3/20/26: Joint Assembly School Board Meeting

001We are just about ready to begin. I'm checking to see if we have anyone on the phone. Or if there's anyone on Teams. I'm on Zoom. On Zoom? I'm on Zoom, Bellamy Margo. Thank you, Margo. Does everybody have a microphone? Nope, we got a couple still waiting. We'll get started as soon as everyone's provision for the meeting. In order to use our time as wisely as possible, even though some members don't yet have a microphone, we do have some audience participation. So, I think what I would rather do than wait for that all to happen is to begin the meeting, share the microphones if you don't have one until we get to the point you have one. So, good morning, everybody. I now call to order this joint session of this joint conference of the

002Anchorage Assembly and the Anchorage School District. Today is March 20th. It is 10:06 p.m. We're on the record from 10:00 a.m. until noon. So, I would like to ask the clerks to conduct the roll, please. Member Baldwin Day. Present. Member Vice Chair Brally. Here. Chair Constant. Here. Member Gerkel. Here. Member Johnston. Here. Member Martinez. Present. Member McCormick. Member Prescodia. Member Rivera. Present. Member Silvers. Present. Member Volland. Happy to be here. Chair, you have a quorum. Thank you. Member Bellamy. Present. Member Hallman. Present. Member Dunleavy. Here. Member Higgins. Member Lessons. Here. Member Wilson. President Jacobs. Present. You have a quorum. Thank you. Next on the agenda we have >> Mr. Mr. Chair, I'm here as well. Oh, Mr. Myers, sorry. Okay. >> I know that might surprise people, but I am here. Nothing to report. So,

003um next we'll stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Mr. Hallman, would you please read the land acknowledgement? I will. We acknowledge that we gather here today on the traditional lands of the Dena'ina people of Upper Cook Inlet. For thousands of years the Dena'ina people have been and continue to be the stewards of this land. ASD is committed to diversity and inclusion, and it is with honor and respect that we recognize all indigenous people who live and learn in our community. Thank you. So, I Are we all provisioned for the meeting? Does everyone have a mic? No one missing, okay. Then we'll go ahead and

004take up the agenda in this order. Next we'll have minutes of previous joint conference. Um is there a motion? Move to approve. Second. It's moved by Ms. Baldwin Day, seconded by Mr. Volland. Any discussion on the minutes? Seeing and hearing no discussion. Oh, we don't. Okay. Okay. Okay. Well, I guess no vote is in order on this item. Interesting. Next we have the agenda item C. So, you have the agenda before us. Is there a motion? Move to approve the minutes. Second or agenda. Second. Motion to approve was probably seconded by Mr. Volland. So, any additions or other items? I'll note that we are going to have a briefing from the lobbyist, and we're going to hear from the mayor to top of the meeting after the comments, public comments. And so, um just like

005to have that kind of informally placed in there after D, before E. So, um and other than that, any other discussion? Do we vote on this? Seeing and hearing none, I'd like to ask unanimous consent. Is there any objection to the adoption of the motion? I'm seeing and hearing no objection, so consider both bodies have approved the motion. That'll take us next to item D on the agenda, which is public participation. List of four individuals who intend to be heard. Um I would like to hear from Mike Nield. Welcome. Please state your name, what part of town you're from. You'll have 3 minutes. Thank you. Uh my name's pronounced Nield, by the way. Um thanks for having me. Uh ladies and gentlemen of the assembly, of the board, um I got a handful of concerns

006um based on the closures of the schools, the consolidation uh Starting with the math. Uh back on the meeting on the 17th of February, um the administration provided some documents to uh to the public and to the board outlining the potential savings for closing consolidating these two these three schools. Um year one would be 2.6 million, year two 2.6, then it starts going down 1.7, .9, down to 150,000 by year five. So, a total of about 8 million in savings to close and consolidate these schools. Out of this 8 million, Campbell's only 2.4 total. So, Campbell was on a bond last year along with other schools trying to to fund uh roof repairs, things like that. The voters approved this uh There's still, you know, over 9 million uh plus some debt return stuff. So,

007about 11 million worth of work to be done there. Um But, the money's there for it. It can't be touched on other projects for a few years. So, part of the problem I think with this math is it it's flawed. It's not uh it's not taking into account that two of these schools are becoming charter schools, uh which intend to grow. You know, that one of them has a waitlist of 100 people, one of them has 150. You know, if they grow by these numbers, uh the district will lose about 10,500 for each one. Um so, you could be losing that money within a year. You know, instead of saving 8 million over five years, if if these things max out, you'd be losing 5 million over that same period of time. Um I don't

008see where where that makes sense. So, um I was reading newspaper article yesterday from ADN, and uh Chair Constant had said that the assembly shall approve the budget, that there's no other choice, you shall. And I don't think that's the whole truth. From what I'm reading, there's three parts to that code. This is section 605. Uh section B allows you to increase or decrease, increase via levy and bond. So, you know, you've you've done that with the bonds. Uh but you can decrease, and you can decrease all the way down to the state BSA level. Um the part that you're reading, the assembly shall approve the budget, that's as amended. So, if you if you don't approve it, then they have to amend it and bring it back. If you don't approve that, then that's

009the part that becomes law. Um I think you guys need to take a really close look at this stuff because you're going after almost 80 million dollars in in additional funding from the citizens. If we didn't do what we were supposed to do last year, you know, we're you're you're stepping over dimes to pick up dollars. You're going to save under a million dollars for Campbell STEM. Um and um sorry, stepping over dollars to pick up dimes, but at the same time tripping over your own feet. So, you know, I would ask the assembly, um do not approve the budget as proposed, and uh let uh let ASD go back to the drawing board to to fix it. Thank you. Next we'll hear from uh Haim Winger. Mayor, school board, and members of the assembly,

010thank you. Um my name is Haim Winger. I've lived in Alaska for 28 years, and I bought my home 10 years ago specifically because it backed into the school grounds. And I've spent my life flying airplanes, and I'm the luckiest father of two amazing kids. And I'm testifying here because I believe we want the same things. We're allies towards building a stronger Anchorage and stronger kids, and keeping the people here. And what I can tell you is that the school board I really believe has a credibility problem. As a commercial pilot, I have to give the influence that people will trust me now and in the future. And right now I will let other people talk to the math. But, the math of the savings of closing Campbell STEM doesn't add up. And the general

011appearance to the public is that they're closing the school to reappropriate the bond that was specifically earmarked, or whatever the proper term is, to go towards fixing Campbell STEM. And they want to reappropriate it, which is legally allowed if they close the school. And there's another bond uh for this year, for Lake Otis, which is also slated to close, to allow Rilke Schule and to come on in. That's a public perception problem. And I have voted every single time my entire life since I was 18 years old, and I voted every time for the future of our kids, for increasing education. And this is going to be the first bond that I ever ever vote against and advocate against if this closure goes through, because they've proven they can't be trusted with money. And that

012hurts me. That's a tough decision for me to make. Furthermore, the rationale for closing Campbell STEM has changed over and over again. It was never in any of the surveys done before when a proper process was done, but this time there was no public process. There was minimal, possibly illegal, notification put forth. And there was no community involvement when there were proper studies done. I've asked the district several times in multiple ways, and at least they haven't released the criteria for closing it. >> [sighs and gasps] >> I can tell you that I live on a street with three of the Campbell STEM teachers, and the house right next to me is owned by a person who's uh still got two kids in ASD, and their oldest daughter is entering graduate school now to um

013work on CRISPR technology as a brain scientist. STEM is vital to this. And we're doing this at a time when all the money coming out of Juno is changing. I've advocated and lobbied and we've got public statements towards increasing public funding. Please reconsider and going Welcome to Elizabeth and Amber. Please state your name, a part of town you're from, you'll have 3 minutes. Hi, I'm actually live in Midtown, but my nephews attend Campbell STEM and I'm here to advocate for them and all the students that do attend STEM and want to attend STEM Campbell. Um I understand that uh there are I have a neighbor um in Midtown, her son was able to go to STEM. She was ecstatic. Uh so as the gentlemen uh before me have mentioned it doesn't make sense, it feels

014arbitrary, it feels like just um kind of looking for money and it and it also doesn't align I feel like with the vision of providing excellent education and building up Alaska's um population. Uh what Alaska has to offer to its citizens and other people who might be considering moving to Alaska. We have uh an out-migration problem and closing schools like STEM definitely will exacerbate that problem, I believe. Uh we have to have resources here, we have to uh build the trust of people that places like STEM are can't be on the docket for closing especially with so little notice and without assurance that a new STEM uh K-12 or sorry, elementary uh would be in the works for the future. Um I'm not hearing any of that. I have not attended all of these meetings.

015Uh however, I do think that um taking into consideration the larger vision that I know the assembly uh the mayor and uh the school board have for uh for representing good education in the state and building up people who want to stay in the state and uh contribute to the infrastructure and the commerce and uh the growth of Alaska. Um these are our future kids um learning STEM skills and uh having a love of science, which is something that we need in the future and I think without a reassurance that you value STEM education uh I would I would ask that you not approve the budget. Um otherwise it really is uh like the gentleman before me said um it's a trust issue and it does not show that you have the best intentions for

016the education of both ASD and Alaska um in mind. That that it's a money game and I think you have to have vision beyond that, you have to have a narrative that moves beyond simply saving money and I understand that these decisions have to be impossible because $90 million is no joke. Thanks so much. Final member of the public, Sarah Lundberg. Please state your name, a part of town you're from, you'll have 3 minutes. Hello, my name is Sarah Sundberg and I have two kids who attend Campbell STEM. Um good morning. I'm parent of two Campbell STEM students. I can only imagine that the school board is sick of hearing from me by now, so I wanted to thank the assembly for the opportunity to speak. Since February 13th, when we got the notice that

017our school was up for closure, I've had this question stuck in my mind and something that just didn't make sense to me. Why is our school suddenly deemed excess by the school board? I couldn't make sense of it until this week. I'm not good at the math and the figures as some of our other um speakers are, but I am good at research and during one of my uh 2:00 a.m. research deep dives, I came across some interesting information. Um at the December 2nd uh 2025 school board meeting, it was conveyed that um Willow Crest Shula's building at Abbott Loop received an estimate for repairs and that estimate came back lower than actual project costs were to be anticipated um once everything was said said and done. So they suddenly had a decision to make.

018They either needed additional funding for repairs of the Abbott Loop building or they needed a new home for that program which happened to be Lake Otis. Um and even still they would need additional funding to get Lake Otis up and running for the move. Um at the same meeting, it was stated um that the board could use {quote} unused bond money. Hi, that's us, Campbell STEM uh to fund this project. Um so Campbell STEM, as we all know, has $11.5 million slated for repairs, updates, maintenance um and the school decided to wait until the end of this school year to do those projects to minimize disruptions in our children's education um and because of that, they painted an $11.5 million target on their back. Uh that just doesn't seem right to me. So the problem

019is that while our voter-approved $11.5 million bond money it it doesn't appear to meet the criteria for reallocation in AO 2024-115 it states that if the district determines that the projects outlined in the bond are impractical to accomplish by reasons of things such as substantially increased costs or changed conditions, all sorts of things then they could reallocate the money to other capital projects. Funding the Lake Otis renovation and moving Willow Crest Shula doesn't quite feel like it meets any of that criteria. This isn't my area of expertise, but I would strongly implore you all to maybe have an attorney look at the legality of this before you approve the budget. Um since I have 15 seconds left Campbell meets federal and state definition for a Title 1 school and uh does not by the school

020district though. And Lake Otis was also a Title 1 school. Willow Crest Shula has an 85% economic advantage. Thank you. Okay. I don't have one more person on the sign-up. Okay, we'll take one more. What's your name, ma'am? Um Linda Brooks. Please state your name, a part of town you're from, you'll have 3 minutes. >> Linda Brooks. And I first learned about this when I was listening to the radio, the news and I heard that the school board had voted to close Campbell STEM. I wasn't sure if I heard correctly but unfortunately it was true. My first reaction was it was bad news. What happens to the school building if ASD does not plan to keep it? How would an empty school building affect the neighborhood? What I did not know was how amazing Campbell

021STEM is and all the good things happening at the school. I learned more about the school by getting out and talking to parents and neighbors. Much has already been said about the lack of adequate public notice and input, so I will not dwell on that today. We know that Campbell was not under capacity, it was not underperforming and it was not on the list of 10 schools identified for possible closure back in 2024. But clearly some powerful reason drove the abrupt last-minute decision to identify and move Campbell STEM to the top of the closure list. Now, having read Alaska Public Media Wesley Early's report, it appears the unique thing that moved Campbell to the top of the closure list was state bond debt reimbursement money tied to Campbell Elementary that could not be moved elsewhere

022in the budget but for closing the school. Not sure exactly what how much of that state bond debt money was, seems like maybe it was $2.2 million, but obviously I'm I'm not the person with the facts and it hasn't been easy to get factual information from the school district. It seems a little bit more like they're burying the information. Anyhow um it makes the pieces of the puzzle fit together a lot more clearly though knowing that fact. Or what appears to be what happened. I say let's give Campbell STEM another year to provide time for more thoughtful research and brainstorming and let's look for win-win strategies that right-size school capacities and help ASD to better economize without sacrificing neighborhood schools. Mr. Higgins talked about such an approach during the meeting on March 17th suggesting co-locating

023daycare centers in schools. What a way to win. And how helpful would that be for parents as well? Per the ADN article Mr. Jacobs is willing to keep Campbell STEM open if the state of Alaska increases the base student allocation amount in the coming month. But the legislature may not be able to act quite so quickly. Last Saturday at the district meeting that was just Elvi Gray-Jackson set representative Josephson and and representative um uh the other representative in uh in Elvis' area. At that meeting, um he representative Josephson, who represents the Campbell neighborhood and is chair of the House Finance Committee, he thought that the abrupt increase in the price of oil due to the war in Iran would net significant new revenue for Alaska, so that Governor Dunleavy may be willing to approve a

024temporary increase in school Thank you. Your time is expired, ma'am. Thank you. Ma'am, your time is expired. Thank you for your handout. We'll now move on to the next section of our agenda, which is we're going to hear comments from the mayor. Mayor LaFrance. Thank you, Chair Constant, and good morning, President Jacobs, Superintendent Bryant, Assembly, School Board. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I don't have to tell you that we are facing a very difficult moment for public education in Alaska. Years of underfunding have brought us to a critical point, and the impacts are being felt by students, families, educators, and our broader community. I want you and the public to know that my administration is fully committed to doing everything within our power to support our schools and to stand up for

025the families who rely on the Anchorage School District to prepare their children for the future. With ballots hitting mailboxes this week, I also want to take a moment to remind the public about the education levy. This measure is designed to help stabilize our schools by limiting class size increases and directly benefiting students. Importantly, the language in the ballot measure is binding, meaning we know what ASD will spend it on, more educators to reduce class sizes. This levy represents the maximum level of local support allowed under state law, and it reflects our commitment as a community to invest in education. I'm grateful to the Assembly for placing it on the ballot and for the strong collaboration with the School Board and District Administration to get us here. At the same time, we must be clear. Local

026efforts alone are not enough. I'm calling on our state legislators to fully fund public education. The state's revised revenue forecast shows that resources are available, and now is the time to use them. As it stands today, the state will provide $16 million less to ASD this year than last year, even with the increase to the base student allocation. That's difficult to reconcile, and frankly, it doesn't add up for our families. Local taxpayers are being asked to contribute more, while the state contributes less, and the total funding still falls short of what is needed to keep up with rising costs. That is not sustainable, and it is not fair to our students. I also want to acknowledge the incredibly difficult decisions that the School Board and District Administration have had to make. These choices affect real

027people, our educators, staff, and families, and the impacts are deeply felt across our community. To those who are experiencing uncertainty, loss, or frustration, we see you, we hear you, and we understand how hard this is. As a parent myself, I share those concerns and that frustration, but we must keep our focus on where change is needed most, at the state level, so we can secure the resources our schools truly need. Finally, I want to thank the Assembly, the School Board, and the Anchorage School District Administration for your leadership, your partnership, and your tireless work during this challenging time. This is not easy work, but it is essential work, and it is work we must continue together. We are all in this together, and together, we will keep fighting for our students and for the future

028of our community. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Any questions? Okay, we're going to move now to a report from our lobbyists or this not our lobbyists, I should say the school district's lobbyists. Good morning. This is Heather Breaks. Can you hear me? Go ahead, Heather. Good morning. Thank you. Um I am uh not able to use my camera this morning for some technical reasons, so I apologize for that. Um I wanted to give you a brief update uh on on session and where things stand at this point, um particularly with the budget. Um today marks the halfway point in of the second session of the 34th Legislature, meaning all legislation will die at adjournment, which is uh May midnight on May 20th. Um the In terms of dynamics here, um tensions have

029been have already increased um and and pressure building in in the capital. There are 661 bills uh introduced, so legislators are um also outside of um the budget process focused on their personal legislation as well. It's an election year. Uh we have Governor Dunleavy is completing his second term. Uh the entire House and half the Senate are up for re-election this year. We also have the governor and lieutenant governor, our US Senate and congressional seats on the ballot, all adding particular different dynamics to uh to the situation. Uh top as in terms of top priorities um in the House and Senate majorities, pension reform remains. Um these were these were priorities that that both bodies announced last year um as they came into session. Um so we have pension reform that is in its last

030committee of referral in the Senate Finance Committee. Uh the Finance Committee has been holding numerous hearings on that legislation. Uh the next stop would be the Senate floor, and um if it passes, it will go to the governor's desk for his consideration. Education also remains a top priority for the Legislature, recognizing um that while they passed uh the historic significant increase uh to the BSA last session, districts really remain in crisis, and there is a desire um and recognition they would like to add more resources and find ways to ease the burdens on districts. Um additional Additionally, um they as they look at education funding and reform, there's talk of inflation adjustments, pupil transportation funding, reading grants, and correspondence funding. Elections, I'll talk about that just in a a little more in a minute. Um

031Elections reform also remains one of those top uh four priorities of the bodies. It is in the House Finance on its way to final passage, the next stop being the House floor, and then to the governor's desk. Um energy and the Alaska gas line project uh has consumed a lot of bandwidth in in Juneau. Um the developer of the gas line project is uh seeking tax relief from both the state and boroughs in which the project will be located, and their bill is the governor's bill um on that front is set to be um introduced here this morning at any point. They're going to the floor momentarily. Um also consuming a lot of um a lot of attention is the rural health transformation project. The state was awarded $272 million in in late December to

032address Alaska's health care systems. It's a 5-year program where states compete for the funds annually and have a certain time frame, a limited time frame, to spend those funds. So we got 270 mil $272 million this year. Um the state really has until September to obligate those funds and then a year to spend those at while at the same time competing for their next allotment. So the Legislature has been hearing a lot um from the administration and health care stakeholders on how those funds will be distributed and used. The governor at the beginning of session also introduced his fiscal plan, um which really consisted of four main or consists of four main components. The first being a a tax package consisting of a statewide sales tax, which is 2% in the winter and ramps up

033to 4% in the summer in the summer, and would um be applied on top of any local sales tax um with uh different exemptions than are currently held at the local level. It also included an increase to oil and gas taxes, a change to the corporate income tax, uh adopting a market-based sourcing and single sales factor for highly digitized businesses. This has been called the um the Amazon or uh Etsy tax um and so it's really targeted at those those types of businesses that aren't currently paying any corporate income tax in Alaska. Uh it also has packaged um uh had a one of the components is a constitutional spending cap on annual state appropriations not uh growing more than 1% over last year's uh appropriation level a constitutional amendment placing the right to a permanent

034fund dividend in the constitution and providing that the dividend be um 50% of the 5% POMV annual draw off the permanent fund earnings reserve account. The legislature um since 2018 has only been able to fund the dividend um at about 25% of that uh POMV draw. The rest has been needed for state programs and operations. And the final component of his uh fiscal plan consists of a sunset review of all departments and agencies on a sort of um rolling basis. The house quickly took up the governor's tax bill allowing the administration to present it in the house finance committee and took public testimony. The Senate resources uh heard the Senate the governor's Senate bill um they they removed the sales tax provision and added significantly more oil and gas tax provisions an education and an

035education tax on individuals and that bill is [clears throat] now in the Senate finance committee. They had their first hearing this week. Other tax bills have also been introduced uh related to pass-through entities, education tax, income tax, and oil and gas. To some degree, the legislature has also been considering property tax reforms and a lot of attention has been placed on how that uh local property tax and uh and the interplay of the local property tax assessments and the state property tax assessments relate to the required local contribution of um municipalities. Um those those conversations have are are just really kind of starting to to um ramp up. Um a large focus uh for this first 60 days of the legislature has uh really been around how are they going to fund a 450 million

036to 500 million dollar deficit in the current year which ends uh June 30th. Um the main components uh driving that large of a deficit um has been um disaster relief for uh recovery from Typhoon Halong um wildfire uh suppression um 70 70 million dollars in DOT capital matching funds to draw down 700 million dollars of federal funds for roads and bridges for this coming construction season and uh 130 million to um make the higher education investment fund whole. That's the fund that is used for students seeking um higher education either in um a uh college or uh vocational technical training programs. Um that fund the reason that fund is has um needs to be uh made whole is last year the um the vote to draw out of the constitutional budget reserve failed and this

037was was put in place as a um backstop for shortfalls throughout the fiscal year. Um there is a sense of urgency around uh um getting this supplemental budget passed because the the DOT state matching funds to draw down on that 700 million federal funds is at stake for this coming uh construction season. And that bill is now um in a conference committee made up of um house and Senate members with a hope of a compromise to um to get that moving through. Um At issue has really been the obtaining that three-quarter vote to draw from the constitutional budget reserve fund um which brings us to March 13th. The spring revenue forecast was released by the Department of Revenue um on a March a week ago updating the December forecast and it significantly uh revises unrestricted

038general fund revenue upward for both the current year and next year driven almost entirely by elevated um oil prices tied to the Middle East geopolitical tensions or the war. Um FY26 so current year again um price per barrel rose from $65 48 cents to $75.26 and that equals about 545 million dollars um more for this current year which also happens to be very um almost equivalent a little uh higher than what is needed for that supplemental that I just uh talked about. Um FY27 forecast is um projected to go up from what was previously forecasted at $62 per barrel oil to $75 per barrel oil and that is an increase of 510 million dollars more for FY 27. Um oil prices uh peaked on uh Friday um last Friday at $107 per barrel. Uh the

039same day the revenue forecast was released and it was as high as $106 per barrel yesterday. Um those are mostly driven the the increase uh mostly driven as well from uh production gains in uh Pikka and Willow um develop uh oil development on the North Slope. Um a large gain from um non-petroleum corporate income taxes as as of of uh of as much as a 105 million dollars um property taxes increased and the permanent fund POMV draw will is projected to remain stable at about 4 billion dollars next year and again that is split between funding state services and programs um and a permanent fund dividend for residents. Um so what does that mean? I think for the supplemental um it looks like it as of now there would be about 33 million dollars surplus

040for current year instead of facing the 450 to 500 million dollar deficit. However, there are still uh a number of um outstanding potential costs for FY26 the state has is facing a a um snap penalty um which from FY24 of about 4.6 million the state um the the estimated uh K-12 um funding amount that went into last year's budget um ended up being about 12 to 16 million dollars short so that looks like it will have to be um added on in that supplemental bill and um we still have outstanding >> it's not helpful, but this is going on way too long. We have a lot of business to attend to and a lot of this is not relevant to the matters before us today. So Heather, I am going to ask you to wrap

041up in the sense that we do have a long agenda and this is pretty detailed. I think much of it is in relationship to the school district not the joint conference. And so um if you just have any final comments. Yes, thank you um Mr. Chairman. I um apologize for that. I was just wrapping up into um the last just the last um few comments. Um while the forecast average for FY27 is increased both the um speaker of the house and uh Senate president and division of uh finance director urging fiscal discipline. So um while you know they're they're recommending that the the budget be based on a conservative dollar amount for that price of oil going into FY7 uh FY27. Um so the focus on education um has been um in in Juno uh

042BSA increase legislation a school construction and major maintenance, school bond debt reimbursement um one-time funding is an option. However, um those conversations it's just too early to know yet what those uh what those increases might be and um I'll just wrap up two two bills in um one in the house and one on the Senate that address those uh both BSA increase um the Senate bill um uh also addresses student transportation um and gives a a significant increase to that. Um so we'll know more um as we get closer to May 20 um and the real and just you know the reality of securing more funding for the district um will be uh will hinge on the governor's approval. So that completes my update. Thank you very much. So that uh brings us next to

043>> Remember a constant chairman. I have a question. Mr. Donley. Thank you. Uh back in 2023 the assembly and the school board unanimously adopted resolution and one of the parts of that resolution called for um the legislature to uh empower uh fund a new uh district cost differential study. Um the results of that could be over 30 million additional dollars to the Anchorage School District. Um have as our lobbyist have you secured a commitment from any Anchorage legislator to sponsor that or to do a budget amendment to provide the funding necessary to do a district cost differential study? Uh thank you for the question member Donley. Um the Senate bill 277 introduced by the Senate Education Committee includes an education funding study with it which would incorporate a district district cost factor update. Okay, thank

044you. Um next we'll pivot into the budget conversation. Before that I'll note at 10:35 member Wilson joined us and um I think the clerk has a substitute version to share. So we'll go ahead and distribute that. And um I think the gist of the S version is that it incorporates and allows the district if the 11. 3 million dollar special levy passes to um just act and not have to come back before us. With that we'll pivot to the school district executive to brief us on the budget. Thank you Mr. Chair. I'll hand it off to our chief financial officer Andy Ratliff. Essentially this is an update to the assembly from the last meeting where we introduced our preliminary budget. Since then the school board has adopted a balanced budget and there are number of

045changes we'd like to walk the assembly through and we thank you in advance for your consideration of the ASD budget next Tuesday at your regular meeting. Uh Mr. Ratliff. All right, thank you. Do we have some slides to present? Uh for the record I'm Andy Ratliff I'm the chief financial officer for the district. Um we're going to bring some slides up here to kind of walk through the timeline. I don't probably need that graphic up there to get started with this. But really where we're at in the process is we generally develop our budget during January. The board approves it through February with a final approval this year on February 24th. And then we turned our budget in on the first Monday of March per charter on March 2nd. Um with a introduction on March

0463rd to the assembly and then the final vote scheduled for March 24th. Um so in that time frame that we introduced it to the board and gave it to them they made a number of uh amendments and those are on the next page. Um those amendments include reducing our footprint which closed three schools and deferred the Oceans Academy opening. Um to create some uh monetary headroom there. They restored most sports and activities with uh that savings. Um that's going to be at reduced services. I believe gymnastics and e-sports are going to no longer be uh be performed. We're reducing some transportation, some ice time, and some pool time for swimming and hockey. And then the dome contract is eliminated as well. Um the we restored 16 middle school FTE. That lowered the PTR from a

047plus four to about a plus 1.75 for middle schools. Uh middle schools took a pretty large hit in this budget cuz we also eliminated the middle school model which was collaboration time for those middle school teachers. Uh we restored 16 or the school board restored 16 and a half nurses. Originally we had called for a cut of about 25 nurses and do kind of a pooling model or regional model across all schools. Um nurses still receive about an 8.5 FTE cut under this this provision. Um we reduced some AK Virtual budgets and non-classroom reductions. I think believe it ended up being some some extra clerical staff. Reduced an additional clerical and I believe some psychologists as well. Reduced some additional high school clerical staff. Uh reduced funding for the Academies of Anchorage to some degree

048and created a middle school addenda for zero hour classes to help support um uh five of six schedule versus a six of seven schedule for middle schoolers. Uh allows them to get extra elective time. So on the next slide uh this is our kind of the the list the high level summary of the list of changes we made. We ended up producing almost 500 FTE out of this budget. That's about 10% of our workforce. Uh last year we reduced about 135 FTE as well. So there's kind of a a downward trend that we're seeing. Those reductions included increases to the pupil teacher ratio or class size of a plus four in elementary and high schools and a plus 1.75 in middle schools. We eliminated the Ignite program. Uh we changed the elementary specialist model to

049instead of having kind of four sets of specialists down to two sets of specialists to save some of that travel time in the um just being able to share those resources between schools. Um so that ended up producing quite a few FTE there. The middle school model as I mentioned goes away. The few changes in high school sports. Nursing model. We kind of across the board supply reductions that we've taken on top of what we took last year. Special education we reduced this year. This is the first time we've had kind of see more significant reductions in special education in quite a while. Uh reduced principals, counselors, paraprofessionals at schools. Um reduced summer school particularly at elementary. Uh building plant operators kind of the daytime custodial. Our library assistants and our clerical at schools all

050got reduced. Human resources department reduced them by their FTE by about 13%. Uh 45% reduction in teaching and learning. 15% reduction in elementary education. 15% reduction in IT. Uh some reductions in fine arts. Half of our grants personnel are now gone. Uh 17% of our communications. 5% of our custodial. A couple maintenance folks and 14% of our warehouse drivers have been eliminated in this budget. And then one of our three rentals personnel and then our equipment replacement fund which funds all our uh our a lot of our white fleet school buses kind of this major may- or major equipment purchases we zeroed out that line item to fund uh that stuff. If you want to see the exhaustive list of everything we changed kind of by department and org code it's in appendix C in

051the budget books that you should have available to you. They're online and I think you guys should have hard copies if you if you pick them up. Um I know a lot of people prefer the digital. But in the back of the book appendix C really is kind of that line by line detail of what did change. Mr. Chair. I have a Can I ask Can I ask Can I ask a question? Mr. Grier. Yeah, Mr. Ratliff how many of these positions were vacant? Um I don't know that off the top of my head. Some of them were vacant but a lot of them are going to be filled. Uh a lot of those are uh certificated positions that are going to turn over. You know we if we uh turn over 250 350 educators

052some of those will get picked up but it's going to depend on specialists. And I think Marty Lang in the back our chief human resources officer could speak better to that. Good afternoon for the record Marty Lang chief of HR for ASD. Um we started the year with 122 certificated vacancies. Um in December we initiated a hiring freeze as we anticipated you know pretty significant reductions through this budget process. Um we don't have a total rolled up account of how many vacancies we have standing right now. Um but we are reconciling that plus the number of notices of resignations that we've received for the end of the year. And um as Mr. Ratliff said we think that's somewhere between three and 400 positions. So we are we know we will have um based on this

053adopted budget um reductions in our classified areas that will result in layoffs and likely many in our certificated areas as well. But we're working principle with principles right now um on their master scheduling process to determine what the need is at the building level to kind of dial that in to the point where by probably early or mid-April we'll have a better accounting of what the impact might be through layoffs versus vacancies and attrition. Right. So just to just to put a finer point on that then you guys don't actually know how many positions you guys are letting go as far as far as like filled positions versus the the vacant position. And and that matters. That matters a lot. I'm kind of shocked you don't have that. You know you guys aren't aware of

054that. So I I would like to see that. That would be really helpful to me because that that matters. That matters to parents. That matters to students. It obviously matters to teachers. So if we could get that information that'd be helpful. Sure. Yeah and it's kind of a moving target. So we get resignations in all the time. So but we'll see what we can get to you in um in finer detail. I was Go ahead. So next slide just kind of shows where our money goes at a a high level. Um 50 and this is has been updated based on the school board's amendments. Uh they were rolled into the proposed budget that was given to the assembly. Uh 351 million or so goes to direct classroom instruction to include our teachers, paraprofessionals, uh supplies,

055materials, equipment. Another 23% goes into our student supports, which counselors, nurses, librarians, principals. Uh that also includes kind of the the supervision of principals, professional development, and we put uh student activities in there cuz that really is kind of a student support. Operations and maintenance takes up about 14% of our budgets, and then administration, which is most of the folks sitting around here and our departments that we that we manage is about 5% or about 33 million. Uh the table at the bottom shows the percentage of the total for both FY26 and FY27. Um you know, there's reductions across all areas. Operations and maintenance is one of the harder ones to reduce cuz a lot of that is going to be fixed costs with rents, leases, utilities, things like that. And then, you know, to

056transition into all the levy piece of this, if the levy gets passed, that money would be directed into that direct classroom instruction bubble there. As the next slide shows what the board approved as part of their uh as an amendment to the budget on the 24th. Um it's really saying that if the levy is approved, the PTR goes from a plus four to a plus two. Uh the kind of a technical note on this from this plus four to a plus two, after this was approved, they also approved the reduction in the middle school PTR. So it's going to look a little bit wonky on the next slide. This is our PTR. The first section of it is what it is currently. So starting in '23 at kindergarten up to about 32.25 in high schools.

057Um the second is what is in the proposed budget. Second Second section is what's in the pro- proposed budget given to the city. Uh which includes the plus four at uh elementary and high schools and the plus 1.75 FTE or PTR at middle schools. So that bottom section, if the levy passes, and this is something that um is going to be an administration proposal, it'll go through the school board to make sure that's how these resources are distributed by grade level. But this is about the 80 FTE, and what it would do is decrease PTR or class size in elementary and high schools by 2.25 and then recruit decrease PTR in um middle schools by by another 0.5. Or uh 1.25, sorry. So they would there'd be some oh on average it'd be about a

058minus two overall. But um it would it's not an even distribution across all grade levels with the our proposal. Again, we have this is a going to be a board decision. But um that's what our proposal would be. Are there any questions on the budget side of things? I think this is the last one of my slides. Ms. Martinez. Thank you. I just want to go back to a question around um cuts to staff in the revised budget. So presumably, just to help me out. When we when we were looking at the budget and you were working on the budget in in December, for example, and let's use clerical. I think that was one of the the terms, one of the categories of reductions. Mhm. Okay. And and I think you described kind of working

059with the principals to kind of look at master planning to some extent outward a little bit, right? So if a principal's hiring clerical staff in December to that budget, was there an an implication to that clerical staff member with the amended budget? Did that have an impact with their job? For example. >> that if we had had unplanned hirings, cuz we did put in a hiring freeze, so some of them may have been held. Um I don't know the what amount of that would be, but if we did hire one in December that ultimately got it very well could have ultimately got reduced in one of the in the amendments or just in the in the normal process of creating a budget in January. And now I have a question to HR. We'll follow up

060with this offline, but the question was essentially really tracking the way we budget on the backs of folks who think they have a job. Right? So if you're hired and you're in a provisional stage, I think we have a 90-day window. Um I'm my the question that I had to HR was essentially to what extent are we utilizing provisional time to save money while not providing a job security for folks who then are not fired, but it's called administrative separation, which is a different term that essentially means something else as budgetary related. And so the question I have is just what are we doing around uh or just to get a better insight. And it'll go offline with this, but I wanted to flag that because it seems that if people we're sending pink slips,

061and we know that there's this thing around pink slips every year with teachers and the state budget. But to what extent are we protecting the workforce that we are hiring to do the work being effective, these are union positions, but then within a budget cycle, these amendments change people's opportunities for employment. And it seems like that's a lot of burden on those folks that I would like us to not have to put the burden on those folks as best as we can. So I just wanted to flag that because I've heard I've heard of a couple of instances where the question about I thought I had a job changed, and it seems like there may be a relationship to what you described today, the amended budget. Thank you. So I'm asked to remind people to

062speak into the mics, uh Ms. Lessons. Um I'm going to offer something which might tangentially help answer a question. One of the amendments the board adopted directed the administration to make um about think four four reductions among office uh like high school office administration. And the rationale for that was that our high schools range from 1,700 students and change on the high end to about 700 students on the low end. And I had observed that all of the eight high schools had been allocated six office administration positions, which essentially meant that at our two smallest high schools, we were providing 12 office administration positions for the same number or smaller than the six office administration positions at our largest high school. And so the board did not direct the administration to make reductions at any

063specific school, but instead identify office administration positions where perhaps they could. With the recognition that every one of those people is is a person with a job who adds value to our system. But in a time of a $90 short fall, perhaps no longer overstaffing small schools relative to large schools was a potential path forward. So that is an explanation for the reduction of, I believe, four office administration positions at our high school level. As a function of our budget. Yeah, briefly, Mr. Martinez. Thank you. I appreciate that. And then I guess the the the the the the larger question to the HR question is, to what extent are we utilizing the probation period for some of the hirers, like a and then dropping them before they get on full benefits. Right? And so that

064question is a question about how we save dollars on the backs of some folks within the workforce. And so I want to follow up with that. I do appreciate that. I think that may be that did offer some insight to some of the questions. Thank you. Member Silvers. Yeah, I'm looking at the student supports list here, um and I just kind of want to narrow in on um curriculum development, instructional supervision, and PD for instruction. I am kind of assuming, and I might be wrong, but um is this money that is spent inside of the schools, or is this money that is spent outside of the schools in more of an administrative capacity? Um typically that's money that's the like the supervi- the principal supervisors are housed here. The teaching and learning department is would

065be a lot of the professional development, which we did cut about 25%. Um so those are positions that are generally housed here. A lot of those Uh hopefully that does that answer your question, then? Yeah. And so, I guess what I'm wondering is what percentage is going towards that and if there is room to divert more of that funding to in-the-classroom instruction. I'm Sven Gustafson, the deputy superintendent, and I kind of oversee all the academic side of the house. Um we have already this budget actually decreases the teaching and learning department by more than 50% of the their budget right now. It is positions, but then there's also curriculum we have to purchase, curriculum we have to look at and adopt. We haven't We have taken all of the curriculum monies out of our budgets

066for the last 4 years, so we haven't been able to adopt anything or update any new curriculums. Um we're pretty much at a bare bones right now in that department after we've cut cuz they've been taking cuts every single year for the last like 10 years. And so, there probably isn't really any money that we can cut out of that department. We have cut in this budget has 48 positions out of this district office that are going back into classrooms. Um in this particular budget as well. Okay. Thank you. Um and then the other thing I just kind of wanted to it it's a concern and I you know, I don't know the answer. I think it's it's kind of sad though. You know, I'm looking at we're cutting STEM, we're deferring oceans, we're cutting

067ignite. Um and I think we're really at a position where we're reducing the capacity for excellence in our education. Um and it's just it's a bad situation and I think, you know, the state has really done a lot to put us here. Um but it's it's just it's not a good situation. Thanks. I'm going to ask a question that kind of raises the aperture up a little bit out of this budget. We had a communication from somebody who asserted we're the only school district in the state who has to submit a budget before the legislature concludes its business. Is that not I don't see any you shake your head no. I have recognized that's because we're on a January 1 fiscal year relative to the rest of the kind of schools that are on that

068July 1. Is there any way to realign the timing of the budget that we could look at that would resolve some of the concerns we're hearing from members like Mr. Martinez who talk about the pink slip turn and coming up with a way where we could have a better sense before we have to do all of that so that we can kind of get off of that terrifying carousel. Right. And we're required by state statute to have a July to June fiscal year. Um the city's on the calendar year, of course, so and you guys require us to have the charter requires us to get that first Monday in March. So, that's really what pushes it back. Other districts, I think Mat-Su is only a few weeks behind us. Fairbanks might already have theirs done.

069Juneau's pretty close. So, it's a lot of it's dependent on when districts local governments require them to have it. Uh the state requires us to submit a budget to them on July 15th. Uh so, they do give you time, but you know, by that time, you know, if it's really hard to get this pinned down if we don't know how much money we're going to have. And like this year, we didn't know until August. So, like after the year had started. Okay. So, even if it was in June, it wouldn't really matter because the budget doesn't get officially finalized until July 1. And that's what could happen. Okay. Well, I would welcome the conversation about ways timing could be used to reduce some of those harmful kind of personal impacts to the individuals we hire

070to do or the school district hires to do that work. Yeah, more time would definitely be beneficial for us in preparing this and getting it more accurate. Just have time for the community to respond, you know. Yeah, thank you. Okay, anyone else? We'll move on to uh Mr. Donley. Thank you, Mr. Radcliffe. Traditionally, the Anchorage School District has been provided with 15 school resource officers by the municipality. Uh my last information is we were down to 10. Uh was there any availability and the district has does fund some of its own security officers and personnel, too. Do we have any flexibility or ability to backfill the missing five police officers in our high schools? With just like school security? Yeah. I mean, to the extent that we want we have the funding to do so,

071uh we could, I suppose. But at this time, it would work if we're going to hire five more people, we got to cut that equivalent somewhere else. All right, thank you. We'll move on to the second half of the presentation. Mind you, there's probably going to be lots of commentary after this, so we do need to reserve some time. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll hand it off to our chief operating officer, Mr. Jim Anderson, who will walk us through the last presentation. Uh slide, please. So, the good thing about this year's bond is for the first time since January 2015, there is state bond debt reimbursement at 50%. For decades prior to 2015, the state um reimbursed 60 to 70% depending on the type of project for all taxable areas that had school bonds. And

072they did that because they knew when they first came up with the funding formula that it did not include funding for capital improvements. They also knew that they funded 100% by the state for all the rural areas, so they came up with the state bond debt reimbursement formula. In the spring of 2015, a couple months after Anchorage had passed a bond, the legislature passed a moratorium on state bond debt reimbursement and backdated it to January. So, for any bond that was passed between and this past spring, there was no state bond debt reimbursement and it was 100% on the Anchorage municipality. Um fortunately, the legislature at the end of the session allowed the moratorium to end and um and the governor did also sign the bill that restored state bond debt reimbursement at the 50%

073level. So, if you look at the almost $80 million bond, um it's just slightly under that. 50% of that would be covered by the state. Something in the community that's been talked about is is it subject to appropriation? Absolutely. Everything to include all education funding is subject to appropriation. Um if you look at and I'm sure everyone in this room has been following Juneau um from the beginning of the session, they have been talking about there has been a dearth of focus on capital projects and maintenance. Um certainly within all the school districts um but but in the rural areas very much so. Um and they and they have put capital and maintenance um as a high priority for this session. Obviously, they have a lot of high priorities and and they can't meet them

074all. Um but I haven't seen anything that indicates that they're moving towards um extending a moratorium on bond debt reimbursement. So, um I'm certainly optimistic. Um I haven't been for the last 5 years. Every time that we'd bring up the moratorium, it was pretty clear very early in the session that they were going to continue it. And this year, I'm not seeing those kinds of discussions or or at least publicly in Juneau. So, um you know, I think this is great for the taxpayers. What we've done since 2010, back in 2010, we had $172 million in bond debt. Um total or I'm sorry, $750 million in bond debt and we have been bonding every year for less than what we paid off pretty much. So, we've gone from $750 million in total bond debt at

075that time to a little over $450 million now. Unfortunately, um because there is an inflationary cost for construction as well as everything, life in general. Um in 2010, we had 100 $172 million in deferred maintenance and we're now about $1.5 billion in deferred maintenance and that really is a direct result of intentionally um bonding less than what was required every year in order to keep Anchorage taxpayers to to not have any more um cost than was possible. And and so, y'all can see that you know, those those those two finally crossed where our bond debt keeps getting smaller um and state bond debt reimbursement is certainly going to help. Um I would once the taxpayers in Anchorage understand that state bond debt reimbursement's back and we're trying to message it, but it's something that hasn't

076been around for quite a while, so people aren't used to it and may not understand it. And and we'll get that word out. Hopefully, it is getting out now. And and at some point though, I think our bonds are going to have to increase or our total bond debt or our total deferred maintenance will will just continue to skyrocket. So, I So, these are the projects. Um I know the assembly seen this. You You passed our bond um already. Um and and it went through bond council. This was the last year for Cynthia Weed to be our our bond council. The muni went out with an RFP, and we now have a new bond council for the muni for the muni and um Anchorage School District. And fortunately, the CFO's office already linked us up

077with the new bond council, and uh we look forward to working with that. There's 20 schools being impacted by this bond, north, south, east, west Anchorage. Um and it really is focused on either safety and security of students and staff or safety and security of the buildings. Um we've talked about uh secure vestibules in the past. We are coming to a close. Um if this bond passes, we'll only have three elementary schools left that we have to do a secure vestibule. Um on this proposition, you'll see Romig Middle School. It will be the first secondary school that has a secure vestibule. And because time is short, um if if anyone has a question on what a secure vestibule is, please find me after this meeting so we I know there's other agenda items. Um but

078effectively, nothing else has changed. Next slide, please. And you can see the essential safety upgrades. Um you know, you look at Romig, it was built in '63. It's last real renovation was 1995. Um so, it's been about 30 years. So, you can imagine that everything from pipes to roofs to um electrical, HVAC, everything else. And as you go down the list, um it's really common. And and and frankly, um as education funding has been very difficult to acquire from the state over the last um 10 years, we also have kept flat the amount we spend on maintenance because we're trying to put as much money as we can in the classroom. And And that coupled with um not having state bond debt reimbursement it has certainly made it a challenge to maintain our facilities at

079a level that even we find acceptable. So, that's all I have barring any questions. I don't see questions. On on the bond debt. Okay. Anna, Ms. Bronson. Yeah, um uh one specific question, and then um hoping to address briefly address another issue that's come up. Um on the bond debt reimbursement, I understand it is subject to appropriation. Um can you remind us I I believe it's a formula, is that correct? So, is there a possibility that for example, we're uh supposed to get 50% and then the legislature only appropriates and we only get say 20%? Or is it an either Is it an all or nothing? >> So, in a 6-year period from 2017 to 2022, um there there was a 50% cut under Governor Walker in 2017, and then fiscal year 2021 and 22,

080there was also reductions in um how much the state bond debt reimbursement. I think it was a learning curve for the legislature because by statute, when they reduced bond debt reimbursement, they had to cut the amount they could provide to the rural communities by the same percentage. And of course, that only exacerbated the what what now became a statewide problem because if they cut all of ours by 100% one year, they couldn't provide any to the rural communities um under that program. So, that's why in 22 in fiscal year 22 was the last time we had um a reduction in state bond debt reimbursement. But through that whole period, well, for the money that we got on No, I was going to mention that even this year they reduced us 30% and that's the 2

081million you'll see on the ordinance. Yeah. Sorry about that. That was the appropriation piece. But different than when Governor Walker and the others intentionally you know, vetoed state bond debt reimbursement. Um so, they knew that they had to pay it back, and that's how we ended up getting state bond debt reimbursement back um in July of 2022. Okay, thanks. So, it's essentially um uh not necessarily an either or. If they reduce it, ultimately, it's likely coming back on a year when there's additional funding available. Good, thanks. And then my other question, I I imagine this is a in-depth topic, but maybe you can briefly comment on I know there's been a lot of community concern around essentially reappropriation of of bonds, you know, project A was planned and then it got changed. And I know

082we've been briefed on that before, but if you can generally comment on the the process or the general procedure that you use for that. Absolutely. So, within within all of our capital bonds, and I suspect there's something similar within the municipal bonds in a lot of different areas, there there is an exception that um you do have to complete every project on the bond um unless it becomes impractical. Um and I and I know that's not the exact word. Unfortunately, it's on my laptop behind me. Um in in this case, well, in every case, they always put that language in the bonds because if something were to happen like the 2018 earthquake and one school goes down, then obviously, you're not going to go put a boiler in even if it was on a bond

083because you have no school left to put a boiler in. Um in this one particular case, and we met with our new bond council this week, um and and discussed, and it would be the same thing. If if you are going to close a school, you would be no longer under the obligation to um do all of the repairs and capital improvements on a building that you were going to declare excess to our uh facility needs. So, I think everyone on the assembly understands what excess means, and it's a it's a cruel word to somebody who's at that school. It's it's not excess because um the school was bad or the people are bad or anything else. It's our inventory. We have lost over 7,000 kids in the last 10-plus years, and we have enough

084facilities for 7,000 more kids. So, when you look at your total bond debt or your total deferred maintenance at 1 and 1/2 billion, there's a couple ways you can make progress towards the 1 and 1/2 billion. If you give back facilities back to the municipality that we no longer need to occupy because we can take groups of schools and and consolidate, then you reduce that long-term capital for those facilities because you're not going to keep bonding for them every several years. You're not going to keep putting maintenance funding into those buildings for every several years. And then of course, the municipality can use those facilities however they would choose to use them um and or work with developers. Um so, bond council confirmed that if a building is not needed um for the number of

085students that the district has, and we declare it excess, then there would be no requirement to use that funds for that building. Now, you can't just like the next day say, "Okay, the board voted, and now we have these $9 million we can use for anything the board wants." It you have to wait until you can confirm and validate that everything on that bond proposition, there was enough funding to be able to complete all those projects. Once you can confirm that, then we can look at reprioritizing other requirements for the use of that money. So, we're probably 2 or 3 years out realistically. Thank you. Member um Member Higgins. Oh, thank you. Um I I don't know if we used the word impractical in the bonds, but I know there's language out there. Uh so,

086I'm going to just throw that out there for consideration. Um I I In the past, when we've had uh I'll go back a ways. Nobody on here in the assembly was here when I left last time, so it doesn't apply to you. Uh but the but the assembly uh took position, some of the conservatives on that group, that we could not bond for more than what we're paying off. Well, what we paid off for what we could accomplish when we started these bonds compared to now is a big decline. You can't buy what you had uh 10, 15, 20 years ago for what today's bonds are. So, that's an issue of concern, trying to replace roofs, trying to do other things. So, just going forward, I'll just mention that. I do appreciate um uh the

087the the comments of support we've got from the from the assembly and and uh Madam Mayor, particularly, I enjoyed your speech. Uh but I appreciate that. But there's a big difference today than, but we're still buying we're still trying to live up to that. We only bond what we paid off, and it that there's a practicality to that. Right now, this bond, of course, has got credibility issues, which you've just heard, and I think it's in multiple locations based upon the majority of the of the of the school board's conduct, and I that's something the public will decide. But I'm I'm interested in one question in regards to it, and that's like Abbott Loop. Now, I happen to be a member of Abbott Loop Community Council. They have some strong views about the school, what

088we may do or may not do. They want to be involved. And and the involvement of the of the municipality, because at one time, I heard the municipality wants it back, wants it leveled, wants to be able to build schools. I dealt reached out to the to the mayor's office. I got a representative saying, "No, that's not the case." Then I got clarification. That was a couple assembly members that may have expressed that view. That doesn't represent the entire assembly, but my thing is just process. Would you look at if we're closing or removing or doing something like that? Is that something that the assembly and the mayor would expect to go to the community council to get feedback, to get some sort of comments? We didn't get that when we did the Campbell. We

089just didn't give them time. We just did it. Uh and that was kind of like decided up front. But if we're going to close it if we're going to eliminate the school, are you going to look at that property being reviewed, how it could be used with the community council, or you're going to do it without that involvement? Cuz we're we're probably on two different trains here approach to what we're doing. I mean, I can comment on that. I'm Rebecca Harrison, municipal manager. Um process-wise, um the if a school does come back to the or is management authority is transferred away from the school district, which is what technically happens, right? Ownership does not change. The title remains in the in the municipality the entire time. So, if the management authority does transition from the

090school district to another to municipal real estate services or to Heritage Land Bank, and it's one of those two options depending on where what the original source of the funds was and what the original ownership of the land was before it went into management by the school district. Um there are a couple of different layers of public process that would happen if the um land was originally Heritage Land Bank land, then it goes through the Heritage Land Bank Commission for and then also through the assembly for the management authority reassignment. If it goes if it was originally real estate property, if the reassignment happens by direction of the mayor. But for any redevelopment to happen, a number of different types of public processes would absolutely happen because um I mean, first of all, just rezoning

091for a school to be used for anything other than a public institution. the rezone PLI, they would need to be rezone for anything else to happen there. And again, so absolutely, I would say is the short answer. Absolutely, the community councils would be involved and the community um more broadly would be involved in any decisions and determinations about how schools would be used. We don't have a lot of precedent for this um in our inventory at the municipality right now, we have one previously surplussed school structure, which is the Woodland facility, um that is now the Boys and Girls Club facility. We recently had a piece of undeveloped property surplussed back to or deemed excess and returned to municipal real estate inventory, the Totem property, but that didn't have a school facility on it. So,

092we don't have a lot of precedent for exactly what we we we would do, but absolutely there would be both required by code and then also uh obviously as best practice, a number of different types of engagement processes with the community to determine what to do with a building if it were returned to the municipal inventory. But at one point, the administration had proposed that we have to put funds in to go ahead and eliminate the school, remove it for the benefits of the of the municipality, which it seems a little bit odd to me. We've got a billion and a half dollars deficit as you as as I believe that the COO clearly pointed out and I think it's very accurate. Within that, is there a is that an expectation that if we're going

093to give up a property, we have to remove the stuff cuz it was on the bonds at one time. It was for a future but I don't know if it's there now or not, but it just seems odd to me that we are being asked to remove a building that might have practical use any as well as all of everything else because you might want to build houses there that we should pay to remove the school as proposed by the superintendent and staff to do that. It just seems to me odd that we were being asked to do that. And I know it got the majority vote within the school board to support whatever it was the superintendent was recommending. I would say in response to that, municipal code is not very clear on what

094happens with structures on properties where management authority is transferred. And again, we don't have a large amount of precedent for this uh kind of transfer. And there are restrictions regarding um there are some restrictions that we're picking through. This is kind of happened quickly to and so we are also trying to catch up to what kind of fund what the funding sources are that went into the buildings that may potentially come back to municipal management and what that means for what can and cannot happen with buildings and how there's there are provisions in code regarding what happens with things that have passed through the HLB inventory that don't apply to the real estate services inventory. So, we are trying to catch up to exactly what the paradigm is, but I think we right now, our

095position is we would anticipate working together with the school district presuming those two buildings are the desire is to return them to the municipal inventory to assess and chart a path forward with what we do. We at this point made no concrete plan or request regarding either property because it is a very new prospect. Uh I have a clarifying question for you. Um you mentioned when a property comes back to the real estate department, it's the mayor's call. That would be for it to go to the real estate department or not for a disposition of that property. Mr. Chair, that's correct. It's the management authority assignment, which is the prerogative of the mayor under Title 25 of municipal code presuming the property is not passing through HLB inventory, which has its own specific process. >>

096So, if it were to go to the next step, which is find some alternative use, then it would still come back through the deliberative process and come to the assembly. That's correct. >> Depending on If it were to move outside of the municipal inventory and even if it were to move within the municipal inventory to certain things. If it went to an enterprise utility, you know it comes to the assembly. If it went, for instance, to Parks and Recreation, that assignment of management authority could be done by the mayor, but there would be other process that would adhere to that as well. Yeah, but anything outside of the kind of direct purview of the executive would come before the body. Thank you. Okay, others, I have uh Ms. Lessons again. Thanks. Uh since we are

097talking about the bond, and I know um public comment uh this morning and and elsewhere has indicated um I don't know a a discomfort, a level of discomfort or uncertainty with the uh question of Lake Otis. I wanted to share a few thoughts and reflections um from from my perspective as a board member. Um I think it's important to understand uh that the Lake Otis building needs first appeared on the district's annual CIP in November of 2020 from the best I could find, uh which is when multiple systems at the school were described as being quote beyond the expected life. The following October, October of '21, the administration brought that uh Lake Otis a comprehensive project forward for consideration as a priority on the 2022 bond, which was a two-year bond. Um that November, in

098response to the scale and immediacy of the building's needs, the ASD board unanimously approved placing a $12.9 million building life extension project for Lake Otis on that final two-year bond package for April 2022. But because that bond package narrowly failed, um and because drips and leaks don't solve themselves, and we haven't had Lake Otis on a bond since then, um it seems to me that the facility costs for doing those many those same repairs and probably more have grown by about 30%, which is why we see the sort of 19 pushing 20 million dollar figure for Lake Otis on the bond uh today. And of course, the board placed that on the bond back in the fall in November of 2025. Um so, I know that there is concern and consternation about the repurposing of

099the building, which the board just recently directed, but I think it's also important to understand number one, the ASD's charter school students are local, publicly enrolled charter school students. The Anchorage has already bonded for a district-owned facility utilized by another ASD charter school, Aquarian. That happened a number of years ago. And actually, that the um Stream Academy, which currently occupies a an ASD facility, uh is also on the bond uh for one of the small the building access upgrades. So, we actually have a couple of charter schools on the bond this year. Um so, I just wanted to underscore with a perspective that um really when voters consider proposition one, one of the bigger ticket items, but not the largest, is the question of how do we maintain a facility that is an ASD-owned facility.

100It is decades old. I think it's a 1955 building. And investing in that building, which has long been a priority, will help maintain that building as an ASD-operated facility for for generations to come. So, I just wanted to put a little bit of context and nuance from my perspective rummaging through some older documents um to that particular element of the bond. Thank you. So, I have myself in the queue to speak briefly now about some of the comments that we heard also from the public. Some we have heard some assertions that the assembly should vote down the school district budget because we aren't comfortable with the decisions made by the school board. And so, um lots of effort has gone into um analyzing this kind of framework, looking at the budget, and the role of

101the assembly in the process. So, I want to speak briefly to that to members of the assembly and the public who are here, and the school district is probably pretty aware of these structures. So, charter 6.01 confers the power of operations of of the school district to the school board, not to the assembly. That is paralleled by AS 14.12.020B, which provides that each borough or city school district shall be operated on a district-wide basis under the management and control of a school board. So, in essence, state law controls and preempts municipal actions in conflict with the law. So, the assembly has essentially 30 days to take action on the budget that was presented to us. The budget was presented to us on March the 2nd, which means action by the assembly will be concluded by

102April the 1st. Now, what happens in that case is if the assembly does not within 30 days furnish the school board with a statement of the sum to be made available, the amount requested in the budget is automatically approved. So, what effectively happens is if the assembly votes down the school district's budget on Tuesday, then a week later, the budget becomes law as presented to us, period, full stop. The And I I have a number of attorneys here who can who can actually back up um the assertions that I'm making. The intent of the law and even the charter, which was amended in 1990, to establish very clearly that the school district has authority over such decisions. It puts the assembly in the position of essentially being able to increase the amount should funds be

103available, decrease the amount, or pass the budget. The The charter literally states the assembly shall approve the school district budget. It doesn't say the assembly may approve the school district budget. It says they shall. We shall do this action, and then it goes further to say, "If you don't do this thing, then it will be done anyways without you." And so, now, none of that is to assert that members can't have feelings, can't express their feelings and frustrations about how the process has rolled out. Um but, what is very, very clear, crisply clear, and I have three attorneys opining in separate communications where they all came to the same conclusion, which is very rare if you work with attorneys, that the reality is the assembly's job is to approve the budget, period, full stop. Now,

104we have looked at the question of increasing the budget, and we have an S version that would allow that, but only if the voters approve because we don't have room under the tax cap to increase the budget. Now, even if there was a movement to reduce the school district's budget, what happens then is that they would be confronted with the question of what further do we cut, not what more do we increase, because they would have less money. And so, that is an option, but legally, if the assembly even amends down to zero, then it is, I believe, the attorney's position that it would then automatically go into effect as presented to the school district because this is the game that would be played. And so, the powers of the assembly are extraordinarily limited. Now,

105there was also a conversation about uh state law and some case law that asserts that the assembly gets to decide where schools are. And that piece of law does not speak to management authority. It only speaks to the specific location where school facilities would be, but we do not have the authority by line item or direction to demand the school district puts students or teachers or any actual operations there. That is squarely 100% under the management authority of the school district and the school board. And so, I just want that to be the underpinning of the conversation, and if anyone disagrees with that assertion, I welcome that conversation and to let the attorneys um have fun the way that attorneys have fun, I guess. And so, that's kind of I just wanted to put it

106out out there, and I do know um Ms. Baldwin Day had some thoughts on kind of this, and others probably want to speak. We are down to about 20 minutes. The assembly has um a work session at 1:00. We can spend a little bit more time here if there was a motion to extend, uh but not too much more cuz we do have to get on to our next meetings. And so, I just want to open the floor for the conversation. Um I will end by saying I too am sad and frustrated that we're losing good schools, and that is not a decision anybody is making because they want to favor this area or that area. It's because we are left with an empty bag from our friends in Juneau, and we're doing our very

107best to fix and and fulfill our duties with that bag that is is not meaningfully uh meeting the constitutional mandate of funding of public education. Ms. Baldwin Day. Yeah, thank you. And I I want to underline that, you know, this this entire conversation we're having today um is really it is the result of decades of state divestment from public education. And I I I hope that we keep that front and center as this conversation moves forward, because I think it's really easy in these scenarios to demonize the folks who are doing the hard work of making untenable decisions about how we do and don't spend public resources. Um And so, to my colleagues on the school board and to to members of the ASD administration, I I want you to know up front that I

108I recognize you've inherited a financial crisis that is not of your own making, and the decisions that have been required of you have been every bit as devastating as we as we thought they would be. Um so, there have been no good choices. Um there has only been the opportunity to try to minimize harm. Um That said, the impact to my district is significant. Two of the three schools that are closing are in Midtown. Um I do not take that lightly. Um they are schools that, as we know, provide an anchor for our community. They provide incredibly important services to our students. Uh you know, two things can be true at once. I I respect the reality of having to choose between terrible alternatives, and I can also be deeply concerned. And one of the

109things that does concern me is the what felt like a last-minute move to add Campbell uh to the list of school closures. I personally believe that that is a short-sighted decision. Uh I believe that it is incongruent with district priorities and outcomes, the the things we've said that we value in our education system here. Uh I'm I'm fairly convinced at this point, based on my own research and and the advice that I've received from counsel, that uh the the legality of the process is upheld. However, I do think that there's a difference between what is legal and what is what is adequate, what is transparent, what is constructive for the public. Um processes that engage the community and help to manage change in really, really difficult circumstances. Um my my constituents have experienced a great

110deal of shock and pain and confusion, um a lot of frustration, um feelings of real impotence have been communicated to me in a variety of ways and a variety of settings. I know you all have heard that as well. But, I think um I think there has been, unfortunately, given the timelines of our budget cycle, a real lack of clarity for people. Um a a lack of opportunity for really substantive two-way conversation. Um And I think that that has eroded further eroded public trust in education at a time when harmful and really inaccurate narratives have taken hold, uh and have eroded confidence in public education and the processes that we follow. And as someone who really tries to to champion public education at every opportunity, uh this action, this school closure decision, makes my work

111exponentially more difficult. Um I think I've I've noted that, you know, every neighborhood school is is an anchor, is an important asset to the community. I think that that is doubly so at Campbell STEM. Uh I'm aware that admin and teachers and and parents have spent nearly a decade acquiring a nationally recognized STEM certification. It is It is not just a sticker, it's not just a gold star. It is a a program from start to finish. And it is It is unique, it is additive, it is attractive. It is successful, and it is the only one of its kind in Alaska. Uh We've We've historically protected language immersion programs at all costs, and I I think that that is a great thing as someone who benefited from that uh in in my own education. I'm

112not trying to hold up two things and put them in conflict with one another. I'm just asking that perhaps we ought to consider that Campbell STEM is a science immersion school, that it is, in fact, operating like a charter school without the designation. And I do not believe that that is It is wise to dismantle a decade of work and parse it out to three different community schools. I I don't think that that is good leadership. And so, I I have some asks uh for this particular body. I'll have more to say about this on Tuesday, but I have some asks for this group that has assembled here. I don't think it's too late to do the work of engaging meaningfully with the community. I don't think that the opportunity has passed even if the

113vote itself has passed. And so I want to ask if others would be willing to co-host a town hall with me at Campbell STEM. Members of the mayor's administration, members of the school district, um the school board to address some of these questions in a substantive way and to put to bed some of the really ugly nasty rumors that have grown up because of a lack of clear information and a very compressed timeline. I think we should show the math. I think we should talk about the rationale. I think we should try as best we can to give options for program preservation. I think we should discuss what we do and don't know about the building transition process. I think we should work to minimize anxiety in this neighborhood because that anxiety is significant and

114it is growing. In the absence of good information, people are always going to assume the worst. And I think we can do a better job as leaders in our community of making sure that everyone in the neighborhood has the best most accurate information we can provide and that they have an opportunity to ask us questions in real time, which doesn't happen in public testimony as we all know. You just get 3 minutes to monologue and then you're or two and then you're done. I think we need to do better than that in this case. I I want to ask my colleagues um in ASD to commit to exploring options to preserve this program even if we cannot preserve the building. How do we preserve this program including potentially assisting school leadership in fast-tracking a charter

115school application? I think that is reasonable in this case. And then the last thing I'd like to ask is that we give serious consideration to a commitment to reverse this closure in the event that we receive additional funding from the state of Alaska. Now I I am not privy to the capital project situations in ASD. I have only made my way two-thirds through that really thick binder that is sitting in front of my CFO buddy over there. But I would love for us to consider reversing this this choice if that is possible in the end if there is more funding available to to the district. That concludes my comments and I would love to speak to others either in this format or after the fact about any of the things that I've just asked for.

116Thank you so much. Mr. Higgins. Thank you. Um one of the alternatives here that the superintendent discussed at one point was right-sizing in which we would be able to do things with child care, other issues that are critical and I know the mayor's office and I had a chance to talk to different places. They're really interested in this. I've seen nothing from the municipality from Anchorage reaching out trying to schedule anything. They've asked for a meeting, nothing from the president, nothing from the superintendent, but those were options out there of right-sizing that was spelled out by the superintendent here a year ago, but I but we're not having any discussions in regards to the changes and possibilities here. And so I put me on the list. Um but there was a criticality here that we

117for credibility we have totally broken down. The the Campbell selection was the superintendent's best recommendation to the to the to the board of schools to close. That's awful. Uh if that's the best option we have given that STEM program, these these teachers got heavily engaged to create this school. I can tell you they did that with the middle school. We are approving a high school with it, but we're now we're gutting the one there. But it but trying to look at the alternatives is gutting the goal of the majority to close a cluster of schools. That's a critical issue for me and I so I appreciate the request that we reconsider and look at this. We've lost our credibility. I think we're going to lose bonds. We're going to lose votes that we need for

118funding. We're we're going to hurt the school district tremendously by this decision. And so I'm I'm going to be very up front. I I thought I heard from the legislature they wanted child care. That was a big issue affecting our economy. Nothing to do with that. In fact, closing Abbott Loop is going to reduce the amount of space that we might have for child care in the future by reducing our footprint when we could have taken part of that. And there's one more point out of this. This is the timing. I talked to two senators and the money that came in for rural education funding can be used for for making changes within the school to provide for the child care. Whoa. So the you got to put up a wall, you got to put

119up a door, you got to have a bathroom. That grant can pay for that. We can wait a couple years now and do it then and then ask the public to do approve funding if we want to and they can pay for that or we can pay for it right now out of the money coming in to the state. We're going to choose to what? Wait a couple of years and have the public pay for something that right now could be provided differently because we want to close a cluster of schools? We have got a bad divide of majority, minority and we're out of the group. They're going to close their cluster of schools. They're going to get the support from the best recommendation from the superintendent. The best recommendation is Campbell. We had all

120these other schools before that were recommended and not selected, but now we've gone out of the way to pick Campbell. I None of that is it been explained. The public doesn't understand it. I don't understand it and I don't get it. And so I appreciate tremendously the comments here. I reach out again with the issue of daycare, child care that's so critical in this organization. We have space. We could do it with the grant, but no discussions at all on the school board and nothing coming from the administration except let's close a cluster of schools and we're going to rush it through so much that we won't even get much feedback from the public. I got to tell you, in case you didn't notice, I'm a little bit frustrated. >> Thank you. We have a

121number of people in the queue. Um Mr. Donley. Thank you. I just want to agree with my colleagues expressing the same concerns about the decision to close Campbell STEM. I also though think there's a there's a real reasonable possibility the Supreme Court's not going to agree with this. We know 5 days is not enough notice. That's by case law. This is only 11 days and three of those days were over a holiday weekend. I think given the significance of the impact upon this community, this neighborhood, and these children, I don't know that I don't feel so confident the Supreme Court would say this is appropriate at all. And so I do think there's there's a severe infirmity with the process that was used in this decision-making. Thank you. Next is Ms. Brawley. Yeah, thank you.

122I'll be brief. I know there's been a lot of um a lot of discussion about this this decision and I imagine that will um certainly continue. I I would just want to express appreciation for uh member Baldwin Day's proposal to um to continue having these conversations. I think um I also want to acknowledge that um it seems impossible to deal with a $90 million deficit or or maybe at best a what, $78 million deficit uh without a lot of pain in the community. And and and I want to express um some concern or or or caution about the extent to which when there are limited resources, we turn in on each other. And so and I also understand this is a very fraught conversation. So the people have a right to be angry for sure.

123Um but I also worry I I appreciate how much um this board and and our body have worked uh really hard to uh work together to focus on what the core issues are and to be solutions-focused. And so I say that knowing that um I think none of us are looking forward to the vote on Tuesday. Um I appreciate Chair Constant laying out the the legal limitations of what we even can do. Um but also I do believe that um in order to restore trust um we we do need to continue having conversations with the public and maybe we can try to correct um if there were wrongs done, but also we need to move forward. And I think at the end of the day um there is no positive solution to a $90 million

124deficit. There just isn't. Um and this district cannot survive on the path that we are on, but we also need to stick together to make sure that we are continuing that message. And so I would also love to participate. I know um Campbell's on the other side of my district um but uh just to say also I I believe that there is a way that we can move forward putting our frustrations and and some of these things on the table without creating further division. Thank you. Mr. Volante. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh before I I make my comments, I'm wondering if you'd like a motion to extend. Not yet, but maybe in a few minutes. Um you know, I I as someone who has a background in science and is um currently in the in

125the field of medicine, it does um yeah, it it it is um disappointing that this program um which I think is very beneficial in our community and you know, I I I echo um member Sulbers' earlier comments. I think it is an example of excellence and something that that took a long time to build up. I also echo um member Baldwin Day's concerns and and uh Mr. Higgins' concerns around maybe um a public process that was perhaps a bit too expedited. Um we have received in in public testimony here today and I think also in some of our emails um uh uh highlighting the fact that there was a previous list of 10 schools in 2024 um that were being considered for possible closure. And I guess I'm just looking to the administration at the

126school district to Can you give us an answer here today on the record why this one wasn't in the list and now is um essentially being chosen for for closure or recommended was recommended despite not being previously considered? I'm happy to clarify that member Boland. So essentially the district put forward a right-sizing proposal to the school board around November and a portion of that proposal was approved. So I actually do want to take a moment to clarify that the school board did approve a proposal to add commercial child care in underutilized schools. That is happening and I'd be happy to have Mr. Anderson clarify that. But two things can be true at once. That proposal included child care and some other boundary changes as well as school consolidation. The school consolidation portion of that proposal

127in November was declined by the school board. At that point it was time to put together a budget for the FY27 budget development process. I did not include school closures in that budget development process. In fact, it was the proposal that I put before the assembly at our last meeting that had a number of very severe reductions including to nurses um various important support positions as well as sports and activities. And at that point that generated discussion amongst the school board that resulted in direction from them to me to put forward a school consolidation proposal on a very short timeline. And I will defer to the school board to discuss more why that timeline made sense. But it was that decision that prompted the administration to review all of our previous right-sizing proposals. I think

128something that gets lost in the nuance here is that every time the school board approves or declines a right-sizing proposal, the administration goes ahead and makes changes. So one of the changes that was made in November for example was to add commercial child care in underutilized facilities. That changes the list of schools that would be applicable for a school consolidation. This is the third round of school closure conversations that the school board has had and every single time the school board makes the decision, the administration goes and makes changes that changes the list of eligible schools. With that said, having done this work for four years on school consolidation specifically, my team can attest to the fact that we've done thorough review of all the building utilization data as well as other relevant data that

129allows us to understand what are the variables at hand when choosing any school. And I think the other thing that gets lost in the conversation is that there's no great I'm going to interrupt now briefly. I will accept that motion now. 10 minutes? I will make that motion to extend until 12:10. Second. Moved by Boland, seconded by Holman. I'm asking now is consent is there an objection to the motion? I object Mr. Chair. Same. I got to jet at noon. You object? Okay, may we call the roll. Member Myers? No. Member Martinez? Yes. Member Baldwin Day? Yes. Member Bronson? Yes. Chair Constant? >> Yes. Vice Chair Brouli? Yes. Member Voland? Yes. Member Silvers? Yes. Member Rivera? Yes. Member Grier? No. Chair, that passes 8 to 4. School district. Thank you. So I guess just to

130put a bow on my comment on since these discussions, one reality remains true which is the fact that ASD has lost well over 6,000 students over the past 15 years. And just for perspective, that's the equivalent of over 10 to 14 full elementary schools. So when it comes to why was one particular school put on a list, the harsh reality is that it could have been a number of different facilities. And part of the ongoing discussion between the school district, the school board and the community is which school to select. And that is an extremely difficult process and it was extremely difficult for this process as well. We're certainly able to go into the factors that made Campbell an eligible school, but to suggest that it was the only school that could have been considered

131is not accurate because we've lost so many students. There are many schools that could be and have been considered by this board. With that said, we were asked to put together a proposal in less than two weeks. That was done. It was put before the school board. The school board is not directed to approve anything that I put forward. Oftentimes on the major decisions they make revisions. In this particular proposal, it was accepted. And that I'll conclude it that. Can I briefly respond Mr. Chair? >> Yes. Yeah, certainly not meaning to suggest myself that it was the only one that was looked at and I think the reason that I asked the question is because I think we need to highlight as you just have in your answer which I appreciate that this has been

132a painful iterative process. And just because there were former list things conditions change over time. So I appreciate that. Thank Thank you Mr. Chair. Ms. Silvers. So help me understand here um was this school chosen because previous schools that were chosen to put before the school board were voted down. So was it like you were going down the list like this one was voted down so we moved to this school next. That's a great question member Silvers. The short answer is that I followed the direction of the school board. My budget proposal did not include school closures. So I followed the direction of the board resolution that was passed on February 9th and there were essentially three criteria offered to me. One of which was to review previous right-sizing proposals which we did and the

133second directive was to consider potentially other schools that hadn't potentially been analyzed in the past or had been but were not on some sort of short list and for brevity again dozens of schools have been analyzed and considered over the past four years. But every time a proposal is accepted, rejected or modified that ignites a chain reaction that means certain programs are moved or certain things like commercial child care are assigned to vacant buildings. So on February 9th when the direction was given to me to review previous proposals as well as potential new proposals, we looked at during that moment based off of what we knew a list of eligible schools and I put forward a list of three that met that criteria. So essentially to be very concise, it's a moving target and we

134were asked to consider a proposal on February 9th based off of what we knew at that point in time and Campbell was a school that was eligible to be considered for closure and it was ultimately approved for closure. I guess I'm a little concerned about that because I feel like um when you chose this school, you didn't look at the whole pot of schools. You looked at the pot of schools that hadn't been previously considered. And so um maybe that wasn't really the top of the list as the one that should have been closed. Um so I I guess I'm a little concerned with um the way that kind of was looked at. Thank you, Mr. Holman. Um I would like to add a little bit of a different perspective we come at it from

135the school board. And that is we adopt a budget and pretty much that goes from one year to the next. We can't adjust revenue. We can't do some of the things that the legislature or the assembly can do in a more fluid way. We knew a 90 million million dollar shortfall was coming for some time. But it's a bit of an abstraction to us and it's not truly confirmed until early December when the governor releases his budget. And that's when we know the 90 million dollar shortfall is for real. But we don't actually know what that means until the administration brings us the budget in January that outlines the changes in FTE the programs that need to be cut or that they propose to be cut. However they managed to figure out how to squeeze

136inside of this much smaller fiscal container. And we didn't like it. We thought it was awful which it is and was. And and we tasked them to please go find something better for lack of a better phrase. In a in in this case we're all constrained by the um deadline to submit the budget. So the deadline for them to bring back a different kind of sandwich which I won't name because we're in a public meeting. But that's what they were tasked to do and and they did. And it's terrible. All of these are terrible. As an educator I'm ashamed that we are making these changes. But it is trying to fit into a much smaller number than than what would have happened if education funding had kept pace with inflation. Reduced because we do have

137fewer students. No one's asking for funding for students that are no longer here. But, on a inflation-adjusted basis, we spend a lot less. We attract fewer teachers and employees. We don't offer as many electives. We don't have as many after-school programs. We had things that worked well when we got stimulus money back around 2010-2011 that we have since dropped because we were able to drop them. Graduation coaches are a great example of something that individuals can say, "This got me through high school." And we don't do it anymore because it wasn't that many kids and and we could drop that and try to keep it in the classroom. So, just just to be clear, I I think the administration was given a very short period of time to come up with an undesirable sandwich. They

138did it. We accepted it, partly because of the looming requirement to submit a balanced budget. And here we are. Um it is awful. I I want you to know we feel that way, too. As one who hasn't spoken, member Jacobs. Yeah, we're going to move on to the next I appreciate the the conversation. And um I'll just speak to the the resolution piece on the the board portion of our our process. Um we provided direction to administration to consider previous proposals as well as um new um potential options for a right-sizing in in part due to provide the board with as many levers to submit that balanced budget that member Hallman just alluded to um knowing it was going to be a painful process. Um I share concern with the budget that we passed. Um

139School districts in Alaska are struggling with some of these same questions. And until our state government begins adequately investing in public education, meeting their constitutional mandate, which will require a sustainable long-term fiscal plan, these conversations, unfortunately, are not over. Um what hasn't been mentioned yet today is um even with all of these unfortunate and damaging cuts that have had to have been made, um there's a deficit that I believe is roughly $40 million for next fiscal year. Um And that's with these cuts maintained. Um we can't lose sight of that. And the advocacy can and shouldn't stop. And um ultimately, it's on our state leaders to begin identifying a path forward to how to fund core services because right now um many things in our state government are broken, including how we support um the

140constitutional mandate that that exists to um adequately maintain a system of public education. Thank you. Right. Um couple of notes. The clerk um called the roll slightly wrong. She called it eight to four on the vote to extend. It was eight to two. So, that's a correction for the record. And um we are pretty much out of time. We have 1 minute left. I want to provide just a brief update that the youth members of the assembly requested that the school district run a voter registration program. We'll get a report on this. They were prepared to speak, but they had to leave. We had 341 students sign up and register to vote this year. So, that's an incredible success. I want to thank Mr. Johnson for speaking up to reclaim our time when the lobbyists

141went long. I wish I had been able to do that sooner. Um I also would note that we are opening our recruitment for a youth representative next week. I have a little flyer for you. The QR code won't work until next week, but we are seeking applicants. We are going to have to skip that part of our agenda where we do member comments because the assembly does have a meeting we have to get to. And I would say Eid Mubarak to all those who celebrate. We're adjourned.