be 100 students for a total funding of $2,085,000, which is a one-time startup grant of $646,000. $1 Million, and then projected foundation funding of $1.4 million. The Ketchikan Indian Community has ADM of 200 projected with a one-time startup grant of $1.16 million and projected foundation of $2.588 million for a total of $3.4 million.

$1.750 Million. King Island and Village of Solomon in the Nome Public Schools area would be a 120 projected ADM with a total funding of $3,075,000, which includes a one-time startup grant of $952,000 and then projected foundation funding of $2.122 million. The K'nik Tribe in the Mat-Su Borough School District has 300 ADM for brick and mortar and 300 correspondence students projected for total funding of $7,064,000, which is— includes the one-time startup grant of $2.188 million and foundation funding of $4.876 million. Uh, $1,000. And finally, Kargi Academy, uh, located in the North Slope Borough School District, with a projected ADM of 100, the total cost in '27 would be $3.262 million with a one-time startup grant of $1 million and projected foundation funding of $2.25 million.

And then for years 28 through 32, the projected cost would just be the foundation funding, which is $13.277 million annually. The impact on the districts that they're coming from is really indeterminate due to the effects of potential enrollment shifts and the adjustments in the formula that we would experience. So the actual foundation formula funding for each Tribal compacting school will be determined after the count period on October 27th. And then the pupil transportation grants will be allocated per pupil with no net fiscal impact, as grants will be offset by a decrease in funding to the associated district. So, as you know, our foundation formula, when you start moving students, it changes levels of funding, so it's hard for us to get exact figures, but this is the overall cost based on the projections, um, that we have at this point.

So I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you, Miss Heineken. Uh, Miss Heineken, as we just discussed here in the committee, uh, the construct of a hold harmless provision, uh, for the school districts that would be losing students to these. Would you be able to project out for the committee what that fiscal impact might be? So I'm assuming, and I'm probably assuming wrong because I do not sit on Finance nor am I good with numbers, as all of my degrees are social science degrees, that we just double that number.

However, I recognize that there's one-time grant funds, and so that may not be the most effective way to, to estimate out what the total fiscal impact would be.

I don't have those numbers, and I'd be happy to go back and take a look regarding the hold harmless. The challenge is for, say, for example, North Folkboro, they have multiple schools. All this, so it's hold harmless is held at the school level, and if, if what, if this, if it's equally, it has to be a 5% or more decrease in enrollment. So if it's, if it's broken out across all the schools, they may not see it. So it's been hard for us to really project what that cost is.

We will take a look and see if we can come up with something that, that might make sense, and I'll, I'll try and get that— we'll get that over to your office. Thank you, I appreciate that. Dr. Bishop. Thank you. Chair Tobin, and I do want to add that when we discussed hold harmless with the tribes, we are— and with the school districts, it was really insofar as maybe establishing something added to this bill to be more sensitive.

I—. We do believe that the 5% is too great. By that same— these would be maximums. By that same talk, that they would never grow larger than this during— this would be the maximum by actual student count. And presently right now, like some of these schools, they're operating much smaller.

So this would be where they would grow to within 5 years. So the maximum amount. So year 1, we gave you the maximum amount of cost of a state tribal school, but it would be definitely based on the AADM. Thank you. Thank you for that clarity.

Any other questions? Senator Keel. Thank you, Madam Chair and Commissioner. Thank you for that. That's helpful in envisioning what a district hold harmless would look like or could look like.

Can you— I'm just trying to think through where the potential impacts are. Certainly in the North Slope borough, most of the community is pretty dispersed. Kids aren't likely to travel Ketchikan, Juneau, but when we start to look out at Matsu, there's an awful lot of schools to draw from. Any concept, conceptual modeling of, of where kids are likely to come from that could help a district analyze or where the impacts might be focused? Sure.

Through the chair to Senator Keel, I believe they have an eye already because they have a relationship with all of these schools that already operate and these tribes. So they have an understanding of how many students. So for instance, in Matsu, K'nik already operates a correspondence charter and a K-8 building, a facility, and their, their charter school, or rather their correspondence school that's charter, is really focused on high school because the tribe provides for CTE and career technical hands-on learning. And their other program that is is presently a charter in Matsu called K'nik Charter, and that is the, the tribe that engaged in this, uh, has about 200 students. And so, um, understanding like that area, I believe that Matsu has a, a good understanding of whom are the students, where would they come from.

In this area in Juneau, there's folks in the room that could probably speak to it, but my understanding is they run a program for younger children and they would want to build that up year after year as well. So, uh, there is, um, uh, the— and how do you pronounce, uh, Dr. Joel Isaac, for the record? Kadege Academy is the one up on the North Slope. Okay, the Kadege Academy in the North Slope, uh, they are operating, uh, right in, um, Updiavik, so right in the largest city there.

Um, Keneq, or Ketchikan rather, is operating in Ketchikan, uh, and right now it's a high school program and it has approximately 26 students in it. And then, which I think I— oh, and then I don't have as much information on King Island. Dr. Isaac can. For the record, Joel Isaac, through the chair to Senator Keel, for the Nome tribes, because it's the two tribes together physically located in Nome, they have— there was an immersion program that Maddie was the teacher in. She was the lead negotiator for those tribes together.

She presented in-house on this. So they don't have a K-12 that's going right now, and it would be building up. Maddie is actively working on the curriculum to be able to do the younger grades in an Upiak language. So it's, there's a max size like one teacher can, can handle. So again, starting smaller.

So you're looking at that 20 to 30 students per— in that grade band between like a K-1 that would be coming that previously she was teaching. So that's like kind of the size scope. And when we talked with Superintendent Burgess, uh, we're looking at like— it's like that when I'm starting with one classroom, um, would be— and potentially being at the existing school that is the existing public school and doing a shared service as agreement for space.

One more for me. Senator Keel. This level of detail is excellent. Thank you for bringing this. You may have said it already and I didn't retain it.

The existing correspondence program that is tribally operated, is that an in-district or is that statewide? And what would be the vision under the bill? Thank you. Through Chair Tobin to Senator Keel, they presently operate This is the first year that they did move to a statewide. The students that they are picking up are actually from—.

[Speaker] Kadeegee. [Speaker] Kadeegee Academy. And so some of the students from the Kadeegee Academy was strictly already a tribal school. They did not have a dual partnership with their school district. They were totally separate.

For certain services, they have joined with with the K'nik Tribe to provide some of the career technical and other partnerships. But outside of that, the K'nik correspondence is primarily those K'nik students that are in physically in Matsu that are in the K'nik Tribe's secondary program because the tribe already runs a secondary program that it's partnered with the district to be able to provide additional resources to get a graduation through Matsu. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Keel. I do want to mention I had an opportunity to visit, uh, the immersion program in Nome when I was there for a Rotary trip, and Maddie was doing some incredible work with the Nome preschool and first grade programs, which was very neat to see.

I do not see any additional questions. Um, my last question, it might be for you, Miss Heineken, or perhaps for you, Dr. Bishop, specifically on federal impact aid, knowing in some of these districts there may be federal impact aid that's coming through. Do any of these districts have federal impact aid dollars, and then how is the vision for the way that those funds are distributed? Sure, thank you. That's a great question that did come up with superintendents as well.

For the record, my name is Dina Bishop, Commissioner of Education, and insofar for impact aid as well as ESEA, all grants grants are by student count. And so if those students did enroll in that new LEA, that LEA would have the opportunity to apply for that regarding those students and impact aid. Thank you. That's helpful. As I am— wish I was more attuned of which district has those dollars attributed to it or not.

However, I have not memorized the funding formulas of all 52 districts yet. Chair Tobin, almost all districts in Alaska have some type of impact aid. I think I think there may be about 5 that don't. So on the majority, you can pretty much say that most would. Yeah.

But I can get those to you, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you so much. Any additional questions from committee members?

Seeing none, I want to thank you so very much for walking us through this bill and providing us an analysis of fiscal notes. Ms. Heineken, when you have some of those additional numbers, if you could follow up with our office and we'll get them distributed to members. And of course, if there's any questions, please do not hesitate to reach out to Dr. Isaac or to Dr. Bishop. I am going to hold SB 686 until a future meeting. Please work with the department and my office with any additional amendments or considerations or concerns.

I do know that there are some drafting questions our legislative legal department has asked us to correct, such as referencing codified law instead of the actual statutes, which we will be working with you to make sure we get those correct statutory definitions identified. This concludes our agenda for today. The Senate Education Committee will not meet on Wednesday. However, the Task Force on Education Funding will meet, and that will be Wednesday at 3:30 PM. We will hold that meeting in the Davis Committee Room.

The focus of that meeting is on federal funding Impact Aid, and Local Contributions to Public Education. The next meeting of the Senate Education Committee is this Friday. We will hold the confirmation hearings for the appointment of Joy Coburn-Smith from Kotzebue to the State Board of Education and Early Development. As there is no other business before us today, before I adjourn, any closing comments that you would like to make? Joel Isaac, for the record to the chair, I just want to say, chikinik'ili, thank you very much for the time on this issue.

We had— we talked briefly on Friday about the going slow to go far, and one of the questions that comes up with that is this is a very big step. We, like, looking at all of Title 14 is, is a big step. And what one of the things that we find that this bill does is it's what is the right size step that we need to take to move this forward, because there's a minimum size that it can be And so on the cross-reference document, some of— there was a handful of items that were chosen to not be in the draft legislation. And it has to do with— that's the reason why. It's like, what is the right size step for this time?

And noting that those things might come down the road. But what is that first step that we need to take? And so that was, again, the decision-making for around some of the 78 pages of the report. Why is some included and not? That was our way of capturing that.

And that this work really has already started to transform education. Having this conversation around tribal sovereignty, tribal involvement in public education is making a change. And so the space to be able to have this conversation with the public, I wanted to express our appreciation that we're here for it. It's also is making an impact even though compacting is not actively happening around education. That our students are experiencing the positive benefits of serious looking at education.

So I just want to appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you. And just very briefly, as I might— for the record, Dina Bishop, and as commissioner and, and former principal and teacher and superintendent, I've been in many different positions in public education. And we many times don't want to do new things.

We operate in a bureaucracy. It's absolutely true. That's what we do. And I I just hope that this committee, as well as the larger legislature, can see that public education in Alaska has not done well for young people, especially Alaska Native people. And I hope you change that.

Well, thank you, Dr. Bishop. Thank you both for presenting to us today. As there is no other business before the Senate Education Committee, I will adjourn us 4:26 PM.