2/24/2026: Special School Board Meeting

001All right, good evening everybody. They're going to get started in just a minute. So, just a really quick safety brief again. We've got essentially a full house. Same as the other times, that door will become an emergency exit since the room's full. There are also three more along this wall. Um, if there is an issue, everybody has to evacuate. There's exits on either way and down the hallway where if you went to the restroom, we're all going to meet back up over in the front of the building. That way we can get nose counts and make sure everybody's okay. Um, tonight uh is pretty much uh a watch. If there's an earthquake, um trying best you can to get under the chair in front of you and uh we'll do the best we can to

002help you. We have lots of people that we can try to help out with. So, anyhow, thank you all for being here and um we appreciate everything you have to say. Good evening everyone. We'll call the Tuesday, February 4th, Tuesday, February 24th meeting of the ASD school board to order. Uh present in the boardroom are members Bellamy, Hullman, Wilson, Jacobs, Donley, Lessons, and Higgins is should be here somewhere along with our student representative Madison. Uh we've called ourselves to order and engaged in a roll call. Uh, member Higgins is online. Uh, Madison, would you please lead us in the flag salute and then the land acknowledgement? >> 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

003justice for all. Oh, we acknowledge that we gather here today on the traditional lands of the Denina people of the Upper Cook Inlet. For thousands of years, the Denina 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, Madison. We want to welcome you to our meeting and thank you for attending and supporting the work of the Anchorage School District and this board. The board thanks students, parents, teachers, staff, school business partners, and the entire community for your investment in our district with your time, your talent, and your tax dollars. We're moving to the approval of the agenda. Members have an agenda in

004front of them. Is there a motion to approve? >> Mr. Pess, >> member Higgins. >> Uh, thank you. I I'm going to be making a motion um to postpone action on uh item number four. Should that be done now or I mean item number one under action items, should that be done now to go ahead and put it in and modify the um agenda or do we want to post does that become an issue when the agenda item comes up? >> Um I think you could make the amendments either way. There would be an order either way. Well, I think it may be more sense to do it now because it kind of sets the agenda. Uh, if that's okay, I'll go ahead and make that motion and see where it goes. Okay. >> What

005What is your motion? >> I I move that we postpone action on act item item number one memo 137 right sizing until our regular school board meeting on April 21st. >> Second. >> Cut him. A motion made by member Higgins, seconded by member Donley. Uh member Higgins, >> thank you. I appreciate this. This this action item is very important issue to our entire community. There's a lot of confusion and concerns in the community regarding right sizing and it will have a significant impact um on children's our student educational outcomes. These issues cannot be fully addressed tonight. I appreciate the work of administration uh generating recommendations in such a short time three days um to provide the recommendations to the board in this community. It's not fully possible to assess all the options and impacts in

006such a short period. The final decision on right sizing will impact students, parents, staff, and the Anchorage community as a whole. There's been raised a number of concerns within our board and the general community uh regarding the information and and the accuracy of some information and a large I see it includes the mayor's office requesting uh opportunities to discuss with the with the ASD right uh right sizing child sales services as well uh within that period of time uh and excuse me one second let me go back to my line I apologize um uh within that and and there that interest is because we have 8,000 children needing um child care for emergency responders, ASD students in our economy. There's clearly a need to consolidate some schools. We have less students today and the trend

007is going down at this time. The lack of adequate funding from the state has reached a crisis and massive cuts that will hurt our kids is now unavoidable. Right sizing may help to to some extent but it will not solve the problem. To fairly address all these issues that have been raised regarding right sizing. I believe we need to fully explain the goals of right sizing to the community and expel and to explore the options to achieve these goals. Then generate a list of options and recommendations with advantages and disadvantages to the board as soon as possible. I believe I propose that the audit committee work with the administration generate a list of public and school members for a right sizing committee. This committee should include at least one member from the municipality. A professional

008facilitator needs to be provided to assist this process. Mr. President, we need to earn the public's trust. We are asking for them to help us with bonds. We are helping them. We're asking them to help us with additional funding. It's a trust issue. They need to be heard. We we've got a lot of attendance here because it means a lot and we haven't provided the details that they need to be supportive for any decision and I believe a f a further review of this with the community may result in in options that we have not explored. So I believe it's a benefit for everyone and I'm asking that we postpone it till the April 21st uh agenda. that gives time for the uh for the administration benefits committee to work together to achieve this goal.

009>> Thank you, member Higgins. Further discussion, >> board members, other discussions. >> Uh members of the audience, I I need your help tonight keeping our meeting in order that includes no applause. I appreciate your cooperation. Uh board members for discussion. Member Hullman. >> Um I'm going to concur. I I do think this would be a very unusual step. Um all of us, I think, are not looking forward to voting on this issue. It I think it's one of the toughest in the nine years that I've been here uh because it begins to significantly dismantle different parts of the district. We've never had a budget shortfall this large. And just to make sure everybody's clear, this isn't a shortfall of our making in this year. This is the administration trying to fit our district into the

010revenue projected for next year. Um there simply is not enough money to continue what we are doing right now. And and the cuts are are dramatic and really will have a huge impact on so many students. There are two things floating out there. One is the referendum that the assembly has put on the ballot to give Anchorage citizens a chance to say if they want to help solve this problem with us. Um the other is assurances by people in the legislature that they will be forthcoming with some funds. I sure like everybody else, no one thinks it's going to be enough to completely fill the shortfall, but there's also every reason to believe that it is significant that and it could change cuts that will um have a negative impact on kids all across our

011district. So, it it's a weird thing and that normally once a budget is passed, and we do have to pass one tonight under the city code, that's when the administration takes that budget and begins to plan based on that. But it's clear to everybody, I think, that it's a budget we don't like, that we don't think is it it's it's very hard to try to make cuts and do the least damage. And and that's where we're we're faced. None of this is good for the district. It is all about doing the least damage to the least number of students. And especially given the fact that there may be significant funding in the offing, some of these things don't have to happen. I think if we do vote on the right sizing part of it, it

012would be extremely difficult to walk back from that. I also have to acknowledge that if we delay voting on it and it comes to pass later, that's very difficult also. And it also continues uh the uncertainty and difficulty for staff members, for students, for families that are also trying to plan for the coming school year at all. So, I I will be honest. I there's no good solution here that I have seen or anyone else has seen, but I would like to see it delayed. Uh particularly the part about school closures, particularly given that people involved with Campbell Elementary have had such a short time to respond at all. Um and there's been limited time for the board to truly study all of the options in this. I would support delaying it. And I will

013say I I do feel like that will create a fair amount of chaos for the administration and I'm sorry about that. Um it also continues chaos for families and I'm sorry about that as well, but it potentially creates unnecessary damage. And the again the mechanics of why we have to draw up a budget before we know what our revenue is going to be is just one of those things that just is the way it is. The legislature meets at a certain time. They won't have a final uh budget for the state until much several months from now at the earliest. The city requires us to get our budget to them before March in just a couple of days. uh no one designed this to be a heinous process. It just worked out that way. So

014I do think the the administration will understand that the initial budget item three is not necessarily what we want to go forward with and and will do what they can to delay implementation while we look and see if the items in right sizing are things that we truly have to do or not. Thank you, member Donnelly. >> Yeah, I think a delay of the right sizing proposal that would close down these three schools is a very appropriate and the right thing to do at this time. I have very serious additional concerns about the legality of the lack of notice that were pres pro provided to the community um providing notice over a 3-day weekend where we came back on Tuesday and took public testimony when there was that's just not adequate and there was no

015notice at all provided to the community councils that are in the uh jurisdiction areas of these schools and under municipal ordinance there is requirement of notice to community councils that I believe could very easily be found by a judge to include the notice that's required here. Uh if you look at the things the ordinance says you have to provide notice of, they include things that are very significantly impacted by the closure of a school in those neighborhoods, in those areas, those community councils. Um I don't think it's right to deny them a fair opportunity to assess and reply to these proposals which they did not get. Um so on those basises I I do think it's absolutely appropriate to delay consideration of this time. Um I'll enter the queue to say I appreciate the motion

016and I I wish I could support it. um delaying hard decisions to balance our budget is so much easier than um leading tonight. U the facts that have been articulated by members are broadly true. the state has underfunded um public education in our state to a degree that warrants legal action which has now since occurred um via school districts in Kuspuck and Fairbanks. Um while there is legislation attempting to get additional resources to school districts in our state, um the state budget itself is underwater with a $ 1.5 billion deficit. Um the state's fiscal picture is currently at best um a mess and anyone who is uh feeling assured that districts will have additional funding um this year um can't be basing it on fact and public knowledge. And so I would caution against that.

017Um, I hope that we get additional resources to allocate to reversing some of the harmful cuts um that we'll be forced to consider tonight, but I can't in good conscience consider passing a budget that doesn't seriously consider um this body having first addressed the fact that we um almost unanimously I believe agree that we have an excess number of facilities for the current enrollment and staffing realities within the municipality of Anchorage. Um, I wish that weren't the case and I wish it were um an easier time to be a member of a school board in Alaska. Um, but we've we've signed up for this work and so I would urge the board to consider completing it today and to stop the continuation process of kicking the can down the road. Um, our colleagues in Fairbanks,

018in Kenai, in Juno, in Matsu most recently as of today are considering this very topic. Um, Anchorage should not be exempted from this hard work. And while there always can be an argument for additional time and conversation, um, this board in particular has been at this process for multiple years. This is not a new process for us. Um, how we can and continue engaging with the community should always aim to improve, but at this point, I think it's time for the board to begin some serious work. We'll move on to member lessons. >> Thank you. I appreciate the the thoughtful conversation about uh this move to postpone discussion on item number four. I guess my question is really for the administration which needs to prepare a balanced budget in the next few days. There are

019a number of items bundled into the recommendation that are not just the three schools that are recommended for closure uh but there's the movement of students. So, how would delaying a vote on the whole of these movements impact the creation of a budget that the assembly could approve? >> Through the president uh member lessons, there were some short-term gains to be made from a school consolidation. And so this would really limit the board's ability to restore essential programs and services. Or the administration might need additional time to identify other potential revenue, but it's going to be limited. Uh and it likely will not restore the same number of programs and services than than could be with consolidation. But that's just my opinion having listened to this at the same time as everyone else. Uh Mr.

020Ratliff, any thoughts? >> Yeah. So, as far as the process goes, you guys are going to approve hopefully a budget tonight. And whatever you approve, whether it includes school consolidations or not or restores anything, um that's what's going to go to the assembly, right? And that has to go first Monday in March. Um after that, and they're going to set that upper limit spending authority and our tax request. Um if we get more money in that upper limit changes, then we'll come back to this this the assembly for that. But that's really the only trigger that they have to go back to them. If the board chooses to later on in April, May, June amend this budget, they have the discretion to do so. Although it gets quite a bit more difficult or within the

021same dollars that we have, but it gets quite a bit more difficult, especially on the staffing component as we get further into the into the year. >> Followup, member, >> thank you. I guess this was I was really thinking at the granular level of maybe, you know, a school budget within this larger budget, right? the movement of students from tutor monaster to um Denali monastery is proposed. So teachers would either be assigned to one school or the other. Similarly, there's a recommendation uh for reboundering um Ali Elementary School as well as the secondary schools. That changes where students and FTE go. And it also changes if you're a high school student which info night you go to in March presumably. Do you go to the one that you're currently zoned for or do you go

022to the one that you might be zoned for? That's a lot of uncertainty um that this delay seems to present. >> Uh member Belling, >> thank you. I had uh similar questions. Um I I mean I I I expect that there would be amendments to uh this item, but I did not expect a delay. We have delayed. We have put it off. We have asked the administration to do the impossible and they did it and there were numerous emails saying just do what you're going to do so that families can begin to heal and settle down. So none of this is none of this is good. None of us want to have to do any of this. uh but as member lessons when I look at the content of how do we move forward with

023the regular with the adjusting the budget balancing the budget when we've got so much into this right sizing piece um so I I I I'm inclined to vote to to keep it on the agenda not not delay >> member Wilson I I feel like I'll speak for myself, but I I feel like I can speak for most of the board members here also in in saying that we have because we've been on the board so long together. Um we have worked so hard collectively to keep as many programs moving as long as we could. like literally um keep as many schools open, keep Ignite moving, keep as much as we could for as long as we could. But with this budget deficit, we we can't continue to keep functioning at the level um we have

024been. We I along with many other folks here voted to use our savings to try to keep those programs going and with the hope that we'd get enough money from the legislature with with many hopes. But um we're we're running short on on those hopes and we're running short on the money to come with those hopes. And so I I hate that we have to make these decisions. I hate that our families um and our kids will be affected by those decisions. But we we do have to make these decisions tonight. we have to balance this budget and and there is still the hope that we will get some um money from the legislature, some money from the municipality. There is still that hope to try to put some of these programs back in place

025for our kids, but it it is an extremely difficult position to be in um to make these decisions. We don't make it lightly. I don't make these lightly. Um, but we we do need to move forward with making some what what I would say some brutal cuts because um I know that our our staff will be affected by it. I know that our kids will be affected by these decisions and I know that our families will be. So I I will support to move the amendment forward and not delay it. >> Member Higgins for your second turn. Member Higgins, you want to unmute yourself. Member Higgins, you're still muted. Okay. Member Higgins, if you're having a technology issue, we can come back to you. Sure. >> Is that better? >> Uh, yep. You're going to

026want to start over. >> Uh, yes. I can tell that. Thank you again. Um I think the first comment I want to make is when we talk about this for right for just based upon finances 2.6 million is not an accurate figure and the and the administration admitted it. We've got a hundred people on a waiting list for for Eagle Academy go to File Lake. They add that that's over a million dollar reduction to the operational money that we have which is with them. They they can go much higher than that. uh and in fact if they if they reach the limits where they're at would be at a negative and then in six years it goes from 2.6 to 153,000. So this is not a long-term financial plan. It needs to be because we

027can teach kids better, we can help them academically. If it's a financial thing, I think it's a disaster because that's not going to work out. But we do need to look at is it going to favorably impact programs? Can we deliver things better? We've heard that issue. I like that. is a fair fair question. We have the opportunity right now for right sizing. We have a grant out there that would pay for cost of change in the schools to be able to handle that we won't have to ask the voters for in the future to pay for with a bond. I like that we really have a credibility issue here. We're going to take Campbell if we do do this right. They voters went out and approved uh bonding money to go ahead and fix

028it. Then we're going to say, "Oh, we changed our mind. We're going to give that to another school and we'll take yours away. Do you think what it's going to impact and I've heard it from people and in Lake Alders I I've heard it from Campbell how it's going to impact their support for the school district. We they haven't been heard from their standpoint. I am not objecting to the idea that we look at the benefits of of changing the way we've got our school structures. I I understand that. But it needs to be focused on academics and not just some dollars that are simply not accurate. We've covered that. The administration even said that. So, if we're going to do it from the standpoint of what's going to help the kids the most, we've

029got to incorporate the if we want public support for for bonds. If we want public support for the additional money we need for our schools, we need to we that trust needs to be earned. We need to work with them. They are our boss and we need to do that. I know I'm asking a lot to delay it, but we went through a three-day period of adding this back in, and we did not delay it in the past. We're bringing it back up again because we did move on it then. I'm just asking for this so we can actually get out there and earn the trust that we can get their support for these changes that we need in the upcoming election. We can accomplish what we want. I don't think we're going to get

030it if we don't do this. I think we've got strong uh concerns that it's not going to help us academically. So, I'm not going to put it as a financial issue. That's a crisis with with Juno for sure. But this is not going to make or break us on the budget when you got a $90 million deficit. And that 2.6 million, if it's more than a million, I'd be surprised. Um, and in in five years, it's going to be a deficit of almost a million or more. I'm sure of that. It just has to be the math is there. Um, so this is not a financial solution. It's an operational. But if we want to go that way, we can always in the budget, I believe, end up putting in a line item for for

031school consolidation changes of a certain dollar amount and put incorporate that into the budget. It's still to be determined. So, we could do that if that's the only concern out there. But my concern is on the kids. Campbell STEM is a great program. It got selected in a rush and and and and you don't have a replacement for it. They've got the preschool for the special kids. They've got uh special ed kids programs. It's it's occupied. It's not one of those half empty. It got selected in the rush. It's unfair. We've got issues. We got the superintendent who has as one of his guard rails providing options out there for the lowincome kids for more the optional programs going to move a optional program away from a title one school. That raises questions of what

032that what that even applies. And that's been raised to me repeatedly by a number of people. I can tell you it's it's a lot. We've all seen the emails. We see the attendance and the audience. Let's respect them enough. I know I'm asking a lot. Let's respect them enough to say we want to make sure that we hear you. We want to make sure that we don't that we don't impact you when a further study would show that there's a better way of doing it. And let's hear the voices out there. I'm I'm begging I don't want to see the reputation, our relationship with the public, with the voters to be impacted long term. And I am concerned if we don't do this that will be the outcome. Okay, I'll jump in the queue for

033a second time and then we'll go to member Hullman. Um I just want to reiterate that um administration have indicated that there would be some significant challenges with um announcing to uh school programs that they would be closing in May and um and closing those buildings effectively um before school starts next fall. Um in addition, I I think that we um should be careful who carries the mantle of um trying to do what's best for students. I think there are seven people here um plus our student rep who are doing everything they can as elected individuals um to put students first and there's a credible case that's been made and deserves uh due consideration from administration that there provides a level of service um improvement for students as well as um short-term savings that are

034by far a secondary matter. Um, with that said, we'll go to member Hullman. >> And and I did just want to reiterate, we we do have the initial budget proposal, which is a legitimate and balanced budget that had things in it that we really didn't want to see happen. So, what we have is an amendment to substitute um that has different things that we don't want to see happen, but there is the significant possibility of revenue. so that some of those things can just be taken off the table without having to remove something else. And and this is I think the the most severe pinch the board's ever been in in my time where there really was no other place that hadn't been cut. Uh in past times, we had some fund balance or we

035had some areas that weren't touched. So that if we wanted to save a program, ignite pops to mind because it has been in come up for elimination so many times. We could do something slightly different in a different area and save that program. This year so many parts of the district are hit. We really can't do that. But if there are other funds coming and and I think there will be some um there's the possibility to not eliminate some things. The question that comes to me is what are the easiest ones to walk back? And if we go forward without considering the right sizing, that means the sports programs at high schools and all middle school sports technically are going to be cut in the fall. If as much as five or six million comes

036from the legislature, that's an easy thing to reverse. Um it's it's not good for the program to have that disruption and uncertainty, but no one's signing up for fall sports right now. No one is taking irrevocable steps one way or the other. We could bring that back in July if money became available in July. If we vote to close a building, I don't see how we undo that. and and that would be taking that step knowing there's potential for funds coming. But right now, we don't know how much. We don't know exactly when we could be back here in six weeks in exactly the same level of ignorance and and forced to do things that we really don't have full information for. But I would rather do that in six weeks and and not just

037because I don't have wouldn't have to do it tonight, but because I think I could make a wiser and better decision for the long run. >> Member Donley for the second time. >> Yeah. The argument that we have to do this now, close these schools now to get $2.6 million, I don't think is accurate. Um there's a proposal for the voters of Anchorage right now that would increase the amount of money uh that's available by over $10 million. So that alone would be five times as much as what we're proposing to only save in the first year by the way because the point has been made that after five years this savings goes away. Um, so it's not necessary at this moment in time to do these school closures and um there are other options

038available to find additional dollars in the budget that's going to be put before us here to vote on um to do some tweaks and fixes here without closing these three schools. I'm just very very concerned that we're in a very very legally questionable area here. Um because we're supposed to follow municipal law. Um and I don't know if I I think there's a strong case that we're not and I'm very concerned about that. >> Just a point of information for member Don Lee. Just want to make sure the board's on the same page that the levy dollars that were referenced have already been pledged by um the superintendent and the uh the board potentially this evening to be utilized to reduce PTR. Um >> point of order, isn't that one of the things we're voting

039on tonight? How can it be pledged already if we haven't voted on it yet? >> The superintendent has made public comments and the board is going to ratify that tonight. >> Oh, well, it's nice you know what the board's going to do before it votes. Mr. Mr. >> The board will be voting to ratify. to know that under the open records and open meetings laws >> the board will have the opportunity to ratify tonight. Member do seeing no other conversation we'll proceed to a vote. Miss Sullivan, the vote is to postpone um the amendment item one till April 21st, 2026. >> Student Representative Madison. >> Yes. Member Lessons. >> No. Member Donley. >> Yes. >> Member Higgins. >> Yes. >> Member Bellamy. >> Member Wilson. >> No. >> Member Hollowman. >> Yes. >> President Jacobs.

040>> No. That motion to postpone is [snorts] uh it fails by a vote of three to four. Is there a motion to approve the agenda as drafted? >> Move to Mr. Chair move to approve the agenda as uh presented. >> Second. >> Motion made and seconded by members Bellamy and Hollowman. Seeing no other discussion is we have a voice vote to approve the agenda. Student Representative Edison. >> Yes. >> Member Bellamy. >> Yes. >> Member Lessons. >> Yes. >> Member Higgins. >> No. >> Member Hollowman. >> Yes. >> Member Wilson. >> Yes. >> Member Donley? >> No. >> President Jacobs? >> Yes. Motion to approve the agenda adopted by a vote of 5 to2. The superintendent update item B1. Dr. Bryant floors. >> I have a motion, Mr. President. I move to amend the agenda

041as adopted to delete memorandum 157 because it's in violation of municipal law and inappropriate to be considered by the board at this time. >> There is no there is no memorandum 157 on our agenda. Member Donley >> you mean 137. >> Thank you for correcting me. 137. >> Okay. Just a moment. >> I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. What was the What was the motion? >> The motion is to delete an item that's already been adopted on an agenda because a member believes it's in violation of municipal code. Um, I don't believe that motion's in order. Do you have any legal opinion or any evidence to indicate that it is an order? Memberly. Do you have any legal opinion to indicate the 3 days notice is compliant with the existing ordinance? >> My understanding is the legal

042citation you referenced has been discussed with municipal um staff and that legal citation does not apply to the work of right sizing. >> Is the public going to made privy of that? Because I haven't seen that opinion. >> Uh I don't know that there's any written opinion. If there is, I'll ask it be made public. So I'm going to going to rule that the motion is not in order. If there's a motion to over appeal the ruling of the chair and a second, we'll vote on that. >> I move to appeal the decision of the chair. >> Is there a second? >> Okay. A vote to appeal the ruling of the chair. There's no discussion. Miss Sullivan, the voice vote, please. >> Student Representative Madison, >> no. Member Bellamy. So, we are voting now to

043appe What are we voting on? >> Um, a yes vote would overturn the ruling of the chair and allow me Donley's motion to proceed. A no vote would um sustain the ruling of the chair. So, a no vote would be to um rule that the motion is not in order. >> So, my vote is no. I don't I don't believe it's member. >> Yes. >> Member Hollerman. >> Yes. Member Lessons. >> No. >> Member Donley? >> Yes. >> Member Wilson? >> No. >> President Jacobs? >> No. >> Uh, the motion to appeal the ruling of the chair fails by a vote of three to four. Superintendent updates. Dr. Bryant, the floor is yours. >> Thank you, Mr. President. I wanted to use my update tonight to provide a high level overview of the district's financial

044position, our uh budget outlook and school consolidations proposal with the board and with the public for one final time before the board has its deliberations later tonight. So, as it stands, ASD faces a $90 million structural deficit going into next fiscal year, which is why for the past several months, our discussions have centered on the stabilization and long-term alignment of our resources. It is not evident that ASD will see meaningful structural changes to district revenue from the legislature, which leaves the district with no choice but to consider long-term changes to the way that we operate. Testing one, two, three. Yep. So, as I was saying, it is not evident that we will have a long-term change in our revenue from the legislature. There is no evidence that there will be a structural change, meaning a

045permanent change to student funding, which leaves the district no choice but to consider long-term changes to how we operate. The presentation that we're about to show the public will walk us through how we got here, what reductions have already been made, and the structural pressures that still exist as we continue to weigh difficult tradeoffs in choices. These reductions that have already been proposed include large reductions to district office non-classroom supports. Just as one example, we've proposed a 22% reduction to our largest department, which is the Office of Academic Services in addition to numerous position reductions across the entire district office. And even yet, we were still forced to put forward difficult proposals to close our budget gaps. These difficult reductions do not reflect our aspiration as ASD. They do not reflect the strengths of and

046value of our school communities. This budget purely reflects a difficult reality of the real world impact of declining enrollment, rising costs, and funding uncertainty. Our current current footprint and programming no longer align with our enrollment and available revenues. Next school year, if we were to operate exactly as we do right now, ASD would be $90 million short. It is our statutory and fiduciary obligation to pass a balanced budget and that can only be responsibly done with structural changes. Now, I recognize and this group recognizes the extraordinary difficulty of having to have these conversations and the impacts on students and families and everyone in this community are extremely real and must feel deeply personal to everyone involved. But at the same time, delaying structural alignment does not eliminate disruption. It does not eliminate uncertainty. It only

047increases it over time. So, the administration's recommendations reflect an effort to balance immediate stabilization needs with the district's long-term financial health. Following the bud the budget presentation, I will return to review some recent community data um including survey data that can also help illuminate how residents broadly speaking in Anchorage are weighing these difficult trade-offs alongside of us. Um with that, I'll turn it over to the team for the presentation. For the record, I'm Andy Riff. I'm the chief financial officer for the district. We're going to go through our presentation here. Um, starting out back getting back to our budget timeline. Right now, it is February 24th. We have to have our budget turned into the assembly by the first Monday in March, which is this coming Monday, for them to introduce it and then approve

048it on March 24th, I believe, is their meeting for approval. They will set the upper limit spending authority and the tax request that the district uh proposes if they or change it or amend it to their to their liking. Um, right now this legislature is in session. I believe education is going to be a topic coming up, but um I don't really know what funding is going to be available through legislative sources as there wasn't anything included in the governor's budget for that. Kind of the backdrop of why we're in this position. You can see those bottom bars are the base student allocation, the BSA that has been provided over since 2017. a permanent BSA increase of any sort of magnitude did not happen until FY26. We did get some sporadic one-time funding. We had

049some ESSER funds the which is the federal stimulus for COVID relief. And then some those light blue or the light yellow bars are uh the fund balance the district was able to put towards their budget. So really this is about the third year of flat funding if you consider the one-time funding we got in FY25 which followed about eight years of flat funding on the heels of that. So while our the inflation adjusted BSA would have been about $1,400 more than what it currently is had it just been tied to inflation since 2011 which would generate about $102 million for the district had that had just that simple mechanism been in statute at the time. Um so this is really once we drop off that fund balance that really puts us in this fiscal cliff

050where we have to make significant budget adjustments. This next chart shows the state budget changes by their departments over the last decade as well. You can see the the K12 support for districts across the state has only risen by almost 7% a little less while other departments have gotten nearly 90% increases uh 60 70% increases across their their budgets. Um a lot of those you could see you know 30 or 40% increase. That's about what inflation's been. So you can kind of see where that those increases should be. However, that same support has not been extended to public education, which puts our district and districts across the state in a really precarious financial situation. The lack of meaningful increases in state funding also limits the amount we can collect locally. So, as we've not had

051increases in state funding, it's hard for the local government to give additional funding because we're capped in how much the state caps how much the local can give based on how much they give us. Um, so we're really beholden to other governments to be able to fund a district. We can't make up money or tax folks on our own. So, what that revenue picture looks like is a total overall reduction of about $43 million in revenue. Uh you can see about 14 million of that is reduced from the state. About 11 million of that 14 million is because of the required local effort increasing and shifting that burden from the state to property taxpayers, which you see an increase in property tax of about 9.7 million. And then you can see the decrease in fund

052balance. While we did scrape together some money for our fund balance, that'll still leave us with about a 1% of our expenditures worth of reserves to be able to uh account for future drops in enrollment or other emergencies that might come up such as another earthquake, fires, things like that. Um so that equates to about $6 million of, you know, truly fungeable money, spendable money that we can use to address emergencies. So this big drop in revenue coupled with the rising cost of labor, the rising cost of health care, rising cost of utilities, liability insurance, all these costs can keep going up so we can afford less people and less stuff. That's really what's got us into about an 8090 million uh structural deficit at this point. So how we spend our money, we put

053together this slide really just to show, you know, what big buckets that goes into. Um so the direct classroom instruction is for general education and special education those teachers and pair professionals in front of students every day. Um, student supports would include counselors, nurses, librarian, security, behavior supports, principles, instructional supervision, professional development, some of the things that we run out of this office and including sports sports in that line item as well as that is generally a um I would consider it as a student support because that's really something valuable for our students. So when you see like in the bottom section where you see the change in the actual total dollars that includes our nurses, our sports principal, security, clerical, all those positions that are kind of ancillary to direct classroom instruction and coming

054out of either schools or professional development and supervision. I wanted to put this in there. I'm sure you can't look see it looking at the TV, but in the handouts that you have outside um for the slideshow, it shows up better on the full page slides. So, if you have it on paper version, we do have those around uh you'll be able to you'll be able to see it a lot better. But the gist of it is this is how we've changed our FTE by state function since over the last decade or since 2012, so the last 15 years. Um, and just by function, we've decreased about 33% of our instructional staff. Our special education instruction and has remained about equal and our special education supports gone down about 17%. As our special education population

055has trended about the same, although our intensive needs students have gone up considerably. Um, so those why those haven't decreased as much as some other areas. Um you can see district administration and district administration support have all decreased by about a third and about half of community services. Um so we've been chipping away at these deficits and you can see by and this is just our FTE so you can see what we've cut over the years. Um it has been significant and in this budget we're proposing about another 10% reduction in our general fund workforce. So, this is all the budget changes that we made this year. Just to kind of go through what is in the budget before you tonight before any amendments are made. Uh, it includes a PTR or class size increase

056of plus4. Uh, it cuts ignite. It changes the specialist model as well as the nursing model. It removes middle school sports and activities and a lot of other high school sports that we've gone through. It includes reductions to special education, principles, counselors, paraprofessionals, summer school, BO, library assistance. The library assistance, that's all but one library assistant left in the district, I believe. Uh there's a 13% reduction to human resources. The teaching learning general fund staff is a 45% reduction. It is a 15% reduction in their staffing. Grants is 50%. Communications another 17%. The warehouse drivers, that's 17% of our warehouse drivers. and about 33% of our the three or one of the three people that work over in our rentals facility. So, we're making significant cuts and while it doesn't add up to big dollars

057because these uh departments have been chipped away at over years as well. Um but again, I mean we don't and the board mentioned this, we don't take these cuts lightly. This these cuts lightly. It really does. This affects our friends, our neighbors, our co-workers, our family, and our students. I have students in the district. This is affecting them also. and as well as every other kid in the district. Um so please don't think we take this lightly or this is a hard budget for us to make as well. Quickly on the classroom teachers uh about 49 teachers were reduced 50 teachers due to enrollment declines. So as we continue to see enrollment declining we are able to reduce some staff just purely based on that and keep the same metrics. But as we increase our

058PTR, you can see by division over there on the right how many uh classroom teachers we're reducing. 90 at elementary, 29 at middle, 41 at high, and another eight at alternative schools. Then we can kind of get into some of the granular details of what was uh actually reduced in kind of different areas. These are administration and department changes. So by and large folks that might be in this building or at our purchasing or Kennedy uh center about 60 FTE overall the only one that really grew would be the preschool prayer professionals and those uh people are in front of students every day. So that's the only really area of growth we've seen. Um but we cut about almost 60 people out of administration for about $14 million. Did want to add this. This is

059even harder to read than that last little chart, but it shows the change by these departments from FY12 to FY27. Um, you can see some of them are hit fairly significantly. My office was a 50% reduction. Our accounting office was about a third. Our purchasing office was about 40%. There's these reductions have been chipped away out for the last 15 years with these administrations. When we get additional money, these positions just don't come back. The only ones that have come back are really the only increases that we've had of any substances in our mental health and our preschool. And by and large, those are school-based positions as well. So, the ads that you've seen on here are generally school-based and we've just been cutting away at these administrations and there's just not a whole lot

060left to give. Um certainly not to the tune of $90 million. Uh this year we've been cutting special services much deeper than we have in the past. um about almost 70 FTE special services. 21 of those are within gifted and that's the ignite program and the testers that go along with it. Um but there are cuts throughout uh special education levels, uh psychologists, heart of hearing. It's just kind of we went down the line and we cut whatever we could to get this budget to balance that we thought may be the least disruptive. Although we know that's it's going to be disruptive. So, the schoolbased changes, we went and talked about a lot of that. That's the nurses, counselors, librarians, the teachers for enrollment, and PTR. Um, so with that, I'm going to turn it

061over to Mr. Gustoson to discuss the right sizing proposals. So, for the record, I'm Sven Gustoson, the deputy superintendent. And just kind of going back to remind everybody where we are and what the um recommendations were. Um, we did had the resolution on February 9th for us to go back and look at three areas previously analyzed school consolidation proposals, additional near-term efficiency opportunities and options facil facilitating repurposing. Um, that resolution also directed us to look at different things there and to have those to um the school board and public no later than February 14th. Our recommendation coming from that, I'll just run through these quickly, um, was to close and consolidate Lake Otis Elementary School, Fire Lake Elementary School, and Campbell STEM Elementary School with associated boundary changes. Just a reminder that the Lake Otis

062and Fire Lake um, recommendations um, for where the students would go um, has changed from the November uh, recommendation. In this recommendation, we would repurpose Fire Lake Elementary School for Eagle Academy and Lake Otis Elementary School for Elques. We propose to relocate the tutor Monasuri program to Denali Monasuri. We proposed to move sixth grade Denali Montasauri students to middle school to change Deli Elementary School boundary to move non-emersion students to Huffman Elementary School. To change government hill elementary school boundary to move non-emersion students to Inlet View Elementary School and to declare the Abbott Loop and Campbell STEM properties access to district needs after they've been vacated. As we move into the we had a recommendation if we were to utilize the funds the school con consolidation was 2.6 million. Uh there were some SBDR funds

063from the Campbell STEM Elementary School. Um construction of 2.2 million that we could use. Deferring Oceans for a year puts 1.4 million into the mix for a total of redirection of 6.2 two million from this. Um, we did go back and look at sports costing and with some revenue increasing and reductions in cost of how we run sports. We would need 3.16 million to reinstate middle and high school sports at a new model. Um, with a few sports not included. If you look back at last week's presentation, um if we added the sports re, um our recommendation would be to add sports and activities at 3.16, reduce middle school ptr by 16 FTE costing 2.2 million, and add 6.5 nurses back into the the tally at a cost of $840,000. I'll turn it back over

064to Dr. Bryant. >> Great. Uh thank you. So just to close, I wanted to leave the board with a few data points to guide your deliberations tonight. Uh that includes balancing act data from December as well as a survey that was um recently conducted this month. And of course, I want to acknowledge that um throughout the the past few weeks and and really months, we've been hearing deeply felt perspectives from individual community members and families. And that's also been a really important data point for us as we consider these really difficult proposals that we wish we did not have to discuss and we wouldn't have to discuss if there were an abundance of more resources for public education. But in addition to the individual perspectives, I also wanted to take it upon myself to gather

065a feedback via a survey that can uh capture the broader community sentiment um including residents that may not be attending these meetings. So individual lived experiences are surely powerful and this just offers some additional context um to guide the board. So the first data point I want us to look at is actually from December of 2025 because as the board recalls we asked the community throughout the late um fall semester to participate alongside ASD in balancing the budget. So the simulation was called balancing act and it was a rather comprehensive exercise where the community got to weigh the revenues of the district against our expenditures. Uh so in other words participants were required to produce a balanced budget just like we'll have to do tonight. And what I wanted to share with the board transparently

066is that I did notice that in that context of balancing a budget, 88% of participants chose to close repurpose schools. That doesn't mean that was an easy decision. That doesn't mean it's popular with those who chose it, but it it does reflect a trend for how residents responded when faced with fiscal restraints and really clear tradeoffs. Next slide, please. And this brings me to the community survey that was commissioned uh earlier this month. It took place from February 14th. Uh this was in partnership with the Alaska survey research group. You can see some of the pertinent facts here. Over 1,000 Anchorage adults participated including about a thousand registered voters. Uh this was a formal panel survey meaning that there's a margin of error of about uh 3.5% plus or minus and these results provide a

067statistically reliable snapshot of community attitudes during this particular time period which again was February 14th through the 18th. Next slide please. So, one of the questions that was asked in this survey and I did provide the full instrument for for the board at your desk. Um, but essentially what was asked was how should ASD approach school consolidations in general? And on this slide, you can see uh the responses that I would say are best understood as differences in the timing of a school consolidation and possibly differences in the conditions um for a consolidation. But what you'll notice is that there's actually a really strong plurality that supports immediate consolidation given the urgency of our fiscal situation. That's the 39.5% that you see on the slide. And there's another 41.5% that also is open to the

068idea of school consolidations, but their support fringes more on process and in timelines and community engagement and those sorts of factors. And a much smaller segment opposes consolidations as a budget strategy entirely. So this is just one snapshot in time, but it does suggest that consolidation itself isn't necessarily unpopular. Um, but the opinions vary on the how and the fine print. So what stands out is that most respondents are open to the idea of consolidating a school under some circumstances. And the primary distinction is not for or against consolidation, but it's really between the when and the how. And this is consistent with what we see often in complicated policy discussions. There's usually not a binary. It's usually a combination of nuance perspectives. And that's the case for this specific question. Next slide. But we

069did also offer a question that made the tradeoff more specific. So we also asked respondents if consolidating undercapacity schools would allow ASD to partially reverse cuts to nurses, sports and core programs, how would you feel? Uh so in other words, this question proposed a very specific tradeoff and what we saw is that when consolidation is linked specifically to preserving uh services, support increases substantially. And this reflects a common pattern that we do see in decision-making. Preference preferences tend to shift when the tradeoffs are explicit. So it does suggest that for a good portion of the community, they are weighing consolidation against the program preservations that they see being discussed for reductions right now. But at the end of it, when you zoom out, 75% lean towards consolidating schools when presented with the context in a

070way that's similar to how it's being presented today. Again, this is one snapshot in time. It doesn't mean it was an easy response, but I did feel it was important that the board see some of the macro trends on this topic. And I we did ask another related question to right sizing and this is on the last slide which is we do have a levy measure that's going to go on the ballot for the first time in a very long time. I'm not tracking a history of any levies uh for district operations. So I felt it was important that we asked the public um if the school board approves consolidation that reduces operational expenses, would you be more inclined to support the tax levy? and 49% express support for the levy and 51% do not

071currently support the levy at least during this snapshot in time. And I just want to make sure we all are tracking this. We asked the public where they stand on the levy that's being discussed for the anchor school district and about half support and half uh do not currently support the levy. So in other words, um 32% of those who opposed the levy indicated that consolidation could influence their position. Some said consolidation would actually move them to support the levy. So again, of those who oppose the levy, 5% said that consolidating schools would move them to support the levy. And then again within the group that do not support the levy, 26% could be influenced if the board were to move forward with consolidating a school and they would reconsider their current uh status of

072not supporting the levy. So again, this doesn't reflect any certainty for an outcome of any ballot proposition, but this reflects a snapshot for where the public was when they were faced with some of the difficult trade-offs that we're being faced with at the dis. and I thought it was important for the board to have that as just one data point amongst many as we go into a difficult deliberation tonight. So, in my closing remarks before I hand it off to a special guest, um the survey data does not make the decision at the end of the day. It is the school board, but it does help illuminate how the broader community may view these very difficult tradeoffs and the individual impacts are very real uh regardless of how we move forward. But it is our

073responsibility as the fiduciaries to balance perspectives and to make difficult decisions. So with that said, we do have a special guest, but the last slide was just any final technical Q&A on this presentation. So um I would be happy to entertain Q&A before special guest >> uh member. >> Yeah, this is to ask for clarification maybe more for folks who are not on the board but are paying attention. Can we review what school bond debt reimbursement funds are? And can you talk about them as funible, not funible, dedicated to schools, their origin? How did we get to that little pot of money? >> Sure. The history on that dates back to about 2017 when the legisl or the state first decided to cut portions of the school bond debt reimbursement program which is essentially paid

074for 60 to 70% of uh outstanding uh bonds that were approved prior to 2015. So the district would or the city would approve a bond um prior to 2015. The state would cover 60 to 70% of the cost. And these bonds continue to get sold on for many years and the state would cover those costs. Starting in 27 2017, uh the state decided to stop paying that paying municipalities for or districts. I think Anchorage is the only one that actually does their own debt servicing. Other other uh districts are done by their municipalities or governments there. Um, but in 2017 they stopped paying that and that money was eventually paid for by in in a number of ways. It ended up being about $90 million because they did it over several different years that they

075didn't fund the program. Um about 74 million of that as I recall was picked up by the taxpayers. Uh we did have some money within our debt service fund balance reserves and some money within our general fund reserves that we helped to shore up those payments to our our our creditors. Um so eventually that money came back to us as about $90 million in total. Um but due to the different ways that municipalities paid for it because again Anchorage was the only actual district that paid it themselves the municip it came back to um the entity that paid the bill without any real strings attached. And that was due to the fact that all these municipalities did it differently. Um, some of them just, you know, cut other things to say we're just not going

076to pay for this to pay for it. Some of them taxed the residents. Uh, but there was a variety of different ways and they couldn't account for that in the legislation. So, they just kind of gave the money back to the whoever paid the bill and made it um essentially a funible source where they could use it on whatever they wanted. >> So, how did Campbell STEM get to have that 2.2 million assigned to it? >> Um, I believe that would have been board action and when we're doing the we're doing the projects, but let Mr. Anderson speak to that piece of it. >> Right. It's similar to um how we got the money for Inlet View. We took a huge chunk of the SPDR and put it towards Enl View. We came back with

077multiple board memos for lots of projects across the district to be able to use it um for for other high needs. and and this was one of many. >> Thank you. But at the end of the day, it was allocated back to the school district and could be used for capital projects or operational needs. >> Yeah, it was really flexible to whatever the whoever received the money wanted to use it for. >> Okay. Seeing no other questions from the board. Uh we'll move to um our guest Dr. Bryant. >> Thank you Mr. President. So if there that'll conclude the question and answer portion of this report and I would like to welcome our very mayor Suzanne Lef France who would like to give a few remarks to the board. Good evening. Thank you, President Jacobs,

078and board members for all the work you have done with the superintendent to date to put together your budget. I know it has not been easy, not by any stretch. I recognize that mayors do not often come before the board to advocate for public school support, but I felt compelled to join community members tonight to express my support for our schools. And thank you, Dr. Bryant, for this opportunity. I am a strong believer in our public school system. I'm a proud product of Alaska's public schools myself. As a parent of three children who have gone through ASD, I have seen firsthand the dedication of our educators, support staff, and administrators. Our schools matter to me deeply, just as they matter to the many committed community members who have already spoken. Right now, you are facing

079tough choices, some really, really tough choices. and you are being forced to consider cuts that will have real and painful consequences. Let me be blunt. These cuts will be devastating not just for families, students, and educators, but to the future of our community and for ensuring that this is a place where people want to stay, to move their family to and to start or expand a business. A strong public school system is the foundation of our economy. But these cuts are on the table because the state funding formula has not kept up with today's realities. Let's be clear about what school cuts mean. They hurt kids. They hurt families. They hurt educators and staff. They hurt our economy. They hurt our future. As Dr. Bryant mentioned, "I proposed a $12 million special levy and the

080assembly approved placing it on the April ballot, and I thank assembly members Anna Broly, Felix Rivera, and Aaron Bowwin Day for co-sponsoring this measure, and I urge voters to approve it, will not close ASD's projected deficit, but it will help retain ED 80 educators who make a difference in classrooms every single day. and the ballot language requires that the funds will be used for teacher positions and student programming. That is the most we can do at the local level. Now, state leaders must act. Our community deserves a school system that reflects our shared values and our commitment to the next generation. Thank you all for your leadership, for serving in these positions, and for doing the difficult work ahead. >> Thank you for your remarks, Madam Mayor. We've completed our superintendent updates. We have four

081testifiers remaining from our meeting on February 17th. Did not testify because we met our uh midnight adjournment deadline. Um, so we're going to give those individuals a chance to come forward if they're present tonight. Our first speaker from the 17th is Ping Hang. Go with that. And then Jared Zarn, if you could also come forward, please. I'll just remind the audience that um during our public comment time, it's our time to listen and the public's time to speak. We do ask you do not engage in applause um so we can hear from our testifiers and continue on with our meeting. Welcome Miss Wong. You have two minutes that you can begin when you're ready. >> Hi, my name is Japing. I'm a staff member at Campbell Stam and a mother of two children who attend

082Campbell Stam. I agree with the prior testimony as to why keeping campus stand open is important, but there's a part of how this impacts the entire ASD student population and Anchorage community that has yet to be shared. Yes, I said the entire ASD community. Campbell STEM's remodel plans have been shared with staff, the student leadership team, and our PTA as a part of Campbell STEM certification. Part of the grant for Campbell STEM remodel includes building five interactive STEM stations throughout the hall. One STEM learning classroom and two interactive STEM playgrounds. This is all in addition to a prior $40,000 grants which transform Wolverine Park into an outdoor learning lab for Campbell STEM. How does this impact ASD? Part of the grant specifies that Campbell STEM will be available for all ASD as a field trip

083location. This means an interactive STEM focused field trip free of admission fees. The busing will be the responsibility for the groups attending. Fuel trips in Anchorage is are expensive, but they wouldn't be to Campbell Steam. This grant also states that Campbell STEM will open two days per year for all of Anchorage to have a free STEM interactive exploration day. Campbell STEM is a street over from a public bus stop providing access to all Anchorage. If you close Campbell or ASD will be impacted. Campbell is a truly a jewel in the ASD crown. Please protect Campbell. Last but not least, our proposal from our community are all grounded in careful analysis. We believe closure decisions should be as well. Thank you. >> Thank you for your testimony. Welcome, Mr. Zorn. You have two minutes. Please begin

084when you're ready. >> My name is Jared. I have >> Sorry. Good. Uh my name is Jared. I um have three kids that go to Campbell STEM currently. Um so I just like to point out a couple things um from the $2.6 million in savings. Um it's known that Fire Lake and Lake Otis are going to host charter schools. To my knowledge, according to the FY adopted budget, those charter schools have staffing that's paid for by ASD. So truly, there's not a savings that's actually happening with those two specific closures. So really, you're looking at Campbell's STEM closing, which is around a million dollars in savings. But when you add in the transportation costs for sending kids to three new schools, that swings it down to about 560,000 in savings, nowhere near the 2.6 million

085that was portrayed to the public. Um, so there's the bond funding um for Campbell STEM and the 11 million to, you know, do the upgrades. Um, the community is going to be voting on a bond in April for almost $20 million to improve Lake Otis, but we're going to close Lake Otis as a public school. It feels like that's kind of something that makes no sense to the public. Um, looking at your community survey, um, I see that it's over four days and it's around 2,000 people. So less than 1% of the community of 18-year-old adults were a part of this survey. So I could ask everybody behind me, which is about the same thing that you just gave all of this information on and showed that everyone supports closing schools, but really your data

086is flawed and misleading to the public. I urge this board not to make a decision on closing a school without this credible information. and doing such is going to be detrimental to the public and to your school system. Thank you. >> Thank you for your testimony. Our last two speakers tonight are Sarah McCaulay and Aara England. >> Welcome, Miss McCll. You have two minutes. Please begin when you're ready. >> Thank you, members of the school board, for hearing my testimony this evening. My name is Sarah McCauley. This is the third time I'm here giving testimony on behalf of Fire Lake Elementary, and I'm angry that we're here again. You continue to call Fire Lake and Lake Otis expendable because of declining enrollment. You should be looking at where the population is decreasing in Anchorage because

087Eagle River is growing. None of the reasons you kept Fire Lake open in previous attempts to right size have changed. Did you take the time to learn that this year's kindergarten class is twice the size of last year's class? I know because I volunteer there. I know that this year's first graders, last year's small kindergarten class, has grown this year. I'd also like to take a a chance to respond to previous testimony about giving Fire Lake to Eagle Academy Charter. You are under zero obligation to operate in excess of the constraints of your building, Eagle River Academy. The problems you're having with your building need to be addressed by the authorizer of your charter and those who selected your building to begin with. The appropriateness of your building should have been assessed prior to the

088establishment of your school. You have options. Overcrowding can be mitigated through attrition and graduation. Your school can take the more cost-effective route of returning to Birwood ABC, which is the school you originally broke off from. As I heard from supporters of your school, your kids are exceptional. They are exceptional under current constraints and will continue to thrive in their current setting or on a return to Birwood ABC. President Jacobs, you voted to fire to close Fire Lake twice. As one parent to another, I hope you never have to sit where I am sitting and have to defend your children from those who wish to cause them fear, insecurity, and instability. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your testimony. Welcome, Miss England. You have two minutes. Please begin when you're ready. >> Uh, good

089evening. My name is Accara England and I'm speaking as a parent in the Roachula Charter School community. Families connected to Lake Otis Elementary deserve transparency regarding the proposal to close the school. What information has changed since your prior vote? Understanding the rationale does not require agreement, but it does require clarity. When decisions are explained, communities can engage honestly even in disagreement. Real Cosula families also deserve transparency about whether Lake Otis remains on the school bond proposal if the school is closed. Real Cosula has repeatedly asked for the long-term facility investment. If the building remains part of the bond strategy, the community, the voters behind me deserve to know how it will be used and m maintained. If it does not, families deserve to understand the reasoning and financial implications. Finally, I speak to you again

090about charter governance and staffing authority. It must be clearly defined in written policy. You had one of your administration talk about how charter schools have the autonomy or the purview to set their budget and follow their own budget. But that is not written anywhere. You have state statutes that require us to hire out of unions that you contract with. Clear policy reduces confusion and strengthens accountability. When difficult decisions are grounded in transparent criteria and written governance, trust follows. When they are not, uncertainty grows. I ask that you clearly explain any changes uh any change circumstances and defines decision-making authority in writing. Thank you and welcome, Mr. Gibson. >> Thank you for your testimony. That completes public comment for this evening. Uh there is written public comment uh attached to our agenda. We'll move to our

091consent agenda carried over from the February 17th meeting. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda as drafted? >> I move to approve the consent agenda as presented. >> Second. >> Seeing no discussion, we'll have a vote on the consent agenda. Miss Sullivan, please. >> Student Representative Madison. Yes, >> member Higgins. >> Yes, >> member Bellamy. Member Lessons. >> Yes. >> Member Hollowman. >> Yes. >> Member Wilson. >> Yes. >> Member Donley. >> Yes. >> President Jacobs. >> Yes. Our consent agenda is adopted by a vote of 7 to zero. We'll move on to action items. Our first item is ASD memorandum number 137. Right sizing. Is there a motion? Member lessons. >> Mr. President, I would move Jacob's lessons amendment number two to memorandum. >> Member lessons. The first motion in order would

092be a motion to approve. >> I move to approve memorandum. >> Okay. Motion made by member lessons, seconded by member Bellamy. Um member lessons. The floor is yours for discussion. And any amendments? >> Thank you. Uh at this time, I would move um the amendment entitled Jacob's Lessons amendment number two to memorandum 137. It reads, "Delete the phrase transition Denali Monaster 6th grade to middle schools from memorandum 137." >> Is there a a second to this amendment? >> I second. >> Okay, great. Um, all right. Member lessons, do you have any discussion in addition to making the amendment? >> Um, yes. This is um this was included by the administration in the right sizing recommendation and when it was initially presented to the board actually I think it was presented in the budget um if

093I'm not mistaken. However, over the past few weeks and especially in recent days um families connected with Denali Monaster have been uh fairly unified have been extremely unified in their opposition to this recommendation. So out of deference to those um families and um after some consultation with um one member of the administration um this is being offered co-sponsored by President Jacobs um to best support those students uh completion of the multi-year monatory cycles. >> Um thank you. I'll join the queue just currently empty um and just indicate that I appreciate uh member lessons drafting and collaborating on this item. I think it's a reasonable accommodation for our right sizing plan and as I understand it it is especially helpful for our monastery program and students. So I'll be voting in support of this amendment. Seeing

094no other discussion, we'll move to a vote. Member Wilson, the floor is yours. >> Just have a a clarifying question. So is by removing this is the intent to keep sixth graders in the Denali Montasauri program or is this >> member lessons >> only temporary? Yes, that the intention would be to retain them in the Denali Monaster program because it is an intentional multi-year cycle of youngers and elders and um students and their families have uh really focused on the fact that in the monastery model um among the elders, sixth graders stand as mentors, co-instructors uh to their younger students and younger students then aspire to be that older uh model and that without that sixth grade component uh something is severely lacking and I think the same holds true for their younger grouping as

095well although um that's not something that's part of this conversation. >> Thank you. I'll add member Wilson to your question that um member lessons and I coordinate with district administration and confirm that they um don't have any large concerns regarding this change. Seeing no other discussion, um Miss Sullivan, can we have a voice vote on um Lessons Jacobs amendment one to ASD memorandum number 137? Apologies. Me lessons Jacobs amendment two to ASD memorandum number 137. Representative Madison. >> Yes. Member Lessons, >> yes. >> Member Higgins, >> yes. >> Member Bellamy, >> yes. >> Member Donley, >> yes. >> Member Wilson, >> yes. >> Member Hollowman, >> yes. >> President Jacobs, >> yes. >> Motion is adopted by vote of 7 to zero. Are there other discussion or amendments? Member Donley. >> Thank you. I'd move

096on page two um to delete the reference to Campbell STEM Elementary School. >> Second. >> Okay. Member Donley. Um please write out that amendment and provide it to Miss Sullivan when you have a moment. We'll wait till you do so. All right. So, there's a motion to and the motion reads a move to delete and Campbell STEM Elementary School from paragraph page two paragraph 2. Motion was made by member Donley, seconded by member Hollowman. Uh, member Donley Okay. The motion uh reads and Campbell STEM Elementary School from page two line two. That's a motion to delete. Uh member Donley, I think the closure of Campbell STEM at this time is particularly inappropriate. um Campbell STEM community had no notice of this until the Friday um before a 3-day weekend and had very little time to

097prepare testimony or even learn about it uh prior to our meeting last week where we accepted public testimony on the subject. uh I think that's really not appropriate um for deciding the closure of a school to have that little opportunity for public uh review and consideration. I continue to remain extremely concerned about the failure to notify the Taku community council of this action. uh they actually had their meeting on Thursday before the Friday of notice was provided and um they didn't have another meeting uh scheduled until after this meeting. So, they were completely preempted from any uh notice or opportunity to actu um counsel to the board regarding the impacts of of this potential closure. And you just give me a second here. Some of the facts about Campbell STEM that make it particularly inappropriate

098to close are is it is the only STEM certified school in the entire state of Alaska. Uh Campbell is actually nationally recognized as a STEM school. Uh Campbell's reading and math test scores and growth are higher than the ASD average and they're higher than any of the four schools that this is recommending their students would attend next year. Campbell has one of the highest attendance rates in the district. I think it's about 90% attendance, which is something to be incredibly proud of. Um, Anchorage voters approved a bond for the remodeling and renovation of Campbell STEM Elementary just recently. And for the past two summers, millions of dollars have already been spent replacing the entire roof on the building that houses Campbell STEM Elementary. It's a high-erforming school. It's got 74% occupancy, which is more than

099most by far most of the schools in the Anchorage School District. Um, so it's a high-erforming, high occupancy, successful school that we're going to do away with. That just seems incredibly illogical to me. uh and the fact that there's been so little appropriate notice provided to the community and to the community council impacted by this make this a really bad idea. Um I feel very strongly that this is not the right step at this time. Campbell STEM is simply not the right school and this is not the right time to be closing it for such a relatively small financial advantage that is going to almost completely disappear in five years. Um the projection for the savings for all three schools after five years is only $154,000. And that doesn't even count the testimony that we

100received tonight about the huge the additional increase in that we're going to have to pay in busing to accomplish this. And so the other factor, you know, that's going to affect that total savings uh projection is the what's going to happen at Eagle Academy with the with their u the number of students there and the impact that's going to have on our budget also. So, we could end up virtually saving nothing by this very dramatic, significant, and damaging closure of a very successful school in our district. I just don't think this is a good plan. Um, I feel confident this is not the right way forward. Um, and so I would hope that the board would delete the closing of Campbell STEM from this memorandum. >> Thank you, Member Donley. Um, I'll enter the queue

101for a question for administration. We've got a couple members in the queue. Um, we heard uh via email and um in a person testimony that one of the challenges associated with um dispersing the Campbell STEM population to multiple different schools would be um concern about the the STEM specific programming. Um I've talked with administration specifically about the certification that sounds like something that's paid for that may offer um acknowledgement of the amazing work that's going on u but doesn't offer additional resources necessarily. And so I guess my my question is one does the certification offer additional resources financial or otherwise? Um and then what do we pay for that certification? And then two is uh what if anything can be done to bring the the amazing work happening at Campbell to the receiving schools? >>

102Mr. Gustoson, can you speak to the potential of receiving schools expanding the STEM? though we've already had one of the receiving schools ask if they could bring STEM into their school. As far as um the certification, it's a Cogna um STEM certified school. So, Cognia is the the accrediting company that accredits like all of our schools. Um so it it's we have a systems of accreditation for all schools but then STEM went above and got the um STEM accreditation um through Cogna. Cogna is a a program that if you looked into our our budgeting we do pay um for Cogna certification and accreditation. Um as far as how much does that cost specifically for the STEM one? I I I don't have that with me tonight. Um but again, we we do have at least

103one school asking to uh take on STEM as one of the receiving schools. >> The figure I had heard um indicated it may be something in the neighborhood of $100,000. >> That's for the systems accreditation for all of the schools. >> Okay. >> That's not for the STEM. >> Understood. Um but it is a cost that the district pays for >> for Yes. >> understood. Okay. U we'll go to member lessons then member Hollivan. >> Thank you. Uh it was all in those same veins and really could the administration speak a bit more to whether um STEM accreditation is something that we could expand more broadly in ASD. That is something that we would be very interested in doing. And we've actually have talked with some of the senior directors of elementary education to to

104talk to other principles about the STEM certification. Um I just got a text from my senior director that's above um Dr. Whit and it's $1,000 every five years that we pay to get that accreditation updated. Um so it's minimal for the actual accreditation payment. Um but we have uh other schools that have been expressing interest in STEM STEM certification wanting to go through um that process. >> Go to member Hullman. >> Um there are two concerns um that really give me pause on this. One is process. We've all watched the process we've gone through in every other case where we've considered closing a neighborhood school and it's been relatively extensive. Um there have been meetings at the schools. There's been evening opportunities for people to turn out um and a number of opportunities to to

105speak to the board to email the board. And because of the of the time crunch, which is not exactly of our making or anyone else's, um, except that the board is having a hard time finding a school they're willing to close. We are simply skipping all that in regards to Campbell Elementary. There's no question that when we've taken the time uh to give people a chance to respond or gone and visited, we we learned things and there simply has not been time for that to happen in the case of Campbell. The the other thing is the program. Um, and I say this as someone that was in schools as a classroom teacher for 16 years. It programs don't just arise in a short period of time. It usually takes a number of people with some

106dedication working over a period of time, often in excess of everything else they were doing to begin with. Um, I don't know what all the steps are involved in becoming an accredited STEM program at at the elementary level, but I'm guessing it's more than filling out a couple of forms and mailing it off to somebody and hoping you get a positive response. It is the norm sadly in this district that as we take districtwide initiatives, we simply pave over really good work that is done at our local buildings rather than recognizing that work and expanding it. Um, if there are other elementary schools that are interested in becoming STEM certified, that's awesome. I would think one of the first things they would do is try to find some time to go to Campbell and see

107what happened and if it's gone um obviously they can't do that. The other thing is it becomes a lesson to anybody that is thinking about it. If you see it erased your incentive to try to do it in your own school is is simply diminished. Um, I I think we have to have a lot of respect for that and for what they're doing. I I'm not saying that it couldn't happen that I would vote to change it, but I would want to see the whole program moved. If indeed saving money on the building is enough to justify closing it, I would want to see a way to try to move the whole program with that plan in place first rather than hoping uh that something is going to happen because unfortunately uh I don't think

108this has been mentioned tonight, but I think everybody's aware of it. This this is just the first in what could be a number of years of reductions. And if this is how they're handled, it will have a chilling effect on people doing the kind of work it takes to have an excellent building. The the excellence in a building takes time and it takes getting the right group of people together to make things happen. I think we've seen that that has happened in all three of these schools and that's what has made the decision so difficult. Um and yet there is the undeniable fact that we have more space in our buildings as an aggregate than we need to operate and teach our students in an effective manner. And I apologize in advance to the administration

109for um not being able to support this, but I think if we are going to do it, we need to to take more time. If there was anything about a hallmark of closing Abbott Loop as a neighborhood school, it was that it was the one we did that year. It was done with a lot of preparation. it was done knowing where students would go and working with those schools to have a positive reception and the feedback from people a year after was surprisingly positive. Um, but I I don't think we're in a position to do all that leg work and make that happen. And so I will not support I will support the amendment and not support closing Campbell. the student representative medicine. >> Yeah. So, I just have a question. I'm just merely curious.

110This is not charged one way or the other. Do we have numbers on what staffing looks like at Cample STEM Elementary School? Dr. Bryant, would you like to answer student representative Madison's technical question? >> Yeah. Through the president, um would Mr. Lang or somebody on the team be able to confirm the number of staff? I think is the question. >> Yeah, there's um some of the hard stuff we don't I don't know would be like the special education and the LL staff because that is budgeted centrally. But as for the um just kind of the gened staff, there's budgeted for next year 10.8 teachers, which includes both classroom and specialists. And then and then there's another seven or so FTE between principles, a halftime counselor, librarian, office admin, BO and then pair of professionals. >>

111Member Bellamy, >> my question really had Thank you. has to do with um the facility itself because not only were we I mean I I I I get that um we did not do this uh process like we did the others um and it caught people off guard but at the same time I understand there are some facility concerns um that people may agree or not agree done because the other recom part of the recommendation is to declare it excess. Can the administration kind of refresh my understanding? >> So to start with um you know a little over a week ago on a Monday night the board directed us to come up with um other options and and we did. Um if you look at this group of schools, Willowrest, Glattuswood, Clatt, Taku, and Campbell,

112um really San Lake, it just had a massive renovation. So their deferred maintenance is less than I mean it's $150,000 probably. Um the other ones, there were two schools that had larger numbers. Clatt a little over 15, Campbell a little over 16. Um but I would tell you that the decision um the criteria we were given was to provide flexibility for the board to make decisions. >> Um you know I don't look at $16.5 million for anyone school as the reason to close a school. There were there were a lot of reasons. If you look at the gaining schools um really Willowest, Glattuswood, and Clatt and and I'll let Sven talk this a little bit in Campbell. It really was we had four schools and about three schools worth of students. So, we looked geographically

113at this group of buildings and and while it's true that Campbell does have the most on deferred maintenance and it is true that there were some challenges this winter that um you know if the school doesn't close, we're certainly going to get after as soon as the snow melts and try to determine um you know what we can do. But it it was a tough call. This was not something where we looked at the facility and said that this one building is the worst building in the district. What we looked at was the group of students. We looked at um how many sections at grade level we could improve at gaining schools. Um the SPDR which which provided flexibility for the board which was a criteria that that we were asked to look at certainly

114gave the board more options to undo some of the other absolutely painful cuts that we put in this budget. And so if the intent is to provide flexibility to the board, this one did provide that best flexibility. Um because I don't I don't think there's anyone in the city that that likes everything we cut in the budget. Um you know it's an amazing school. We've learned over the last you know half a decade plus of trying to close schools that every school is the wrong school for somebody. Um there is no school where we can stand up and feel good about selecting that one school. it is if you have four schools worth of students uh or three schools worth of students and you have four schools and you're trying to meet the other criteria

115um you know yes Campbell Campbell has a little bit more deferred maintenance than clatt um but it that that was not um you know we we still have three schools worth of students. That was that was the goal was to get rid of combo classes and to provide a better um educational experience for students. And I know Sven has looked at some of the grade level sections in combo classes and talked with principles and four or five years ago when I first briefed this board on trying to close schools, the very first thing we talked about was um combo classes and the education level of service that we could provide. Um because clearly um you know we have closed three schools in the last four or five years. Um it it is tough and every

116school's the wrong school to somebody. But if this passes like other other recommendations um you do see those combo classes dropping and gaining schools and it does accomplish especially looking at a PTR of four. um it does provide some level of service better at the gaining schools when you fill them up. And if you look at this, these schools are full. Um but you know, as as as we went through this past year and the year before, it is true that depending on which school was picked, anybody there could say it, but if you close any of these other schools and fill us up, we would be full. It's always true. You could always change the boundaries. We've had those discussions. you can do you can always pick a different school and change the outcome

117of of a school on a list. Um and and really there's never going to be a case where that won't be an accurate statement unless we have another massive earthquake and a building just crumbles. >> Thank you, Member Belling. We'll go to Member Higgins. Thank you. Um, this one is is the most disturbing of all. It's a rush decision. I appreciate uh Mr. Anderson's explanation. I understand that. Let's go back to the issue of right sizing. Was anything considered in regards to right sizing. Earlier the superintendent, and I think it was this year, talked about we're not going for downsizing, we're going for right sizing. There are opportunities here within these schools to expand um the critical need in the in the school district for child care of 8,000 kids. It's affecting uh emergency responders,

118ASD staff, the community as a whole, employment and we've had lot a great presentation on that. the numbers were staggering and we could do things within the schools to go ahead and provide that space without uh and see that the schools are fully utilized and if things change in the future from a from a need standpoint we don't have to build new schools we just have to make changes to it. So, we got some opportunities here uh within the right sizing and the state the legislaturator is telling me that the grant that we have from the federal government over $200 million which they got a lot of it out there can be used to go ahead and pay the cost of providing that space for these schools that have surplus space and we would end

119up fully utilizing the school and we'll be meeting their community need. the mayor's office has asked to have a meeting with us and we've never done it but that's a critical need out there and I'm wondering what happened to the right sizing was any consideration provided in selecting Campbell of how you might be able to utilize some additional space because there's a lot of need in that area for child care was there any discussion or consideration for that >> um through the president member HS I think the most succinct way to to answer your question would be to uh remind the board that we did put forward a robust proposal that included expanding child care in different schools and the board did approve that. Um, of course there were more options we could consider but

120the board seemed satisfied with the proposal we put forward as it relates to child care. really the Campbell STEM conversation more relates to uh the board resolution 25261 substitute version that requested and directed the administration to not only look at the previous proposals but to provide additional schools that offer near-term efficiency options. So that is the deliverable that we provided to the board. I'm raising this question because there's there's when senators are talking to me uh really emphasize you got this money today, you didn't have it yesterday and it can be used for that. This is an opportunity to expand using that and and to do that if we're really focused on that. I think we're looking at downsizing. I've never seen anything where the downsizing has been, you know, this is another alternative. Campbell

121is a great school. I went there the day after this thing got announced. I walked through it. Well, I had to do it actually four days later because it was released on a Friday and Monday was a holiday. It was very impressive. Okay, very impressive. And it it's doing very successful. It reminded me the day after I went by Bear Valley and it was successful and then people went out and they said, "Oh, wait. We didn't see all this." And I feel like that's the case here. This this is just a rush decision, impossible time frame for Mr. Anderson to look at all the different possibilities out there and this one hurts the community and we have other options out there but the biggest issue I'll throw out is we talk about maintenance as an

122issue. We asked the voters to approve a a bond I believe right uh you know for for to fix up the school and part of the explanation of picking the school is we can give that to someone else and take it away from that location. We asked for their feedback and their support financially to do this and they gave it to us and I feel like we will be pulling back reneggging on that that's going to hurt us in the future um when we go out there and ask for money and say trust us because it just doesn't measure up. So I I I strongly urge this one was a rushed decision. I don't blame the administration when you have a very short period of time, but there are some other issues out there with

123this and this would be a rush decision, long-term consequences, and I think it would be bad for kids and bad for the community. Thank you. >> Thank you. We'll go to Member Wilson. >> Just had a a clarification or asking for clarification. I just heard from um member Higgins and this is why I'm clarifying. Did I hear that He said that there is more money available to us. Is can we clarify if because I would love to have more money available to us. >> Certainly. >> I believe member Higgins raised a $200 million figure. Do you have any recollection of that, Mr. Anderson? >> Yes, I I did speak about that at the last work session. Um we we are building proposals for grants. It's the the rural health um transformation initiative. Um, you know,

124we started by reading the the first document the state put out was how they were going to look at locations around the state and how they were going to utilize these funds if they got the grant, which which it looks like we're good. Um it mentioned it's a 88 page document so really read it on a weekend but in the first 10 or 12 pages it probably mentioned that Anchorage is the one and only city in the state that is not considered rural. So, our grants development officer um she's phenomenal as you all know um spent a lot of time with the state and others um to find pathways where we could show linkages and ties to how what we do could um clearly be linked to um areas outside Anchorage and that's what we're

125building right now. So, we've got a couple proposals um that are getting really close. Um once they do, of course, we'll we'll be able to talk about that more. And then once we get those, we'll we'll continue to look for other paths, but uh you know, you never know with grant money if you're going to get it or or not. For one, um we know that the state didn't prioritize Anchorage, but we believe that what has been written is strong enough to get across the finish line. Um and and of course, we will continue to look at at this potential Member Wilson, you have a followup. >> I do have a followup. I'm just concerned about um counting our money before we have it in this regard because we we lost significant $15 million grant

126this year that we weren't expecting to lose. And so I'm I'm concerned about adding money into this budget when we do not actually have it in our pockets. >> Um I'll join the queue for um comment that I actually heard at a community council meeting. Um I heard last year um during our closure process and that I've heard tonight. Um I am so incredibly grateful for every ASD educator that makes magic happen in classrooms across the district. Um the outcomes which truly are amazing that happen in our buildings at Fire Lake, at Lake Otis and at Campbell STEM um are impressive and I think a testament to the students, the families and the educators um that reside in that that area and have the students attend that that program. I hope a future board chooses

127not to target um programs that don't have standardized high standardized testing scores, um have lackluster attendance rates, have higher [snorts] than average suspension rates. um the underlying logic of choosing a a program for those reasons is deeply disturbing to me. Um Anchorage is stratified um and that data bears out in who attends what school where our economically disadvantaged students live. where our students u from bipok families reside and attend. And we know from our data that certain subgroups don't test as well as others. We know that certain subgroups have um different attendance data. And I I can't personally get behind an initiative that were to target closures based on academic outcomes. I hope that um similar to Abbott Loop Elementary and other programs that have chosen been chosen by the district to relocate that those

128students those educators transfer to a new location and continue the amazing work and collaboration and learning that happened in a particular building. Um, I think culture is real and it can be um an adjustment. But I don't I personally attribute the um academic outcomes in our buildings, not to the building itself, but to the leadership of the building, to the educators, to the students and the parents. And so that will always be my personal northstar. Um, and I I hope the administration is never directed to identify buildings for closure based on academic outcomes. I don't want to see what that looks like. >> We'll go to member Donley. You have your >> um I just wanted to clarify the answer to member Bellamy's question about deferred maintenance. Does how does Campbell STEM compare to other

129schools in the entire district? I mean, my understanding was that they're very normal in the amount of deferred maintenance they have at this point in time or maybe even less than the average. So, of of this group of schools, because when you're consolidating schools, you look for groups of schools that are relatively close together. So you can um try to find how to fit those students and those special programs into the least number of schools. But to maximize them, um there is no average school need. If you look at Inlet View, it's probably $50. If you look at San Lake, it's like $154,000. Um if you look at Bartlett, it needs about $72 million. It's really not a fair comparison to say what the average is because they're they're really spread out. And I did

130misspeak. I I said clatt was 15.2, but we're getting ready to close the secure vestibule, which was about 3.2ish from last summer. So, actually that one will drop down to about 12 million. Um, but it all of our old schools need need love, right? And you can look around the district and it's not unusual to see a school that needs 16 to 19 million. And that's because we have kept them off the list for so long that now you finally have to do it. It doesn't make it a bad building. It's completely safe. It doesn't make anything wrong. Um, but of these schools, Campbell Elementary does have the most deferred maintenance, but if we had adequate state funding if because we we all know small schools have some have pros and cons, but the pros

131only happen if the state provides the funding to be able to resource those schools and and we know that absolutely with a $90 million deficit that didn't happen. So, I I would shy away from trying to pick a school purely off of deferred maintenance unless it's got some structural issue that would require um that school to be demoed. In this group, it is the highest, but that doesn't mean it's a bad school, a bad community, or a bad program. It's just hasn't seen any love for a while. >> And I understand that point of view. Um, but I've been advised by members of the community that Campbell STEM's current deferred maintenance is not extraordinary in any way and might be slightly less than what the citywide average is. And it's just one factor. I mean,

132obviously I agree with you that it shouldn't be the only factor. Um, but I was just wanting to identify that factor. you know, with $1.5 billion dollars of deferred maintenance, we had 172 million back in 2010. Um, and and when bond debt reimbursement went away, um, we kept making our bonds every year because now the taxpayers were paying 100% instead of 30 or 40% and we kept them below uh, bond debt payoff every year. And that was intentional to try to help out the Anchorage community. The reality when you get to $1.5 billion is that even if money rained down from the skies, there's not enough construction people. There's not enough maintenance personnel to to even really chip away at 1.5 billion. Um so we do the best that we can and try to extend

133the life um to until a time when the state can prioritize um these kind of funds. But the only real way to eliminate excessive growth of long-term deferred maintenance is to is to take some facilities offline because over the course of 30 or 40 years, a building is going to cost you at elementary 30 to $40 million um almost replacement value at some point. This building's 50 plus years old. It needs love. It doesn't mean it's done anything wrong. Um it is it is the highest of this group though and and in three and a half days you you can't do a district-wide thorough assessment of of 91 buildings. You you can't. So we took this group again, three schools worth of kids in four schools and we narrowed down the focus and and you

134know typically when the board directs us to do something we comply and this is what we came up with. I'm not seeing any other discussion. Oh, member Higgins. Thank you. Um I I got to address the issue a little bit on the finance just to clear this up because we keep hearing it. We got a $90 million deficit, but I was in Juno. I was only one that went there. I paid for it myself. I always emphasize that. And what I heard is that there is some money out there that they think can come our way. I've talked to the head of the of the House Finance and and Senate and had a good discussion, a general view. They want to make sure that whatever we they give us, they want don't they do not

135want the pe the uh uh pupil teacher ratio to go up. They want to be dedicated to that. It would uh cost about 30 billion because they said that's what our superintendent told them and their response was to me and it made it sound like they did the others that that they think that's probably a doable thing they can do. They know they need to do more but they can do it next year. new governor, new day, new changes. So the idea that we're going to be 90 year this year in 40 and in 50 whatever it is, all of that is subject to change and and so u just the the doomsday approach we are at a doomsday point. I don't want to say we aren't, but the idea that there will be nothing

136and we should count on nothing. There is evidence because I've got it and they and from them they've talked to the superintendent in regards to it that we have some hope for some additional funding there for to keep the PTR from going way up. uh and if it does it doesn't make it go up that takes off some pressure on some of this as well because the class sizes uh consolidations and all something that that will not happen next year if it comes out that way and if we get the public support uh in Anchorage it's going to make a difference so somewhere I just don't want this particular one Campbell uh being added to that in a rush situation uh very little time to look at all the other schools and locations within Um,

137I don't think anybody walked through it, much like they did in Bear Valley and other places. This one, if it had more time, I don't think it would have been chosen, but it definitely isn't the process we would like to see because it was so rushed and it's brand new. I think it's a disservice to the community and I think the fact that they voted funds to go ahead and address the maintenance issues should not be held against them that it hasn't been done yet. Thank you. I'm going to get into the queue to um give Dr. Bryan an opportunity to um speak because he was mentioned by name. Um I also want to articulate um I appreciate member Higgins optimism. Um where the state is going to to get 30 million um to add

138to their $ 1.5 billion structural deficit in their operating budget is an answer I really am looking forward to hearing. um the state doesn't have that answer right now and um and they don't have the resources to make that a reality. Um I I hope they do and I'll continue to advocate strongly for them to do so, but it really will involve a long-term sustainable fiscal plan and u addressing new revenue as well as um a serious look at how we choose to to fund government in our state. Uh with that said, Dr. Brian, I think a couple times it's been mentioned that um you provided a figure of $30 million to the legislature, something we might need or something we can um deal with or expect. Can you share any insight as to how

139you know about a $30 million allocation the legislature intends on presenting to us? >> Yeah, sure. Through the president, uh member Higgins and I are surely invested in speaking with our legislators and sharing our financial position, but I do have a different account from what was shared. So, I'd like to clarify that $30 million figure on the record. So, actually, I had never heard the $30 million figure until I had my first briefing with the legisl with the Anchorage Caucus um shortly after the budget proposal was made public. And as we all know, the budget proposal that's before us today uh is extremely severe. It's equivalent to a $700 cut per student. They were extremely alarmed. And I didn't actually say the words, "What does ASD need?" It was actually the opposite. The legislators were

140desperate to know what could ASD do if we were to receive approximately $30 million. It was purely hypothetical. It came from one specific legislature. But I've seen zero evidence that there is a quorum amongst the legislature that would result in a $30 million appropriation. and zero legislators have indicated to me that even a permanent BSA increases even on the table. So the $30 million that would was discussed came from a legislator. But again, there's no evidence that there was support from any colleagues. And every time the $30 million has come up since, it's usually in the context of one-time funding. The other way in which I've heard the term $30 million, and maybe member lessons can correct me on this, but I believe that we would actually need $90 million and close to $30 million

141on top of that just to get to the legislaturator's class size targets. So, we need extraordinarily more dollars than simply 30 million. So, I want to make sure that the public's aware in terms of the trade-offs. $30 million wouldn't get us close to where we need to be to get out of this deficit, let alone the next two. And that's the other time that I've heard the term $30 million come up because $30 million is actually what our structural deficit is projected to be two fiscal years from now and we have an additional $40 million deficit going into the next fiscal year. So even once this $90 million structural deficit is closed, the work begins to find $40 million on top of that and $30 million on top of that. So, it's very important that

142we understand the long-term financial trajectory of public education and specifically as it relates to the Anchor School District. So, again, I think um member Higgins and I are on the same page in terms of wanting to be aligned with our legislators perspectives and and what they're thinking, but the context in which that figure was shared is very different from me. And perhaps other members have had individual experiences, but my individual experience suggests that there's zero support for a permanent increase in education. and I welcome legislators to correct me if I'm mistaken in my assessment. >> Member Les. >> Yeah, thank you. I would just direct um our body and the community back to the February 3rd briefing where the administration calculated that to meet the state's own standards for target class sizes, we need another

143341 teachers and 46.5 million. and to provide adequate class sizes courtesy of our Picass study. That's where we need um more than 700 educators and uh roughly $95 million. So, we are a long ways from there. And um if we're talking about speaking with legislators, I'll share publicly um I reached out to a handful of them Wednesday night. I was done with dinner and helping clean up and I just was reflecting on our meeting that extended until Tuesday night. I mean until midnight on Tuesday. Losing track of time here. And I shared that I have never and the decade that I've paid attention to the Anchorage School Board on that side of the dis. I've sat up here and I've testified and in the time the four and a half years that I've spent on

144this side of the dis I have never seen our community more broken. Never. And do you know what I saw in the newspaper earlier this week? Nothing. I saw nothing. There is no response coming from Juno. There are no horses. There are no white horses with cowboys on them coming to rescue us. We are all devastated together. And as a mom, as a community member, as a board member, I am beyond frustrated. I saw February coming in May. I spent this summer being really grumpy on hikes with friends and families. I was thinking about February. I was at school events this fall. I was thinking about February and now it's February and we do not have a state plan to fund our schools which is why I'm deeply grateful that there is a lawsuit against

145the state to fulfill its constitutionally mandated obligations so that all students have the opportunity to attain state standards. We have $72 million more to cut next year and the year after that. This is not a place I wanted to ever be as a member of the Anchorage School Board. >> It felt really good to say that out loud. >> Felt good to hear it. Member Lessons. Um, we'll go to Member Higgins. >> Um, I just want to uh jump in here with just a couple comments. When I was meeting with the legislators, a number of them said, "How come they're not yelling at us? you're not doing any of it. And that was an interesting, you know, coming from the legislature. But the other ones that most interested, the the public doesn't seem to be

146telling them what they want. They seem to be quiet and they think that the public has already resolved that they that they can't do a difference with the legislature they got. I hope that's not the case, but they need to be inundated. It's the best hope I can tell you. But it is disturbing that the legislature says it's us and they think the public is just out of it. But they decide ultimately who's on the board, who's in the legislature, who's the governor, and that's going to make the difference. And that's the best we can hope for. Thank you. >> Okay. [clears throat] Um, we've we've deviated from our agenda item, but I've allowed it because it's been good discussion. Um, returning to the agenda item and then maybe putting a bow on this topic

147since I don't see anyone else in the queue. Um, you know, I I don't remember exactly what member Hollowman said, but um I I thought I took away um that, you know, the with a different process, maybe we got to a different result, maybe we got to the same result. Um I don't dispute that's true. What I what I do feel strongly is that um if If if our board toured all ASD programs together, we would see that there is amazing things happening in every single school that the district operates. And that includes charter and optional programs. It includes brick andmortar neighborhood schools. It includes our special programs. Um, I I don't see a scenario where uh the district identifies a building for closure and the students and the educators and the families in that

148program say, you know, there's not a ton here that's special. We'll probably be fine if you um were to relocate us somewhere else. And so I hope the board um and future boards recognize that that that scenario doesn't exist. And so I wasn't surprised to hear about the amazing things happening at Campbell STEM and and wasn't surprised to read the numerous comments about the amazing things happening at Fire Lake and at Lake Otis. Um I've seen them via some of my own students that I've fostered over the years. Uh I appreciate the discussion and I I don't know that administration could have done a better job identifying programs and so um that's where I land I think and with that said I don't see any other discussion so Miss Sullivan the voice vote please will

149be voting on the for those who don't recall uh It's an amendment by member Donley to delete an Kimbell STEM Elementary School from the memo 137. So a yes vote would delete that language and a no vote would keep the language in. >> Student representative medicine. >> Yes. >> Member Donley. >> Yes. >> Member Higgins. >> Yes. Member Bellamy. >> No. >> Member Hullerman. >> Yes. >> Member Wilson. >> No. >> Member Lessons? >> No. >> President Jacobs? >> No. >> That motion fails by a vote of three to four. We've had a board member ask for a fivem minute recess for a comfort break. We will take that now. We'll call our meeting back to order. The time is 9:27 p.m. Member Donley, I understand you have another amendment. Yeah. My second amendment would

150um delete on page two, line one, quote, Lake Otis Elementary in parentheses, repurpose offer to Rushula Charter School. Unquote. >> Second. >> All right. And due to a technical challenge, the amendment won't be displayed on the screen. Um, can you repeat that one more time just so we have it from the public? Member Donley, >> page two, [clears throat] line, excuse me, line one, delete the language, Lake Otis Elementary School, parenthesy, repurpose offered to Rikushula Charter School unsy. >> Okay. The motion for members would be effectively to remove Lake Otis from the right sizing proposal. Me member Donley, you have comments. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I think the board made the right decision back in November when we voted against closing Lake Otis. Um, I think there were a lot of things wrong

151with the plan that was put forth at that time for how to deal with the closure. And I would actually commend the administration for coming back with a better plan than we were we were presented with in November. I think there have been improvements. Uh particularly concerned at the time of the moving of of some special students from from Cassum all the way across town. But even with that improvement on this plan, I think the notice issue is still very very unfair. um the time that was uh given to this community to address to re this re-examination of the closure that we voted against back in November um has not been sufficient. Uh I continue to believe it's a violation of municipal law. The failure to notify the community council, in this case it was

152the Campbell Park Community Council, I believe, and it might have been Rogers Park. Um um Lake Otis is a diverse fullervice school where all students receive free meals and families in need of additional food support get it. Uh students benefit from a full-time counselor, mental health clinician, and programs such as Title 4 indigenous education, migrant education, and 21st century afterchool learning. Uh many students were already reszoned to Lake Otis this year, and the closure would and some children would attend their third school in three years and that undermines stability, trust and relationships. But even more significant I think is the notice the failure of notice here of appropriate notice that um can't be overcome even by arguments about the merits of savings which are very debatable and we know disappear virtually after five years or

153the merits of of why this particular individual school is being chosen. I think the notice requirements trump all that and the failure to fully notify or fairly notify the community of this proposal. Thank you. Is there other discussion from board members? Seeing none, we member Higgins, I see your hand. >> Yeah. Oops. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, you know, the board last time voted six to1 not to close this and then we end up with a I'm sorry, a finance committee where the goal of president is to close the cluster of schools. President the the and I appreciate this. Uh, the superintendent cautioned that the public doesn't really support this. This one is one that brought out a lot of emotional feelings in it. It really does. You're talking to the to the to the

154title one school for the last 20 years. We're talking about schools that are this school is uh not underutilized as presented. We've already had discussion with the uh chief operating officer before that the the the figures on utilization with the state are not reliable because it's not right. In this case, it's way off because when you got 32 kids in five classrooms because they're so high risk to other kids, this school is set up and is heavily used with special ed and all the other programs that are in here. You're going to the kids the the staff I mean the parents that have the biggest difficulty in getting to different schools that are further different locations are going to be those in lower income. We've already had that discussion in many other cases before, but

155it's it's out there. These are kids that are vulnerable. These are kids that moving them out disadvantages the families that connections. We know that the families engage with the school is a big big deal. Uh academically, it makes a big difference. If we're going to close schools and and say, "Oh, money or we might do this or do that." We you got to recognize we're not closing schools to say, "Oh, we close schools." We should be doing it because we're going to be a to better utilize resources and it's going to get the kids better academic outcomes. This is one that is just the opposite. I think there is no question out there in my mind that this one is selecting a high need title one school where kids are going to be disadvantaged. Now

156the the the goal here is it's it multiplies. In order to do this you have to almost overload to the elementary. You're going to go up to 99% after you force out Monasoy. Now, Monasoy is an optional program for a title one school. We said we're going to expand opportunities that way and you're going to take it away. So, you're going to disadvantage two optional two schools here. But that title one school with with Lake Otis, it has been it it is an important school for those for those parents, for the kids. There's a high degree of connection. You go out there, you can't help but feel and see what's going on. I visited that school recently because they said and I showed up and they had a potluck going and a group of kids

157came and sang. I love love loved it. It was it there there was a lot of pride out there when you go through it. This is a devastating decision and I'll go one step further. We we got the bond out there to get additional money to improve it. Right. We we we're promoting it that we're going to help this neighborhood title one school to get fixed. you're proposing we put we that's on the bond not going to be changed but we're just kidding because now we're going to select the Wilsha uh school to go in there they get the benefits will benefit Wila is doing fine uh they've got 15% lower income as I understand while this one's over 80 uh they've got you know grant from the German government they got all this other

158stuff and they're in a safe school right now a safe school Abbott Loop that school was built to withhold. There's going to be changes that need to do, but it's not an unreasonable amount of changes within that. And I know that part of this plan is if we move um the the school Wila in there, we can level um uh Abbott Loop. And that was always promoted by, you know, administration and we heard different people talk about it until I talked to the mayor's office and they said, "We're not asking for it." So now I go where is it coming from? It came from two assembly people that don't that does not represent that assembly and the assembly people in that area not supportive of this. So that's all that putting that out there doesn't

159make sense. If we're going to close a school like Abbott Loop then take administration and put it there because administration shouldn't be renting a building if we can do something different. Makes sense to me but I don't think it's good for kids. And if it's not good for kids I don't want to do it. If we don't do this, then we won't be disenfranchising TUDA or causing it to be larger than what it should be. 99%. Give me a break. First of all, we know the numbers are not right from the state, but that's so close to busting it. It's not a good number, is it? And it's because it's hard to reassign those the the highintensity special needs kids with without some impact there. is going to have impact in the neighborhood schools. If

160the one school not to pick this one is was a 6 to one don't move it. What has happened since then? What what communications have taken place which are going to be known later resulted in this coming forward again? So it's it's one of the cluster of schools to be cut. I don't like it. I I I find it very objectionable and I hope that we'll listen to the Inlet View community, the TUDA elementary community monastery and there are issues there with that. It's hard to have a trained staff. It's hard to have the other but you've got a heavy commitment of parents and you're going to pull it right out from under them. I I'm strongly requesting not to do this and I'm I'm not going to ask the board uh school board uh

161the the school representative to the school board do her last presentation which I thought should have been it's it justifies a scholarship. I'm telling you it's so good realizing firsthand how this would impact the family with her experiences. I'm telling you it this one's this one's a tearjerker for me because this school doesn't deserve to be cut and if we change from a 61 vote to where we are not doing it we need to look at what has taken place and and communications that is causing that change because I think that's a fundamental breakdown on school board uh and I don't want to go there but we will if we have to because this is just it's just inappropriate. Thank you. >> Member Les. >> Um, yeah, I had a maybe a technical question for

162the administration. We've this is a school where the recommendation is to have it be repurposed for use by a charter school. And I guess my question is, let's say it's 12, 15, 18 years down the line and the anchorage of, I don't know, 20 40 whatever that makes it is thriving. It is booming in population for all sorts of reasons. Is there a world in which a renovated Lake Otis building that taxpayers successfully um you know approve a bond for, we do the work, there's a new playground, there's lights, there's all of the things that need to go into upgrading Lake Otis to where it needs to be. could not to say this to destabilize charter schools, but does the school district, does the school board have the right at some point in the future

163to say, "Actually, we need this school back or any school that's been given to a charter uh for neighborhood students. Is there is there a procedure? I mean, I'm assuming that's never happened." >> You you are correct that it hasn't happened. Um, it certainly could. I would I would guess if you're looking down 10 to 15 years that we would also look at other options such as building other elementary schools to two levels. Um, there are a lot of different options, you know, no no board, their charter does not say ASD will provide a building. It doesn't. So, I mean, it's a hypothetical question at this point, but um the school board in the future um would have a number of options to include um having them move out and giving them an advanced notice

164to make that possible. >> But the dis Thank you. But the district would itself retain management over that building. It is an Anchorage School District facility. whatever happens. >> Every building and every square inch of property is owned by the municipality and we are the property managers. They are a tenant for the period of time that the board wishes them to be a tenant. >> A followup um Mr. Anderson on that line of inquiry. Um do we have other ways to address um if I think it would take first our state getting its fiscal house in order and then um things like offering a defined benefit for educators and public employees. A whole host of things would have to happen for this to occur. Um not just like the Willow project to come online. Um

165but in that world where we see a reverse of net out migration, do we have other options to address capacity needs in this area of the municipality? >> We have a pretty large plot of land in West Park. Um it it actually would hold a a very large middle school and it's currently dormant. We also have um land that Eklutna has platted for us um for some future development someday um out in the Eagle River Chukiak area. Um you know, we we recently built a a building um that holds more students than than the old building that it's replacing. I mean, there's so many options in a hypothetical world. Thank you. We'll go to member Halman. >> Um through the chair to the administration, would did the Rilka APC have a response to this proposal?

166>> They did send a letter to the board back in November saying that they wish to accept um that building if it were offered to them. At this point, we have not offered it to them. it's merely part of a plan. And frankly, just like back in November, um they could always say no. I mean, they have that choice. The APC would have to accept it with the terms that we put in the agreement. >> Seeing member Donley, >> thank you. Um, following up on member Lesson's question, one of the concerns about replacing Lake Otis with a language immersion school is it becomes unsuitable for many students in that neighborhood to actually have that as an option because if they haven't been involved with that language immersion school since kindergarten in grade 1, they can't

167just go there in third grade or fourth grade. So, um, that's a a a significant concern that I have with placing an immersion school inside a a neighborhood school, um, as this plan proposes to do. >> Uh, member less, >> thanks. Um, this is, I think, something that's in, this is not something, this is something that's incredibly hard to grapple with. Um, as members of the board, members of the public, and members of the administration know all too well, um, I've repeatedly voted to retain neighborhood schools really in their condition to the greatest extent possible over the past few years. Um, I think I supported the Avaloop closure, but I'm not sure I voted for any other closures. I have really been focused since I joined this board, since my very first finance committee meeting

168in August of 2021 when our CFO and director of OM um showed a chart with our uh looming fiscal cliff. um that that chart has stayed with me for 4 and a half years or so. Um I've been focused on advocating for the funding streams that would surface to allow all children wherever they were to have the opportunities they need to reach their potential. Um, and back in November, I I voted, and I think I used the word respectfully, uh, to disagree with the administration's recommendation to close Lake Otis, but the desperation is real. We cannot meet all of our students needs at this point in time with the budget that we've been given, with the footprint that we have, and the way that our students are spread out. And I'll be honest in even

169more layers. When we passed that resolution a week and a half ago, two weeks ago, I was hoping Lake Otis wouldn't be on it. I was hoping that there would be another school. I created a list of about 22. I played Tetris with two dozen schools. Quite frankly, if the administration had taken my recommendation, we'd have seven times the number of people that are here tonight because that would have been a lot of movement for a lot of families. Um, this is not a vote that I will take lightly. It's not a vote that I have taken lightly in the past. It is with the utmost regard for our educators, for our students, for our community as a whole. One of the things that has been at the forefront of my mind since um over

170the winter really, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. And as distasteful as I find these votes, as much as I would not like to be taking them, I I'm going to have to support to close Lake Otis at this point today. And I'm going to attribute it to lack of progress from Juno. >> Member Holland. >> Um I appreciate much what member lessons has to say and this is uh this this is a real difficult thing and I think as was alluded to earlier when you look at any one school you have a hard time finding a reason to close it. But when you step back and you try to look at areas and and bigger groups of buildings and groups of students, um that's really what you have to think

171of. Um one of the the early suggestions actually was to close as a neighborhood school even though it was close to full capacity. But the way that would have worked is one group of students in one neighborhood would have all gone together to another building and another group of students in another neighborhood that wasn't close to them would wind up going to a different building that was actually closer to their house. So even though it was a full school, the the logic of that particular building made a great deal of sense to me. Even though rightfully so, the staff in that building were startled that that a pretty crowded school would be on be up for consideration. Lake Otis is a little bit different and like member lessons, I voted to keep it open in

172the fall. What will be different next fall is there won't be as many staff. Um it it would be reasonable to think that it will lose at least one staff member. It and I I think things are awfully thin right now as they are. If we do consolidate, it gives the district the ability to group students better, more efficiently. uh which may sound administrative but but what it means is the kind of supports and services that some students need are available more of the time. Um they're available they're more likely to be available as they're needed and not say on a Tuesday afternoon or or you know like just one or two times a week. So, I uh have that same feeling that unfortunately I I think we made a good call in the fall.

173I think for the future of the district given the potential funding, the right call now is to go ahead and follow through um with these steps in terms of getting as many ASD students on into safe buildings um that that don't have high maintenance needs and grouping our neighborhood school students together uh in an effort in the long term to do a better job. See no other discussion of Sullivan. The voice vote, please. >> Student Representative Madison. >> Sorry. For board members, just to reiterate this vote is to a motion to delete language. And so if you would like the language deleted, so if you would like Leotus removed from the consolidation proposal, you would vote yes. If you uh would not like it removed and would like it to remain in the consolidation proposal,

174you would vote no. Student Representative Madison, >> no. >> Member Donley, >> yes. >> Member Lessons, >> no. >> Member Hollowman, >> no. >> Member Higgins, >> yes. >> Member Bellamy, >> no. >> Member Wilson, >> no. >> President Jacobs, >> no. That amendment fails by a vote of two to five. Uh member Donley Anderson, you have one more amendment. >> Yes, Mr. President. Um um this next amendment would be similar to the other two, but it spec specifically relates to Fire Lake and it would uh remove Fire Lake from the list of schools to be closed. Um, so I would move that on PA the language on page one on the last line that reads Fire Lake Elementary School repurpose offered to Eagle Academy Charter School in parenthesy be deleted. Seeing no second, that

175amendment fails. >> Oh, second. I'm sorry. >> Um, motion was made by member Donley, second by member Higgins. Member Donley, your comments. >> Thank you. Um, my comments are similar to the decision- making [clears throat] process from last November. Um, this particular school is right next to a huge new housing development that that seems to be ready to progress. Um, I think we're going to need the space that's in that school for this uh additional housing that's projected to go in there um in addition to the unique special programs that Fire Lake offers to its students. Thank you. Seeing no comments, Miss Sullivan, the voice vote, please. >> I'm sorry. Yes, >> member Higgins, you have comments? >> Yeah. Uh, thank you very much. The issue here is from a finance standpoint, this is one

176way you're going to lose money. Um, you know, we know that they've got 100 names on the on the on the backup list. They got more names. I think they can add 150. So, it's uh $1.5 million that will be transferred to them. The biggest concern here is that, you know, our charter schools don't do uh special ed programs. We have those special ed programs in there that will be displaced uh uh because they're not going to pick it up just like Wiler is not going to be picking up any of the special ed programs at Lake Otis. And so, this one's going to cost money immediately. So, critical $4 million plus you gave it up. uh if you want to look at what that would do and then go beyond it. I like Eagle

177Academy as charter school. A lot of ways uh it does get good academic results. There's a lot of benefits to it, but at a time of finances reminds me of oceans being delayed or other issues. This one's a costly one. And so we're going to be cutting some things that we don't have to cut financially because of this one. Um and um and I agree with u member Donley. I heard from uh the um uh native community that they've already put in requests for zoning for approval for platting for about 150 homes. They're looking at 1,500 homes and then they're going beyond that. It's a thousands of homes on land that's that's out there that they own and they're going to be going look at these split in this in the near future. and it

178further consistent with the with the military plans that may or may not be there. I heard something, but I don't have any reliability to that. But I just see this as one of the financial issues once again of special ed. Um, you know, there are pros and cons to every decision. Uh, but I'm looking at the their immediate proximity to those special eds in those programs. So, I'm not I'm going to support the request. Thank you, >> Member Higgins. I just um I'm compelled to clarify something that was said on record. Dr. Brian, is it accurate? I'm going to try to use the words from the previous speaker that charter schools don't do special ed programs. >> Mr. Gusson, um would you or Miss Harris be able to speak to the actual mechanics for special

179education delivery in a charter school context, please? We're going to be joined by Miss Harris, our director of choice programs. Y >> good evening. Robin Harris, um senior director of choice schools charter and alternative. Um through the board, through the chair, uh special education students are they apply in the lottery just as any other students um due to our AR. Um all students are accepted in that lottery and then teams get together to talk about what the best um least restrictive environment for the student is and what their services needs are and in most cases students are um eligible to attend the charter schools. >> Thank you Miss Harris. Seeing no other discussion on the voice please. >> May I respond to that please? Member Higgins, >> the special educa, all all schools have to

180accommodate requests for special education and they're allowed to go there. We don't have any special education programs, I don't think, like SB, SBBS or any of the other programs like that. Uh, and I don't see that going there, but that's we pick a site, we put it. We don't have any out like that for the um charter schools. And I'm going to make a request in to get the number of IEPs by school, including charter schools. Um um I'll get that in sometime later today or tomorrow. Thank you. >> Thank you, Member Higgins. Seeing no other discussion, Miss Sullivan, the voice vote, please. Again, for members, um this is a motion to delete language from the right sizing plan. So, if you would like to remove Fire Lake Elementary School from the right sizing plan,

181you would uh vote yes. If not, you would vote no. Student Representative Madison, >> no. >> Member Lessons, >> no. >> Member Bellamy, >> no. >> Member Wilson, >> no. >> Member Hollowman, >> no. >> Member Higgins, >> yes. >> Member Donley, >> yes. >> President Jacobs, >> no. >> Uh, that motion fails by a vote of two to five. Are there other motions on ASD memorandum number 137? Other points of discussion? Member Donley? Thank you. Um earlier there was a mention that some unidentified attorney had offered an unidentified opinion that it was legal to proceed this way at this time without the notice that that that I've suggested is necessary. Of course, that's not just hearsay. That's double hearsay with an opinion that we don't know what the question that they actually responded to

182was. Um, that's incredibly weak. Um, but let's look at something that's not hearsay. Let's let's look at Anchorage Ordinance 21320H named notice. And subsection 3 requires a 21day notice to community councils for a whole litany of things, a long list, many of which are directly impacted by the existence of a school in a neighborhood. But even more concerning, if you go down to subsection B 6B, and I'm going to read some of this to the to here. Um in subsection B it it tries to identify what types of parcels are subject to this notice. If the subject parcel is a branch public facility that serves a specific delineated area, that's the community council, such as a, now here it comes, gang, public school or fire station, then any community council whose boundaries lie within the

183delineated area of service of a branch public facility shall receive written notice, and it's required to be 21 days in advance. This motion is illegal and it should not be passed. >> Thank you, Member Donley. Um, Dr. Brian, would you care to respond? >> Member Dunley, I I'll start off by saying actually the input I got was in direct response to your referencing that ordinance at the previous school board meeting and members of the audience let me know that the way that you're portraying this ordinance is actually not applicable to school closures. I defer to the board if additional written guidance would be helpful to make your decision tonight. >> Member lessons. >> I will hold my comment for the moment. >> I don't see any other members. >> Yes, I do. Excuse me. Can

184I jump in here for a second? I apologize. >> Yeah. I I want to um uh recommend we remove the boundary changes for Ali um uh that's being requested. They have uh of course the vast majority of their students are French emerging and they have some that are not uh within the neighborhood area and uh it has been working. There are some the justification here is that they want to move those kids to another school and when doing it they're going to change the busing system. So with 300 kids, some most of them are located in those neighborhoods will lose the busing. They're going to have they're either going to have to find some other way to go there or they're going to have to switch to a non-emersion program and we're cutting it and

185the entire school there and and the parents are rightly upset that this decision is being made and they're also questioning what's the goal. This one doesn't fall into the right sizing type category. It's a change that is in the future. Will this make a difference? They think the population for the French program will go down because of this and there may be some other motivations. I don't know what the what the issue will be. But switching that bus to go to that school. Parents in that if they didn't want to go to that school, they could do that just like parents who want to go to the French can go would have to do that in the future. But the but the numbers don't support it. moving a limited number of kids and disenfranchising so

186many parents with the busing issue um creates a serious problem and we've gotten emails talking about what they can't how they can do it and they can't do it. Um, I just I would just strongly request that this is not a in the same category as the other request and it's going to hurt the schools of attendance and it's it's just isn't necessary activity there. It's always easier to have all them move someplace else, but you're going to be damaging the French emerging program and hurting those families. Thank you. >> Thank you, Member Higgins. Member Les. Yeah, thank you. At this point in time, I wanted to raise Mini code 1.15.060.2. In light of memo 137's recommendation to reszone Ali, Hans Shoe, and service to Omali, Golden View, and South, I need to declare a

187potential conflict of interest. Uh, specifically that the zoning for my home is in the middle of that. It would be affected by alli related reasonzoning recommendations made in memo 137. But I would also further offer that uh my two children because of our life circumstances do not have not do not and likely will not attend any of the five schools which would be impacted by the administration's recommendation given their age and programmatic uh enrollment. Um so um I I don't believe that my interest in my home would prevent me from placing the public interest on official action before the body uh before above my private interest. I would defer to the president for that uh determination. >> Thank you, member lessons, for declaring a conflict. It's my ruling. You do not have a a conflict

188of uh interest and um I appreciate you raising it. This um decision is subject to an appeal of the ruling of the chair. If any board member wishes to appeal my ruling that member lessons does not have a conflict, feel free to do so now. Hearing and seeing none and seeing no other discussion on the underlying uh memorandum ASD memorandum number 137. Um can we have a voice vote please? >> Again the the motion the underlying motion is to adopt ASD memorandum number 137 as amended. >> Member Hullman. No >> member Lessons. >> Yes. >> Member Bellamy. Member Donley. >> No. >> Member Higgins. >> No. >> Member Wilson. >> Yes. >> President Jacobs. >> Yes. >> That ASD memorandum number 137 is a adopted by a vote of four to three. I will take

189a fiveminute recess and then Turn. We'll call ourselves back to order. The time is 10:12 p.m. Just a reminder for board members, we typically adjourn by board policy at 11:00 p.m. We must adjourn by midnight um according to charter. Um if we do not conclude our business, we'll have to continue our meeting uh what will likely be tomorrow um or potentially Thursday. Uh with that said, we will move on to AS Memorandum number 116. Is there a motion? There is a motion. Uh I I move uh ASD memorandum number 116 allocation of major maintenance capital improvement grant funds for maintenance and capital projects. >> this would authorize the transfer and allocation of up to 4.2 two million dollars of state of state of Alaska Department of Education capital improvement major maintenance grant funds for planning,

190design and construction of maintenance and capital projects across the district. Now >> second motion made by member Bellamy, seconded by member Hullman. Is there discussion? Member less. >> Thank you. Uh at this time I would move to delete Abbott Loop Elementary School Rogosul improvements phase 1 $350,000 from memo 116 >> seconded by member Wilson member lesson's discussion. >> Thank you. This is really a me this is an amendment that would be um that would make the um entire uh memorandum conform to the intent of um memo 137 which we just passed previously. So in essence it would um because memo 137 would offer the lake Otis facility to Roka Shul this would lower our need to invest $350,000 into the Abolute facility for long-term maintenance. So it it does present some savings. 350,000 won't go

191very far in a $ one.5 billion dollar deficit backlog of um deferred maintenance, but it's a start. >> Thank you. Um to question to the administration. Um will you need to bring back forward um another plan for these funds if the this amendment is adopted or um this is something you can use at your discretion for routine maintenance needs or other improvements that are currently ongoing? What is what would the potential use case look like for this $350,000? >> I'd like to give Mr. Anderson just a moment to get back to his microphone and and clarify that information. Sorry, could you repeat that again? >> Yes, sir. Uh what what can the board expect in terms of a use case for this $350,000 if these funds are deleted uh from MO16? >> I think that

192would depend on what other amendments pass or fail. and um because there's a number of other amendments and then we'd look at priorities. >> I want to say I >> Oh, right. I don't know what else we'd use it for was was my answer. We would pick a different priority. Um obviously at this point we would keep Ruka we we would not make those improvements. We would not add four reos. we would not make some of the other improvements to that building and it would uh we'd be able to use those funds for something else, a different priority. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Seeing no other discussion, Miss Sullivan, a voice vote, please. Just clarifying that this is for amendment number one to remove Abbott Loop Elementary School improvement phase one. >> Correct. Yes. Uh

193the amendment uh we're voting on the amendment right now which Miss Lessons made member lessons made which would delete Abbott Loop Elementary from this allocation of capital dollars in ASD memorandum number 116. You would vote um yes to delete this language and no if you would like to keep this improvement. >> Member Donley. No >> member Higgins. >> No >> member Wilson. >> Yes. >> Member Hullman. >> Yes. >> Member Bellamy. >> Yes. >> Member Lessons. >> Yes. >> President Jacobs. >> Yes. >> That motion's adopted by a vote of 5 to2. Is there any other discussion as memorandum number 116? Hearing and seeing the voice, please. >> Uhhuh. Wait, wait a minute. This is 116. Oh, I'm sorry. No. Okay. Sorry. >> Okay. Miss Sullivan, the voice, please. member lessons. >> Yes. >> Member

194Donnelly. >> No. >> Member Bellamy. >> Yes. >> Member Hullerman. >> Yes. >> Member Higgins. >> No. >> Member Wilson? >> Yes. >> President Jacobs? >> Yes. AS memorandum number 116 is adopted by a vote of 5 to2. Our next item of business is ASD memorandum number 131. Is there a motion? Member Bellamy. I move to approve the fiscal year 2627 preliminary budget and authorize an upper limit spending authority of million2 $286,954. Sorry about that. Is there a second? Second >> motion made by member Bellamy, seconded by member Holland. Is there discussion or amendments? Member lists. >> Yeah. At this point in time, I'd like to move finance committee amendment number one. >> I'll second. And uh the the motion would be to add the following language to ASD memorandum 131 as guidance from the

195board to the administration to amend the 202627 FY27 financial plan and budget after the successful April 7th 2026 passage of Proposition 9 Anchorage School District operational cost special property tax levy 2026 only. There is a significant um but brief summary of uh how we got to this point in time, but at the bottom of the page, you'll read uh that if a majority of voters approve Proposition 9 during the April 7th, 2026 municipal election, the school board directs that the administration shall use all available revenue from the levy to reduce the projected FY27 increase in the district's K12 pupil teacher ratio from a plus4 to a plus two by retaining containing 80 K12 classroom teacher and 3.44 kindergarten paraprofessional positions. And I brought this up briefly in the committee report at our last board meeting,

196but just to restate here, um, this amendment comes via our finance committee meeting on February 12th where we discussed and reviewed the origins, language, intent of the levy and supported bringing a finance committee amendment clarifying use of that levy um, to the pool board for its consideration. >> Thank you. I'll put myself in the queue. I appreciate member lessons taking lead on drafting this and appreciate the finance committee for making this recommendation. Um earlier in our meeting, uh I advise member Donley that our board um was set to adopt this proposed amendment um in part because there was a a fullthroated and um significant conversation in finance about how to use these funds and it appeared that we achieved consensus. Um, I anticipate that being the case now as there haven't been any other amendments

197offered for proposed usage of these dollars. Um, I think this is the best use of this funding and um, it is in line with the language the mayor is um, using publicly as well as what our superintendent has iterated is a priority for him and uh, that's in line with our goals and guard rails. So, I will be voting yes on this. Member Donley. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. President. I actually was intending to vote for this um and I support the proposed amendment, but I think I think there's a problem with what you said earlier in the meeting, uh, Mr. President, and I think that it's a serious compromising of the voting process by announcing the results of the vote before it's even taken. So, I'm I feel compelled to move that On memo

198131, amendment one be tabled because the presiding officer compromised the voting process by announcing the results of the vote before it was taken. >> Motion to table. >> Is there a second? >> Seeing none, that motion fails. Um, I'll just speak to member Donley's um underlying uh remarks which are that um the nearly the full board had a in-depth conversation on record and discussed the proposed um usage and the finance committee achieved consensus. Um no amends no amendments um producing an alternative plan were offered. And so that was my prerogative as a member of this board to indicate that um that's where I saw this meeting going. Um, I don't agree with the remarks made by member Donley about um my intent and uh I'm allowing them because [snorts] um I support members to speak

199what they feel but that isn't accurate or reality. With that said, see no other comments. >> Point of personal privilege. I never said anything about intent. >> Understood. We'll ask for a voice vote, please. Member Belly, we are voting on >> this uh this motion is to >> I'm voting on the right thing here. >> The amendment to ASD memorandum number 131 that would incorporate the finance committee's recommendation that was discussed on record >> that came forth from finance. >> Correct. >> Yes. >> Member Donley. >> Yes. Member Higgins, >> yes. >> Member Lessons, >> yes. >> Member Wilson, >> yes. >> Member Hollowman, >> yes. >> President Jacobs, >> yes. Memorandum, amendment one, T memorandum number 131's adopted unanimously. Are there other amendments? Member lessons. >> Um, yes. At this point in time, I

200would move Jacob's lessons amendment number one, and I'll read it. Amen. I move to amend the preliminary FY27 budget, ASD Memorandum 131 to utilize the savings captured from adoption of ASD memorandum 137, ASD right sizing to restore 3.16 million dollars towards middle and high school sports and activities. In addition, utilize 2.2 2 million to restore 16 teacher FTE at the middle school level and to restore 6.5 nurse FTE. There is an explanatory note which I'll read as well. This amendment, if adopted, would reverse the proposed elimination of all middle school sports as well as high school tennis, gymnastics, I'm sorry, uh high school tennis, um volleyball, swimming and diving, hockey and hockey cheer, wrestling, Nordic skiing, and soccer. And I will ask for a point of clarification. I see that the word gymnastics is included

201on this amendment and my recollection is that gymnastics is not restored. >> It is not restored on this. >> So, we would need to make a technical correction to the note that's on the amendment. >> Um, I'll agree to the uh technical correction as the seconder of this motion. Um, does any board member oppose us removing this for accuracy purposes? Okay. Um so made member lessons. Um any other discussion on this item? >> Sure. Um it has been a busy time in our email inboxes and one of the most resounding messages that has come through from parents, community members, educators, >> the community broadly. before the discussion started. >> Um I I seconded this the second the motion. >> One of the most resounding consistent messages is the value that our community places on having

202one nurse in every school. And this is one of the most central components of the amendment from my standpoint um as as a co-author of the amendment. um it would claw back, for lack of better description, six and a half of the 25 reduced nurse positions um that the administration is proposing as part of this budget. In addition, there is an absolutely critical I think if you look at our student outcomes and if you again consider the cohort of students who are going to be in middle school next year, these were these entering sixth, seventh, and eighth graders next year were COVID kindergarters, first graders, and second graders. This would restore 16 teacher positions across our middle schools to help adjust um from the loss of the middle school model and also a an increase

203overall in middle school FT that took place some number of years ago. So this lessens um the blow that the budget strikes and provides classroom teachers which uh is absolutely in line with the amendment the finance committee uh just put forth. Um, finally, it would restore over $3 million um towards ensuring that students have access to middle and high school sports and activities. It comes with almost $2 million in cost reduction measures, which is um incredible. Yes, students would have to uh pay more for participating in those sports and activities and organizations um whether you know it's the Nordic Ski Association or the people who drive the Zambonies um or operate them um they would need to have agreements that will be a little bit um less generous but at the end of the day

204I think that there is incredibly strong support in our community for offering students the opportunity to develop the grit, the perseverance, the teamwork. Um, all of the engagement and drive that can happen when you have something you care deeply about and when you're part of that sport, that team. Um, I would caution, however, that these are onetime funds and that we have a $42 million deficit next year. So, we can only cut things once and we can only restore them once. Um, so it is with a hopeful heart that I hope the board passes this amendment. We will need more than hope to sustain us in the long run. >> Seeing no other remarks, we'll move to a voice vote on member Dling. >> Thank you. Um, I'm concerned, particularly concerned that the source of

205the funding for this is the closing of the three schools that we've been debating tonight. And, um, I strongly support restoring sports. Um, but I think we ought to do it with more than just one-time funds. We ought to do it with money that's going to be available in future years also by reductions. So, I think there's several other options rather than using one-time funds to do this. One would be to eliminate funding for the Department of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Community Engagement while protecting the the interpreter for the deaf there. Um, another would be to uh reduce two unfilled psychologist positions. Um, there's um 41 remaining such positions. Um, also we could reduce the non title one elementary staffing uh FTE in excess of the matrix. There's two schools that have additional staff that's

206outside the adopted matrix of half a position and that would be fair across the board for all the elementary schools. That would save us some money. I'd like you could reduce middle school assistant principles by two. Um, you could reduce high school assistant principles by three and every high school would still have two assistant principles. You could delete funding to the membership in the Coalition for Education Equity and the Council of Great City Schools and the Alaska Association of School Boards and the National School Board Association. Uh if you did all those things, you'd come up with about 1.5 million in ongoing reductions, which you could use to partially restore middle school sports and restore high school sports of hockey, wrestling, volleyball, tennis, gymnastics, the dome contract, and swimming on a permanent basis. Um, so

207since those are essentially what my proposed amendment number one does, I would move my amendment number one as a substitute motion for Jacob's lesson amendment number one. I see no second. That motion fails. Is there other discussion on the proposed Jacob's lessons amendment one? Seeing no other remarks, member um Miss Sullivan, the voice, please. Uh for board members, this is an amendment to ASD memorandum number 131, our operating budget, which would um utilize savings from multiple sources. Please reference the amendment um worksheet to restore sports nurses and um educator FTE at middle schools. A yes vote would be to appropriate these funds in our budget. A no vote it would be if you did not wish to do so. >> Member Higgins. >> Yes. Yes, >> member Bellamy. >> Yes, >> member Lessons. >> Yes,

208>> member Wilson. >> Yes, >> member Hollerman. >> Yes. >> President Jacobs. >> Yes. >> Uh, the motion is adopted unanimously. Member lessons. >> Thank you. At this point, I'd like to offer Jacob's lessons amendment number two. And I'd like to just draw the board's attention to um there's a stapled piece of paper and you're going to be looking for uh the page on the back. There are two amendment number twos. One says note revision to item three. Anyways, the I move to amend the FY27 preliminary budget ASD memorandum 131 to restore 10 nurse FTE via adoption of attachment A and attachment A is uh on the same piece of paper below um but I will read it uh into the record. So this would redirect 1.3 million in aggregate savings from a series of

209four reductions towards restoring 10 nurse FTE as follows. Number one, delay payment of schoolboard memberships in the Council of Great City Schools, the National School Board Association, the Coalition for Education Equity, and the Alaska Association of School Boards for an aggregate savings of uh.19 million. Number two, reduce schoolboard professional and technical expenditures which had been designated for an additional as yet unassigned external audit. That's another $100,000. Item number three, which is the one that was adjusted for a small technical um for a small technical change would decrease the overall budget for Alaska Choice Virtual by 25%, a reduction of $671,000 by identifying 624,000 in programmatic reductions and reinstating the prepandemic practice of charging fees. fees for online coursework so as to generate no less than $47,000 in revenue. Fees would be waved for eligible students.

210So that is an overall reduction of $671,000. And item number four would direct the administration to make unallocated non-classroom FTE reductions. And I can continue to speak to that a bit more. Um, essentially these would be, well, I guess it is what it says. These would be non-classroom positions that the administration would uh identify um elsewhere in the district. So, protecting the classroom, but perhaps trimming here or there. I don't know. It'll be their discretion. Um, and again, this is to restore 10 nurse positions, for lack of better phrase, clawing some more of them back from the 25 nurse reduction. So, if you were to combine these, you'd be at 16.5 um out of the 25 reduced. With the three schools that have been consolidated, there's actually 22 that need to be restored. So all

211of a sudden we're at 16 1.5 out of the 22, which um doesn't entirely close the gap, but it makes a regional model significantly um less thinly spread. >> For our record, um I've seconded that motion. I see member Higgins with his hand up. >> Thank you. I I see you know you're delaying the payment of the dues with the council of Gracie Schools. I'd like to revise this or recommend a uh um move to amend that to basically discontinue our payment of dues towards the council of great city schools and reduce uh then reduce the which uh that and reduce the $100,000 we use towards audits uh which would save $145,000. So $45,000 you've already got reflected in delaying it. So, it's an additional $100,000, which I I I don't mind you just extending

212what you're applying the money for and keep it the same way. Um, but those are those are that's what I'm going to propose and I'll wait for a second before I talk, I guess. Right. >> Uh, member Higgins, just a point of information. The audit um funding is actually part of this amendment. Member lessons, is that correct? Yeah, just a just to clarify that removing that audit is how we gain $100,000 and the majority of a nurse for a year. >> Okay. So, you've got that already included in your in your your figures. >> Yes, that is that is item number two that's identified on attachment A as >> Okay. Well, I'm I'm just going to propose that rather than delay the cost that we uh modify it so that we uh discontinue our association

213and the dues associated with it with the council of great city schools. >> Uh member member Higgins, could you I need you to articulate that into an amendment. Um >> um I move that we uh amend the um which which item this is? I forgot. Uh Kelly um >> item one. >> Yes. To to change the reduction of the Council of Grey City Schools from a deferred uh membership fee to a um to delete the membership relationship with the Council of Gay City Schools. Equal savings. >> Second. That was made by member Higgins, seconded by member Donley. Is there discussion? Member Higgins? >> Yes, thank you. Uh the the issue here is the council of great city schools has been in the past a source of doing audits. They their council to the to the

214board is really as more of a superintendent organization. They've counseledled us not to even talk about any items that the superintendent uh doesn't want information on because we may imply that we want something different and that would interfere with him deciding everything he does. I mean it really is that far over. We've been given advice that uh contrary to the National School Board Association uh in regards to stuff. But the benefit has been they've done audits and those audits have been at a very low cost and we need operational audits within the school district cuz we have found a lot of savings and a lot of issues. In the last several years the audits have been um um we no longer have audits reporting to the to the school board. They want to they work

215with the administration the they reach a consensus report on what we're allowed. We had some serious issues in regards to purchasing. They declined to share it with us. And I can't even get the superintendent to give me the names of people who talk, but I'm sure that he's going to do that only with the cons with the support of the council of great city schools. It doesn't reflect on us on how we're doing the job. And the benefits no longer exist. Unfortunately, this is, I believe, the first administration in schoolboard history that that successfully blocks operational audits. But we have other options. We can go out there with the public, bring them in to do audits uh and work around the process and probably save money. So discontinuing this, I think, is a an important

216issue. Thank you. >> I'm just going to jump in the queue for a a procedural note. That's um I guess I'll make remarks as well. Uh this amendment wouldn't affectuate any additional savings and it appears intended to um have the board discuss now whether or not uh the Anchorage School District will remain a member of the Council of Great City Schools. Um that's a conversation that we can have later if and when we find um funding to pay these dues. The amendment was specifically worded to acknowledge the fact that we're going to have to identify a fund source in the future to bring those dues back into our budget. Um we're passing a budget or we would pass a budget um if this underlying amendment were adopted which did not include um immediate payment of

217those dues. And so um the board can choose at a later date whether or not it wishes to remain a member of the council. Um and so for that reason I don't support the amendment. Uh we'll go to member Wilson. >> I I just wanted to state that I have not had the same experience as um what was stated from from another member. Um I have had I've received actually quite the opposite positive experience with the Council of Great City Schools. Um I I would absolutely support delaying the payment for for all of our memberships to make sure that we can have um as many of our nurses and staff on on our staff this year. Um, but I I would like to, as um, President Jacobs stated, I would like to have that conversation

218regarding each of these memberships um, at a later date. >> Member Donley, >> thank you. Well, limiting these memberships has been something that I've proposed for many years here as an amendment almost every year in our budget cycle, but specifically um the Council of Great City Schools. I have very grave concerns uh about that organization is not really in line with uh the population of Alaska. They are a rabid anti-second amendment organization. um they passed resolutions that are really really in not in the interest of citizens of Alaska when it comes to our rights to keep and bear firearms. Um, additionally, they tend to be very one-sided with who they invite to come and talk to them. They seem to always be on one end of the political spectrum, and I don't think that's fair.

219um at least some these at least the National School Board Association has a balanced approach to the speakers they invite to their events. Um so I agree with not uh continuing our membership in the Council of Great City Schools as their interests are not parallel to the overall interests of the citizens of Alaska. >> Member Bellamy. >> Thank you. Uh so full disclosure, I serve on uh I represent our board uh on the council of greater city schools uh board of directors. I don't know where you guys are getting your ideas from. That is you. I don't know that either of uh the board members who've spoken up. I don't know that you've ever even attended other than I mean really you you've you've not engaged. But um I will not be supporting uh uh

220pulling away from any of the organizations because as a governance body we need to have we need to be connected. But I will I will uh the original motion to delay and you're right member Higgins. Ever since I've been on this I mean uh member uh Donley ever since I've been on this board you have consistently gone after the council. You've gone after the Coalition for Education Equity. You've gone after the Alaska Association. So, it's an opportune time. So, I get it. Uh but I will not be supporting um the delay is one thing. Uh to discontinue based on what you guys are saying is absolutely offensive and uh for another discussion. Thank you. >> Point of personal privilege. >> Member member Don Lee. My remarks were just labeled as offensive and inaccurately represented my

221experience too. >> Member Donley personal matter. This was a personal attack. >> Member Donley, if you have a point of order. >> I do have a point of order. >> Okay. Please present your point of order. What rule do you believe has been broken? >> A misrepresentation of the member's experience. >> Okay. Uh I will ask all board members to remain respectful. I understand it's a long night. Um we'll move on. Member lessons. I just wanted to return to the fact that this item pays for nearly one nurse to serve a school, maybe a school or two um somewhere in Anchorage. That's what this is about. Thanks. >> Seeing no other comments. >> I have a comment. >> Yeah, Mr. President. >> Member Higgins. >> Thank you. I I I'm not I'm not opposed to

222delaying this discussion till later, but let's go ahead and put on record now that I'm asking again for the superintendent to work with the council of great city schools to give me the contact information for the purchasing audit so that we can follow up on the recommendation they had that we have a committee to implement those those approvals and that we with their support in the meeting said they would provide allow us to use one representation >> the amendments please wrap up your comments. Thank you, member Donley. >> Thank you. So, when I first joined the board, I went to a meeting, uh, the regular annual meeting of the Council of Great City Schools, and sitting in the the committee that dealt with resolutions. There was resolutions attacking American gun rights, attacking the Second Amendment,

223and and they all just seemed to assume that I would agree with that. And when I didn't agree with that, they were all shocked. and and the the executive director came to me and says, "Yeah, these are all folks from major urban school districts. So, they have unique problems, different problems than rural Alaska has." And so, they're not sensitive, you know, to your concerns. So, um they they just ignored them. Um and I thought it was really irresponsible and frankly unconstitutional um based on the const our both our state constitution right to bear arms which I helped draft and the national second amendment with the right to bear arms. So I have an exact I have a specific personal experience in this and I don't appreciate being questioned whether I knew what I was talking

224about or not. Seeing no other comments, we'll move to a voice vote on amendment the first amendment to amendment three to to discontinue payments from the council of great city schools specifically. You would vote yes if you wish to change the deferred payment to the council to delete and no if you do not. >> Member Higgins. >> Yes. Member Donley, >> yes. >> Member Bellamy. >> Member Lessons, >> no. >> Member Wilson, >> no. >> Member Hollerman, >> yes. >> President Jacobs, >> no. >> Okay, the motion fails three to four. Uh, right. Under the underlying amendments from member lessons, is there any additional discussion? Hearing and seeing none, we'll move to a voice vote on Lessons and Jacobs amendment two. Um, you would vote yes if you wish to adopt the amendment to restore

225to nursing FTE and no if you do not. >> Point of order. I believe the amendment should be amendment two or that's number three in your order. Okay. Thank you. So the the uh for board members the label is the uh the amendment three is the label uh the the number of amendments we've had not the labels that board members introduced them with member lessons. Yes, >> member Wilson. >> Yes, >> member Hollowan. >> Yes, >> member Donley. >> Yes, >> member Higgins. >> Yes, >> member Bellamy. >> Yes, >> President Jacobs. >> Yes. >> That memor or that amendment is adopted by a vote of seven to zero. Is are there is there additional discussion or amendments on ASD memorandum number 131 member lessons? >> Thank you. At this time I'd like to move

226lessons amendment one to memo to memo 131 and board members this is a horizontal page. Um the investment >> member lessons made a second for discussion. >> Member Holman seconded member lessons please proceed. >> Thank you. This is uh an amendment that identifies some very small, some slightly larger uh sources of funding to ultimately restore 3.6 six middle school classroom teacher FTE or the equivalent in addenda whichever works best for the administration to support approximately 36 semester long zero period PE and/or health courses uh for our middle school students next year. I think it's important to understand that this is um not a long-term policy change and this is not a long-term funding mechanism. It would in the context in which one FTE, one teacher would teach five classes in a semester or 10 a

227year and in which according to our middle school program of studies, sixth and seventh grade students will be provided daily physical education while eighth grade students will will be provided one semester of physical education and one semester of health education. The intent is twofold. One is that the administration would allocate enough FTE really based on any middle school's immersion, student enrollment, physical space, and family surveys of students uh commitment or ability to utilize a zero period because busing would not be provided across the six middle schools hosting ASD's seven non-charter immersion programs. Those are Begitch, Golden View, Mirrors, Mirror Lake, Romeig, which has two programs and Wendler so as to offer roughly 550 middle school students who are categorized as immersion students uh the opportunity to complete those necessary PE and health courses outside the

228confines of the sixth period day that frankly all middle school students are going to have to take uh next year with the elimination of the middle school model. So, taking PE or health uh before the start of the day would allow immersion students to pursue the additional immersion coursework they need as well as their core coursework and elective course work. And elective course work, I think so many of us would agree, is absolutely critical. Um it allows students in formative middle school years a opportunities to try on CTE courses or pursue band, orchestra, choir or any other fine arts opportunities uh which are critical for their development and um frankly their career pathways. Um the secondary intent is to not give all of this FTE just to immersion students but to um allow to allocate

229additional FTE across all middle schools to provide non-emersion students the opportunity to enroll in those same zero period health or PE classes um so that they too can offer an additional elective. Um, right now under the lack the withdrawal of the middle school model, a student will have to choose in seventh through eighth grade between a language and fine arts or fine arts and a CTE course. This would allow a student who is able to get to a zero period course, which is something that I understand has existed in ASD for some time, um, the opportunity to pursue those wide interests. Um this would indicate that surveys of parent parent interest as well as a lottery if needed would be used may be used to determine sort of the overall allocations. So the investment is

2303.6 teacher FTE or addenda for um $468,000 and the reductions would take place as follows. Number one, uh, eliminate funding designated to pay for the contracted services of a United Way employee to serve as themies of Anchorage convenor. That's about $65,000. Number two, it would reduce funding budgeted for the freshman first day expenses, which are currently set at $24,000 for next year to serve approximately 3,000 incoming students by $5,000 or about $1.67 per student. I would add that it does not delete freshman first day. It does not delete. It just brings that figure down a little bit. Uh the third reduction is that it cancels busing for the freshman guaranteed experiences which have been previously paid for with the um the canceled FDS grant that $15 million grant. Um, actually that's where the academyy's well

231that's where the freshman first day expenses came from and I think that's where the United Way uh employee uh contracted services also came from. Um I know that one would be a tough one to swallow. Um but perhaps there are opportunities for partnership with a municipal or tour organizations to maintain the busing to those events. Um the fourth reduction would be a reduction but not an elimination of funds assigned to marketing for themies of Anchorage by a total of $6,000. And then the fifth item is a reduction in total high school office administration FTE which is currently proposed as 48 by 4. Um and that would be determined by the administration. And I did provide um a walk through a little bit of some of my thinking, but again that item that fifth item would

232be at the administration's discretion to identify $340,000 in office administration reduction. Um based on the high school and middle school uh charts that are in our budget book, roughly pages 26,7 89ish, um I just copied and pasted them here. Um you can see that at the high school level currently all high schools no matter their size are given six office administration positions for a total of 48. And if you look at the enrollment of our high schools uh that really varies. You have Eagle River High School which is projected to have 746 enrolled students all the way up to West High School which is uh projected to have 1782 projected enrolled students. So regardless of size, there are six office administration positions. I really begin to think about that office administration position. >> Member lessons,

233I'm going to interrupt briefly. We need a motion to extend our meeting until midnight if members would like to. Our other option is to continue our meeting tomorrow or on Thursday. >> Is there a motion to extend? >> Move to extend our meeting uh until midnight. Second >> motion made and seconded. Is there any opposition? Seeing none, we're extended until midnight. Memberlessness. >> So my interest and focus on this office administration FTE was that it was really one of the things um that could potentially be furthest from the classroom in in a school setting. Um especially when we consider the number of pupils at any given school. Mhm. >> On the third page of this attachment, and I apologize, Member Higgins, you may not have it at hand. Um I did look at the staffing

234for our two smallest schools and notice that um for a a smaller overall enrollment um we have roughly 10 additional positions from from principles, counselors, librarians, office administration, BPOS and security staff um compared to students and staff at Betty Davis East or West on a per pupil basis. Um the investment is significantly higher at our o at our smallest schools and perhaps a reduction of $410,000 I'm sorry a prot of $340,000 via a reduction of four positions somewhere uh could be made out of the overall pool of 48 office administration positions. So that is the whole of the reductions again they are small to medium. The administration would have the leeway to identify the largest amount and this would be in service of allowing truly hundreds of students to gain a seventh period in order

235to pursue language fine arts and CTE elective opportunities within the curricular day. >> Thank you, member lessons. I'm going to jump in the queue to ask um Dr. Bryant if there's any response to the amendment at this point and then we'll go on to other discussion. >> Thank you through the president. I understand that we have to make difficult tradeoffs this evening and we already have and this is one of those situations where this would be a difficult trade-off but I do appreciate that this discussion is focused on a sustainable path forward. Um because in the past there there's been a temptation to see every fresh dollar that can come in and figure out a way to appropriate that. But in this situation, we're looking at costs that have been appropriated to programs we'd like

236to sustain and making a trade for something else that could be of interest for the board to sustain. Um, I'll just be succinct in that there's surely value that's added by some of the items that member lessons have listed and there are certainly implications to reducing staffing at the high school level. Um, that's my high level takeaway. I'd like to ask Mr. Gustoson specifically on the high school administration staffing piece. What are some of the things that the board could expect if we were to reduce high school staffing by that degree? One of the things that we have to watch is in the prior amendment there was $410,000 that we have to also find. So we have to find now another $340,000 in this amendment and kind of looking at probably the same kind of

237positions would uh be a thing as as we look at high schools. It doesn't matter what size they are. They have the same programs. They need a registar. They need a activities clerk. They need a discipline secretary. They need attendance secretary, an AA. So, literally when we get down to it, um, you know, are we going to be looking at some of these? We probably are already with the 410. Um but students will see a a change in their uh their kind of the customer service probably through the offices um if we go down too low on that clerical as well as clerical the ones answering the phones. Clerical are the ones doing the customer service and and uh those types of things. um also the ones that are making the phone calls when there's

238and radio calls when there is um things happening right they're big these are high schools things happen in high schools so >> and then um the last thing I'll add with regards to some of the other um reductions proposed um something that is not as clear as a tradeoff but um I think this board is very well aware that our community is very engaged and supportive with helping our students find strong pathways in post-secondary whether that's uh the local college or a high demand high wage job. So um one of the things that you'll need to contemplate as you make this decision is um what would it mean for the district if we had many fewer organizations um willing to invest their time given that this would send a message that we need to scale

239back those grassroots partnerships. This is not an attempt to persuade one way or another. I just want the board to honestly um think through that trade-off. >> Want to encourage board members to be reasonable with their comments as we have a limited time left and other business. Um we'll go to member Wilson. >> I one thing I'm concerned about um anytime there's a zero period that my first concern is accessibility for our students. Um, are the students that we want to have access to the zero period going to have access because of transportation? That's I mean that's where my mind goes first is is I'm concerned about always concerned about zero period because um not all students will have access to that um just by the nature of not having busing at that time. Um

240I would also like to add that uh themies has been scaled back tremendously and we had we have such great support from our community our business organizations. So, I don't feel like the reduction amount that's listed um really is a clear um a clear financial picture of what additional financial resources that come to our district from our business partners could be lost. Um and and we ask a lot of our business partners and they produce a lot uh for our district. And so I I would be concerned that we would be losing a lot more than what is listed. Um so I'm I'm struggling to to support this amendment for for multiple reasons. >> Thank you. We'll go to member homeman and member building. >> Um the the tone of the amendment seems to suggest

241that immersion students are going to have priority >> in the zero hour. And I I'm trying to do the logistics in my head. Obviously, uh whether a student's able to get a ride to arrive at that time or if they ride the bus and they miss zero hour, they can still participate. Uh the the zero hour would give them the opportunity for one of the electives. while we're still offering electives at middle school, which is pretty thin compared to what we used to do. But I while I want to support the immersion program every way we can, I I don't know why those students would have a priority towards having an extra elective over any other student that's active and wants to make things happen in their own life. And so in essence, we're creating

242a zero hour for people with means. Um, and it's it's a problem at a neighborhood school, I think, to do that. Not that we haven't done it, but in the past, it has been a focus for particular students. Um, you have 250 kids go out for volleyball, you got to have before, you got to have a zero hour practice because there just aren't enough courts in the building to do it after school, which also takes a ride. Um, seventh grade students that want to take algebra 1, there's only a handful of them. There's no way to schedule it on a team or without breaking teams in middle school. So you do it as a zero hour. What I'm hoping if there is money from the legislature and if the ley should pass, not making any

243assumption they will that we may be able to staff middle school to the point where they could at least still have five of seven >> uh classes for teachers and give all students an opportunity of at least one elective or two. that wouldn't actually bring back the middle school model. That that takes more staffing. Um, but I think we may achieve enough where we could have that level of scheduling. So, in in that case, I I feel like we should wait and see what happens before we implement this as a policy. Although I started this not quite prepared to make a motion to table, but that would be my suggestion is that we're getting into the details where once again when we were talking about closures, we really have no idea yet what our budget's

244going to be. We know it won't be any worse than this, but it quite possibly could be well enough to support all of our middle school students having the opportunity for an elective. >> Thank you, Member Holman. And uh member Belly, >> thank you. uh ditto what um the access concern because we won't have any buses uh and kids while we want kids to take advantage of this um and you're right member lessons we we've had zero hour something uh throughout my whole career whether that was Spanish 2 algebra 2 algebra whatever geometry uh in middle school because that's what you know that's what so I'm a little concerned that it's only focused on PE and or courses. Um, and I I think I'm in I'm inclined to maybe uh not support this one right

245now, but come back to it um uh at another date. Thank you. >> Thank you, member lessons. >> Thank you. Um I appreciate each of your comments. 3.6 FTE doesn't go a long way. However, a PE course can pack a lot more kids into a space >> true >> than an algebra classroom, but we're going to be doing that anyways with our PTR levels. >> This is a this is this suggestion I figured out how to scrape together the pennies in the couch cushion. The suggestion came from public testimony. The suggestion came from quite frankly um there was a meeting of immersion the immersion parent advisory committee met some number of weeks ago. I was able to be there for a hot 20 minutes. And during that time, one of the concerns I heard quite

246clearly is that because the continuation of the immersion model requires multiple courses in the target language, immersion students under a sixth period day do not have the opportunity to pursue the elective that another student outside of immersion would. So, just as this board has made a significant investment in elementary schools, I'm going to pick on Ali because you're right here in front of me. Eli is getting three additional teachers compared to the school next door. That's three teachers for one elementary school because this board supports immersion. This is asking for 3.6 total FTE to spread. I think my daughter had a 100 kids in her PE class in middle school. It wasn't pretty, but you could put a lot of kids in there if they can get to the building. And no, it's not equitable.

247Only scheduled opportunities within the school day are equitable. This is another thing that I'm going to hang on the legislature, right? We're not allowing students to have opportunities at this point in time that they used to. So this is an attempt to continue a commitment that this board is making to immer elementary immersion parents and students to ensure that next year students who are in middle school and want to continue whatever language that target language you know is can do so and also get a longitudinal exposure to CTE coursework to fine arts coursework. It is not an easy choice and I respect whatever decision the board members make. But I will say that uh there's been a lot of support from folks uh to this amendment in recent days and it's critical that it is

248not limited to immersion students. Part of the beauty of the PE classes especially is that any student who can get there can piggy back into that space. >> Um I'm going to Yeah, I'm going to call on member Higgins and I'm going to ask that we proceed to a vote. member Higgins. >> Um yeah, I I want to uh attend the com um meeting with the immersion programs. This is a critical issue for them. The damage is long-term if we don't have a way of providing that additional hours so they get enough immersion class time. Um and and like I said, then you're destroying it uh further up. it it's it becomes a a real damaging one. I'm still optimistic as the president will say that we're getting additional funding that will help and I

249would love to see the middle school model go, but this is at least an effort here to help the immersion programs uh not take the the kind of hit that would do long-term damage. So, it's not perfect for what we want to do, but I'm going to support it because it's it's it's best for the kids. Seeing no other discussion, we'll proceed to a voice phone. >> Member Member Lessons. >> Yes. >> Member Hullman. >> Yes. >> Member Higgins. >> Yes. >> Member Bellamy. >> No. >> Member Donley? >> Yes. >> Member Wilson? >> No. >> President Jacobs? >> No. um lessons amendment one or amendment four is adopted by a vote of four to three. We're at our underlying uh motion which is to adopt ASD memorandum number 131 as amended. Member Donley. >>

250Yes, I'm concerned about the Ignite program and I was trying to find funding to restore at least part of it. Um, if we were to support 50% of the program, it'd be nine teaching positions. And one way to fund that would be to uh delete the Department of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Community Engagement. Uh, you could delete two unfilled psychiatrist psychologist positions. Uh, delete the um excess matrix FTE at two schools um that are outside the normal matrix. um reduce middle school assistant principles by two and also reduce high school assistant principles by three. So every school would still have two assistant principles. Um and um if you did that, you would have enough money to uh balance out the restoration of uh 50% of the Ignite program, which is nine teaching positions. And my

251amendment number two, which would become board amendment number five here proposed, um um covers that with the exception of not moving the last four items on there because they've already been covered by other board action today. So I would move um Donley number two, which is comes board number five, without the last four items on there, which have already been covered by prior amendments. clarification. >> Oh, thank you for discussion purposes. >> There's Yep. Okay. So, member Donley, any other comments? >> No. Is there any additional discussion? >> Yes. >> Member Hicks. >> Oops. I'm sorry. Um I I the DEI program is a program that's not affirmative action program that some people raise. I I want to make that clear. These are programs because of the the makeup of our of our u being

252a uh the most diverse school system uh in the country and we've got such a large thing. It directly addresses those issues where we have to do that for their academic success. So it's a little different ball game. I think it's it's every child needs appropriate and that's fine. Uh the issue of Ignite program bothers me greatly because we've heard it from a lot in the community and I think we're absolutely right that we need we cannot ignore the group that uh is in the higher part where they don't academic academically grow a full year. That group the very top has the least uh annual growth of all the groups because they want challenged. So, I'm not going to support this because I don't think this is the right time or the right way to

253go about it. The Ignite program though is important. And um I um I hope optimistically we get additional money from the state to lower class sizes and we can look at this program as well because I don't think we want to give it up. Thank you. >> Seeing no other discussion, Miss Sullivan, the voice, please. Member Hullman. >> No. >> Member Higgins. >> No. >> Member Bellamy. >> No. >> Member Lessons. >> No. >> Member Donley? >> Yes. >> Member Wilson? >> No. >> President Jacobs? >> No. >> Amendment number five fails by a vote of 126. >> Is there additional discussion or amendments on ASD memorandum number 131? >> Mr. President >> member Donley. >> Thank you. Um the uh Anchorage School District is one of the most efficient school districts in the state

254having one of the lowest percentages of administrative costs. But there are some other districts that do have lower percentages. And I frequently hear from people that's where they want us to do reductions. And this budget does contain significant reductions in administration. But my understanding is we're still even with this budget not the lowest percentage of administrative costs. And when I really refer to administrative costs, I mean non-classroom related administration. Um so in endeavoring to possibly reach that goal of being the most efficient uh school district in the state with the lowest percentage administrative costs. Um, I drafted an amendment which is number three, my number three which would be if I offer it would be board number six which would reduce spending by $651,000710 with reductions targeted uh 2% off the codes that the department

255of admin the education determines are non-classroom related administrative functions. And so that's what my amendment number three is drafted to do. And with that, I would move um Donley amendment number three. >> Seeing no second, uh that motion fails. Is there additional discussion or amendment on ASD memorandum number 131? >> Mr. President, >> member Donley. >> Yeah. Um, we did have this as a part of an earlier amendment this but but I'm looking at straight up eliminating the department of diversity, inclusion, equity, inclusion, and community engagement. It's had kind of a tortured history. It started out as the uh department of uh of of I try to remember the exact but it was like equity and compliance uh which was really a scary name. I thought um and it had a very undistinguished origin. I

256remember the night the uh new director of the that new uh department came and explained what their plans were and they included the utilization of radical radical um critical race theory which uh they subsequently backed off on and kind of even interpreted and they denied they ever said it. was um so if we were to uh delete that department, the savings would be about $300,000 [clears throat] if you transferred the deaf interpreter service over to the office of equal employment and opportunity. So that's what my amendment number four would do. And with that explanation, I'm going to offer uh uh Donley amendment number four to eliminate funding for the office of diversity, equity, inclusion, and community engagement. Seeing no second, that amendment fails. Going back to the underlying motion, is there any additional discussion on

257ASD memorandum number 131? I have one more, Mr. President. >> Member Donley. >> Um, in this budget, different high schools have different numbers of assistant principles. Um I'm looking for additional ways to save money. Um if we were to reduce all assistant all high schools to just two assistant principles, we could save half a million dollars. Um, so I have crafted amendment my amendment number five which I think would become proposed board amendment number eight um to reduce all high schools to two assistant principles saving us $510,000 approximately. And with that explanation I'd move Donley amendment number five to do that. Seeing no second that amendment fails. Is there any additional discussion on ASD memorandum number 131 hearing and seeing none miss the voice vote please? This is the memorandum as amended as memorandum number

258131. Our budget Member Bellamy. >> Yes. >> Member Higgins. >> Yes. >> Member Donley. >> No. >> Member Lessons. >> Yes. >> Member Wilson. >> Yes. >> Member Hollerman? >> No. >> President Jacobs? >> Yes. Memorandum number 131 is adopted by a vote of 5 to2. That completes our agenda this evening. Is there a motion to adjurnn? >> Move to adjourn. >> Second. >> Seeing no opposition, we are adjourned at 11:22 p.m. Thank you.