001Good evening everyone. Call the special meeting of the ASD school board to order. Today is Thursday, June 12th, 2025. Time is 6:30 p.m. on the dots. Uh present in the boardroom I see members Hollowman, myself or chair uh member Jacobs, members Higgins, Lessons, and Donley. And online, I see um member Bellamy. And if member Wilson joins us, I will announce that for our record. Now we've called ourselves to order, we'll um salute the flag and then member Lessons, please read our land acknowledgement. We acknowledge that we gather here today on the traditional lands of the Dina people of the Upper Cook Inlet. For thousands of years, the Dina 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
002we recognize all indigenous people who live and learn in our community. Thank you, member lessons. Um on behalf of the board, I want to welcome you to our meeting and thank you for attending and supporting the work of the Anchorage School District and the Anchorage School Board. Uh 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. All right, move to the approval of the agenda. Uh, board members, you have an agenda in front of you which is brief but significant. Um, is there a motion to approve the agenda as drafted? I move to approve the agenda as drafted. Second. Second. Made by member Leon, seconded by member Hollowman. Is there any discussion or amendments to
003the agenda? Yeah. Um could I get an explanation of action item one operating budget adjustment veto response? Is there some specific written proposal that's been given to us to do this? Uh the only written uh documentation for agenda item one would be the um draft summary of vetos from the governor which included a cut to education funding as that was just given to the public uh within the last hour or so. Nothing else is um written and prepared for the board at this time. Okay. Well, it's it's listed as an action item, so we don't have anything in writing before us for an action item. Um, unfortunately, member Donley, the board hasn't had time to draft a potential action item. Um, the board can take action tonight if it so chooses, as this is an
004urgent topic with, um, the July 1 fiscal year starting imminently. Um what action we choose to take I think is to be determined based on a briefing from the superintendent and then discussion from the board. Happy to answer any other questions you may have. Okay. Thank you. Perfect. Is there other discussion on this uh agenda before we uh ask for unanimous consent and move on? Okay. Hearing seeing none, is there any objection to approving the agenda as drafted? All right. We have an agenda. Thank you everyone. We'll begin with nonaggenda item public comment. Great. And we don't have any non-aggenda public comment. So um we'll move on to our action items which um is C1 beginning with the FY26 operating budget adjustment veto response. Dr. Brian, would you like to start us with a conversation
005to frame the issue? Sure, Mr. President. Um, so I'd like for the public to also understand that uh this information is hot off the press within the last couple of hours. Uh, I did anticipate that some action would take place earlier today, but even that ch even that plan has drastically changed within the last hour. So, I'll start off with what I believe the headline is. The headline is is that Alaska state law says that the BSA will increase by $700. But what's happened is that the governor only funded enough for $500 of that $700. So what that means is that statewide districts will instantly need to find the equivalent of $200 per students to cut from their budgets. It only remains to be seen what will happen as a result of this action from
006the governor, but certainly emergency school closures are on the table for districts as a reductions that will result in increased class sizes, poor learning environments, and will continue to uh result in the decaying infrastructure that we see all across the state in our schools. So, um if you haven't captured it already, this is an education emergency and we need action from our community as quickly as possible. So now that we understand what the headline is, let me please walk you through the timeline of events. Is this um is a very nuance discussion that's been taking place for a year. So please bear with me. The board is very well aware of this information, but I'd like the public in one place to understand what exactly just happened today. So here's the timeline. House Bill 57,
007which again uh resulted in a $700 BSA increase, as well as other policies, was passed with a with a decisive majority of the legislature earlier this spring. ASD knew it was possible that the governor could veto a portion of this funding or even the bill. So shortly after the legislature decisively uh approved House Bill 57, the ASD board took a calculated risk in projecting revenue of $560. Shortly after the governor vetoed House Bill 57 and then and I want the community to remember this, the full legislature convened very shortly after and decisively overrode his veto. That means that a $700 BSA increase is in the law. It's in the books right now. So, this is a two-part conversation. So, again, the governor has short changed the statutory BSA by $200 earlier today. That's the headline
008I want the community to completely understand. Um, so with that said, um, again, the law says that the BSA has increased by $700. And I'd also like to note that that override that took place recently was actually the first override that a sitting governor um withtood in probably over 25 years. So to say that their vote to override his veto was historic is quite the understatement. And it's interesting that this happened so quickly because now um I'm getting a lot of calls from people and a lot of questions from community members. And one of the first questions that I get asked, especially within the last 45 minutes, is, well, now that the governor has decided to short change what's in the law, does that mean the legislature is failing to adequately maintain our system of
009public schools? For those of you wondering, that's a question that only the Alaska Supreme Court can decide, and it might be time for us to consider having that conversation as a community. With that said, I'll open it to discussion. Thank you. Um, Dr. Dr. Brian, appreciate your comments. Uh to frame the conversation, um I think it was helpful. We now want to circle back another way frame the conversation to public testimony. Um as we have some individuals who have chosen to take time this evening to sign up uh to speak. All right. And member Wilson has joined us for the record at 6:38 p.m. Um regarding public comments, uh just a brief introduction before we get started. Now is the time to hear from our public. We welcome your comments which are important to us.
010Uh please note the following framework before we begin in public testimony. All public comments are limited to 3 minutes. I'm going to make an exception to that tonight. Um as our chair, we have a couple elected officials um who have either expressed interest in testifying or who are with us tonight. Um I'm intend to give those individuals five minutes. Um and there is precedent for that on the assembly end. Um and using that discretion as chair. Uh with that said, the timer for everyone else will be at 3 minutes. Um that will sit in front of you as your speaker. Uh all speakers will receive a courtesy alert when there are 30 seconds remaining. Uh speakers may not give time to others. When your name is called, please come up to the podium, state your
011name, and direct your comments to myself. Uh please do not uh engage in dialogue with the board. This is the time for the public to speak and us to listen. And then if you have handouts for the board, please give them to Miss Sullivan who's seated to my left. Um there is detailed board decorum guidelines and expectations that are available near the entrance of the boardroom. With that said, the first testifier we have in front of us tonight is Paul Mcdana. Welcome, sir. You have three minutes. Um please begin when you're ready. Good evening, President Jacobs, members of the board, and all of Anchorage's families who are here with me now. Thank you for calling this time to meet the parents of Anchorage and the community members who live here and raise our kids here.
012I'm one of those parents who can't help but wonder when enough is enough. I started teaching in 2013, which was a little more than a decade ago. I want to take a moment to look back at what a decade of public education has changed. When I started teaching, teachers were paid about middle of the road. When you look at national statistics, we were comfortable. We felt this was decent and we felt respected by the community. But it's certainly not like that now. And we're seeing turnover skyrocket and you unfilled positions never get filled. After the decay of public process at the hands of this governor, I wish I could even tell you where we rank now, but I can't. As reported by the Alaska Beacon and the Anchorage Daily News in 2023, our governor deleted
013the database that compares teacher salary numbers. Before I started teaching, the number of schools was different, too. This should have been an unrelenting number. We can change our paycheck to adjust for revenue shifts, but we should not change the number of schools. A community is a school. We don't lose communities. We don't lose schools. If this situation was only about revenue, the governor would be working with Anchorage to diversify revenue, find new tax sources that we can provide to support our schools. That would be leadership. But he can't lead. His so-called emergency last week with the state board of education tipped off his bad hand. He doesn't want schools to stay open. He's attacking how we can keep our schools open while he can't find the money to keep them open himself. So, thank you
014for opening the special session tonight. I hope everybody here hears enough is enough. I appreciate the thoughts about where lawsuits have to become involved to protect what is enough for Anchorage's children. We know what's enough. Our legislature overwhelmingly showed that number is a BSA increase of $700. Anything else is not enough. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your testimony. Our next speaker is uh Joselyn Dormis. Okay, we might not have Joselyn with us tonight. Um next up online is Representative Elise Galvin. Representative Galin, are you with us? Um need you to Can you hear me? Okay, we can hear you. President, we can welcome Representative Galvin, you have five minutes. The floor is yours. Thank you for being with us tonight. Well, thank you very much. Uh, esteemed members, thank you for allowing
015me to testify virtually today. Uh, this is a very important moment in time and I believe you and uh the especially the administration and the hardworking educators need to hear from us. Um, I owe it to you to show up. I serve on finance and I can tell you in the finance committee and actually all of us as legislators know that our priority uh is to uphold the constitution. We understand that an education system is in that. We also understand that is our job to find the revenue to do our job. And that means um that that uh excuse of the price of oil today being a couple dollars less is not something that I think is worthy of cutting education. So let me just start with um today. I know that the line item
016veto took place and I know that the governor has taken us backwards providing less funding this year than we had even last year despite the overwhelming consensus among legislators both in the House and the Senate across what is sometimes seen as uh you know quite a few political valleys. We united on this because we know what the people of Alaska are expecting that we need to increase funding for our schools. For the past 15 years, we've witnessed a troubling trend of not keeping up with the inflationary costs of educating our children. Our state's persistent failure to adequately fund our education system is showing. One by one, we have watched as you, as our schoolboard members, face increasingly desperate decisions and are forced to make impossible choices. I really do appreciate that. I thank you for
017your service. The consequences of these cuts are evident though, and we've seen vital extracurricular programs vanish. Counselors who are essential to our students well-being disappear, and classroom support staff reduce to dangerously low levels, class sizes are growing beyond what is manageable or safe. We are at a critical juncture where every dollar cut translates directly into negative effects on our classrooms and our students learning environments. This is not a sustainable path and we are regrettably failing the public school families of our community. Those who have spent time in our classrooms who truly understand the dayto-day realities can see the truth. Our education system is in jeopardy. I know that you all have visions for our classrooms. if with the adequate support um of greater opportunities our students would experience whether it's careermies I heard a fantastic
018presentation by your superintendent uh recently I want to thank you for that I know that you want to offer a chance for every student to play music or sports or the ability to learn new language I know that's true I know that's in your hearts and I know that you see these are essential pathways to the success of many of our children honestly to stay in school. They they need these these programs and and it's the most vulnerable who I'm afraid you may be cutting out as you make your easier cuts. Yet, we are at the risk of systemic collapse if we do not act decisively. I understand that it's imperative that we continue raising awareness together, all of us, until our community and our leaders all the way up to the governor understand and
019believe together that uh it's important to act in ways that lift all of our children. Some argue that our constitutional responsibility to uphold statewide system of education does not define the quality or extent of the system and others contend incorrectly that Alaska schools are overfunded using misleading statistics to compare funding levels to other states while casting doubt on the importance of those funds in the classroom. Through this important atmosphere of distrust and misinformation, we must stand firm together and be beacons of truth, consistently bringing factual information to light. I pledge to continue um doing that and with your help. I will also continue visiting schools and appreciating the hard work of our educators. I urge each of us in this community to do what we can to pull together for this moment in time. Our
020children deserve our support and attention. They have done nothing to warrant this struggle. So to educators uh with 50 60% over turnover over the last 5 years, I I know I I I know you. I I hear you and I know we're already losing you and I'm asking you to do what you can to stand by. To the retirees among us, your vast experiences are invaluable. If you're able, please step into our schools and assist us. For those of you who are lucky there way to quickly ask our tech folks to unmute. Representative Galvin, I appreciate that and I will be closing right now. Thank you very much. Uh I I just wanted to make sure that the community understands their importance in pulling together whether your aunties, grandparents, if you have the time, I
021implore you to volunteer your support to if and if volunteering isn't feasible, please consider doing something for the hardworking teachers, whether it's baking treats or working with children you know on homework at home or introducing them to new adventures, whether it's at the fishing hole or in the kitchen. In every action we take right now, let us remember to keep our children at the forefront of our minds and hearts. Together, we can uphold our constitutional commitment to education and genuinely support our students futures. I can promise you for my part as a representative, I will be doing everything I can to ensure that we have 45 votes to bring back the funding that's necessary. And in the future, we will continue to keep up with inflationary costs. I will do everything in my power to
022do that. And again, I can't thank you enough for this opportunity to share uh my thoughts on this particular uh desperate time. Thank you. We cannot here. Mr. here. We'll need to reset Mr. Ducy's clock to approximately Okay. Um, so we're we're getting notice that there wasn't sound. um for the first part of your testimony. So, if you'd be willing to start over, we'll uh reset your clock at five minutes. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. My name is Michael Buussy and I am here as a staff to Representative Ted Aishai, District 22, East Anchorage. Uh and as an aside, I'm also an Anchorage graduate at 1982. Um uh and uh I I will continue and read Representative Aishid's testimony. Uh hello, thank you for hearing my testimony. I'm Representative Ted Aishide and I'm proud to
023represent House District 22, Northeast Anchorage, North Moldun. I'm privileged to chair the House Military and Veteran Affairs Committee as well as co-chair the House Transportation Committee. However, I am speaking here on education funding and how important adequate funding is to the people I serve. As a member of the House Education Committee, I have been studying the impacts of inadequate education funding since January. The hours of testimony and the several studies I reviewed have made these impacts clear. Years of flat funding has hurt our Alaskan families and our children's education. We can't continue the path of flat funding as the impacts are real. They're hurtful and our Alaska Constitution calls on us to establish and maintain a public education system. Adequate funding is critical. So despite tough financial times for Alaska, I and my like-minded colleagues
024in the legislature have proposed, modified, and compromised to produce and pass an education funding bill that addresses in part the inadequate state funding of our schools. The result was HB57, a conservative education funding bill that incorporated many of the education policy changes requested by the governor. While modestly increasing the base student allocation by $700, though this increase does not compensate for years of flat funding, it is what the legislature could agree to and what we could afford at this moment. In short, HB57 provides a light at the end of a long, dark tunnel for our children and the educators who lift them up daily. In conclusion, I applaud the good work the Anchorage School District does for our community, and I commit to you that I will continue to advocate for adequate public education funding
025for our kids. After all, when I knocked on 5,000 doors last year in H in House District 22 and asked voters what issue they wanted me to prioritize in my legislative work, their response was loud and clear. Increase education funding. And so I have Thank you uh Anchorage School Board members for your good work. It is an honor to represent my constituents in House District 22 and I'm proud to be an education funding supporter. Indeed, I will continue my work putting kids first and will work to override the governor's veto of our modest education funding increase. Our constitution, my constituents, and our children demand it. Respectfully, Representative Ted Aishide. Thank you, um, Mr. Busy, and please thank the representative on our behalf for his testimony and service to Alaska. Um, our last elected official who's
026with us tonight is Representative Donna Mir. Welcome, Representative Mir. if you would join us up here at the front. Um, you have, uh, five minutes. Please begin when you're ready, and thank you for making time to come speak with us tonight. Thank you, President Jacobs, uh, Superintendent Bryant, and members of the school board. Um, I'm Donna. I represent South Mold Dune here in East Anchorage in the Alaska State Legislature. I really appreciate the difficult task before you tonight. As a legislator, we've heard over the last three years since I've been serving from superintendent, schoolboard members, principals, teachers, parents, and students, and members of our business and the rest of our community how important education is and how it's flagging. Uh, as a parent, uh, I have two children, uh, that went through, uh, ASD's charter
027schools, uh, correspondent school, and as of last month, I have two alumni to Betty Davis East High School. I am sorry for everyone who doesn't feel heard tonight. Um although tonight uh is considering effects on next year's school district budget, uh today's vetos heavily impact families and children even before they reach our students. It includes reductions in the infant learning program, child care assistance, and more. You will likely get the brunt of frustration and disappointment from our community. I will too. But let's be clear, this failure lies at the feet of our governor. The reduction in funds uh really is small in comparison to the fluctuations in our oil markets, our financial markets, and frankly this coming year, the potential changes that we might have in federal funding. Those are the three largest buckets of
028funding that we have for funding our state government. If funding is the real problem, lack of leadership from our governor holds that, too. In the past three years that I've been a legislator, funding measures get vetoed by the governor. changing our uh rental tax for vehicles, a a bill that would actually have provided some protection for folks that are renting vehicles and actually made a reduction last year got vetoed. Charging uh nicotine tax for vaping, which also protects children, vetoed. So these funding measures are getting vetoed. So there's not support for even these small measures for increasing revenue. This atmosphere dampens the ability to work on larger changes that we need to make. We need to diversify our revenue. This is the governor's seventh budget. Um it's my third. Um, we heard at the Anchorage
029delegation town hall this spring from a lot of folks that are really upset about the lack of services, the declining services that we're providing in the state of Alaska. Folks are very willing to pay for these services. They want to live in Alaska. They want their children educated. They want their roads plowed. They want these things to happen. We need to have leadership to provide the revenue that we need in order to do this. We need to take care of our communities. Thank you for allowing me to have this public testimony. Um I'm available to have conversations whether it's on the record later in your discussion tonight or offline. Um hopefully folks will feel free to reach out to me otherwise as well. Thank you very much for your time and um thank you for
030this difficult decision that you need to make tonight. Representative Mirs, thank you for your testimony and your service to our state. My understanding is Joselyn Dormis is with us online. Jocelyn, if you can unmute and begin your testimony, you have three minutes. All right. Are you guys able to hear? I hope. Excellent. Thank you guys so much. Um I have been working the last few months um to encourage um the school board if at all possible to allow in the budgeting some type of activities for the middle school. I understand there's a lot of things on the chopping block. Um I have two students. I'm a ASD parent. I have two students at Mirror Lake Middle School. And um when my eighth grader had his first week at middle school as a sixth grader, he
031ran through the door and told his younger sister, "I can't wait for you to come to middle school. It's so much fun." And this is a brother that usually picks on his little sister. And he wasn't talking about you're going to love math and you're going to love the English portion. He was talking about cross-country running. And at Mirror Lake Middle School, almost 200 students enroll in the cross country running. Um, and it's not because 200 middle schoolers love to run a mile and a half. Um it's because it's an opportunity to be physically active, to be able to do something after school, and um that they get to socialize and be with friends, try new things. And so if at all possible, even um I appreciate so much the consideration of the high school
032sports and just selecting some. Um, I realized that the budget was reinstated and a lot of these activities were brought back and approved, which again I'm just so thankful for. But if you're having to make more cuts, I was hoping that um at least one, two, three options for middle school would still be there um for the kids that don't have opportunities to do it outside of school. that goes along with National Junior Honor Society and any of the clubs and activities that just um give the students a chance to participate in community the fundraising for um the food banks and things like that. So very much we appreciate all the decisions you guys are making and I know you're doing the best that you have with the budget and um thank you for letting
033parents have a voice. Thank you for your testimony. Our next testifier is Rachel Posey. Welcome, Miss Posie. You have three minutes. Please begin when you're ready. Thank you, board members and Superintendent Bryant. Uh my name is Rachel Posey and I'm a parent of two students in the Anchorage School District. Um thank you for this opportunity to be here and doing this at the last moment. Um before I speak to what I was going to say, I just would um request that possibly you could leave the signup sheet out for people who maybe couldn't get here by the normal cuto off time. It was so last minute. There may be others that are coming in that would like to speak if that was possible. But um I als I want to thank the board for and
034the superintendent for the strong and forceful response that you have had to the proposed emergency regulations last week um regarding local contributions. and I am grateful that the board leadership is standing up against that attack on our schools. I also want to thank you for the repeated revisions and hours of work you've had to put into the budgeting process this year. And unfortunately, our governor is not supporting our schools and making your job exponentially more difficult. Um I'm really angry at the governor for his veto today and as I'm sure all of you are as well. And now I know you have to face a lot of difficult decisions now. Um, and I would like to echo the previous testifier and just really encourage you to try to do what you can to maintain some
035level of middle school sports um, or activities. I think that it's really critical for our students to have those opportunities to keep them engaged and keep them attending school and keep them it shows there's increased graduation rates when you have those opportunities. Um, maybe that means implementing a higher participation fee on some sort of sliding scale to help supplement the budget cuts or possibly doing a a small cut across the board for all sports with maybe a shorter season. But just allowing those students that opportunity. Um, I think middle school is such a critical time for development and um, I would really hope that we can keep some of those things in there. But I understand you have a lot of tough decisions and I appreciate all of the work that you are all doing
036and and your being here last minute like this as well. Um so that is all I have to say and thank you again. Thank you for your testimony, Miss Posie. Our next speaker is Denny Wells. Um, for the public's awareness, uh, we will open the floor after those who have had a chance to sign up because this is a special meeting with very last, uh, minute notice for anyone who wishes to testify. So, please don't leave if you would like to speak. Uh, Mr. Wells, welcome. You have three minutes. Please begin when you're ready. Uh, thank thank you very much. Uh, thank you, President Jacobs, um, and, um, and the rest of the board. Um uh I I feel like my my uh sentiments today um really are best addressed to unfortunately the legislature and
037the governor um given that we live in a state where it is literally our our state legislature that dictates our school funding. We we're we don't live in a state where um where you as a school board get to decide our school funding. you have you you are your your hands are tied um and and you you live within what whatever the pot of money is that that that you're given. Um I I would like to start by saying that um education is a fundamentally human endeavor. Um it is a fundamentally human endeavor that um un unlike you know manu manufacturing widgets that you can get more efficient with at over time um we we know that uh larger class sizes are not not effective learning learning environments. We know that um that in-person education
038is is most effective. Um this is a fundamentally human endeavor that will fundamentally um need need to evolve with inflation. Um and to that end um we we you you are currently faced with a situation where um uh your base student allocation your per student funding from the state um if you include onetime funding last year was about $6,600. Um and since last year since you set the budget last year we've had about a three and a half% inflation. Um, so just just to keep up with inflation, just since last year, um, your per student funding should be about $6,870. Um, unfortunately, that's not the level that the legislature could could could agree to this year. Um, they only managed to get to $6,600. The governor just vetoed that down to about $6,400. Um, that's
039$400 per student less in purchasing power than you had last year. And a in a elementary school of about 600 students, that's about $240,000. It's roughly two positions. Um in a high school of like 1,800 students, that's about $720,000. Um they that's that's a lot of school sports and activities or teachers that that our schools schools are not going to have the opportunity to access this year. Um and uh it is really gravely unfortunate. Um it is unfortunate not only um from a from a standpoint of what are our students accessing um but also from our staff and and teachers as well. Um I have three children who are in uh Anchorage schools um and uh just with the back and forth in the early budget cycles. Um I know one of my students schools
040has already lost three staff this year. Um, how many of those are just natural retirements versus uh driven by the frustration from this from the budget chaos? It's tough to tell. Um, but it it's still Mr. Wills. Thank you for your testimony and being with us tonight. Our next speaker is Amy Broek. Welcome. You have three minutes. Please begin when you're ready. Thank you for being with us tonight. Good evening and before I start, thank you so much for your service. I'm Amy Brabeck. I'm an Anchorage voter, a proud solo parent of an ASD student, and I've been an educator since 1996 and an ASD employee since 2001. I've been a classroom teacher and for the past 18 years an elementary school librarian currently at Chachnal. Such disappointing news from Juno. I have you have
041difficult decisions to make and the thought of reopening the traumatic wounds that the previous budget cuts created for our students, our families, our staff, our community. I have such a heavy heart and a pit in my stomach. This evening, I do want to talk connect with you about our elementary school librarians. We all know that the library should be the heart of every school and within it a full-time certified librarian who fosters and honors the love of reading and the joy of learning. We all know that librarians make connections with students through books as well as being a constant in their elementary school life. While we love our books, it is not the only piece of our purpose at our schools. We collaborate with teachers to support students learning and their social emotional growth. We
042help prepare our students to be respectful and productive digital citizens in the 21st century. Along with digital citizenship lessons, we teach Google digital tools to our students and staff. And this doesn't happen just during library class, but throughout the day. Elementary librarians have teamed up with the innovations team this year to focus on technology and education and with a goal of collaborating with teachers and integrating technology in a purposeful me manner for our students. Mel many elementary librarians are their school's elm techch their building test coordinator their teacher in charge wroup provider it they're the school's backup plan and if we look at it through a business lens elementary librarians are responsible for hundreds of thousands of dollars in assets in books and in Chromebooks. I am hopeful that the 12.5 elementary librarian positions will
043remain. We support grower growing readers for life. We support the Alaska Reads Act. We support 21st century learners. In the lower 48, when school districts eliminate their full-time librarians, their reading scores decreased. When librarians were reinstated, the reading scores increased again. And we don't want that happening in ASD. Please prioritize keeping full-time elementary school librarians for every elementary school. Our students deserve this. Again, thank you very much for your time and I know that um the decisions you have to make are very difficult. So, my thoughts will be with you. Thank you for your testimony. Our next speaker is Corey East. Welcome, sir. You have three minutes. Please begin when you're ready. Thank you, President Jacobs and school board members. Thank you for this opportunity to speak. In a state that claims student outcomes and
044accountability matter, the governor does everything he can to undermine the efforts of educators and our support staff to improve student achievement. The governor's veto to reduce public education funding is disgraceful. HP57 passed and was then overridden with bipartisan legislative support. Alaska communities overwhelmingly support a strong, healthy, and vibrant public education system for Alaska, not the miserable and damaging learning environments the governor continues to create. Due to the governor's continued disregard for student learning environments, student outcomes will continue to be challenged. This is what he has created. Unmanageable and harmful class sizes. High school classes have more than 30 students in core classes, English, math, science, and others. Middle school classes have between 35 and 45 students on a regular basis, and many elementary class sizes are well over 30 students. I've been told that some
045kindergarten classes this fall are expecting to have upwards of 30 students. During the five years I taught kindergarten at Maldoon Elementary, I had 18 kindergarten students. 18. And that was a lot for Maldoon. With so many students, there is very little, if any, individualized instruction. With so many students, the frequency and severity of student behaviors continue to cause daily disruptions to learning and at times compromise the safety of those in those spaces. Moreover, turnover of certificated staff continues at an unsustainable rate. This will be the fourth year ASD has experienced 400 certificated educator resignations. If you're not aware, we had 44 more in May. 44. I'm not sure what the count is yet in June. With over 1,600 certificated staff, almost 60% of our educators turning over in just four years. This turnover has a
046detrimental impact on building school communities, program continuity, and developing strong, lasting student educator relationships. Building meaningful connections takes time, but in some learning spaces, students have little opportunity to establish those bonds and with their teachers. As a result, student outcomes suffer. The governor's continued attack on public education will exacerbate the staffing crisis we are currently experiences as educators continue to flee Alaska for more competitive urban school districts in the lower 48 and a defined benefit retirement option or leave the education profession entirely. Our Anchorage community must know that elementary school teachers are now a hard to fill position with 62 unfilled positions for next year and over 220 unfilled certificated positions districtwide. Classroom teachers, special education teachers, nurses, specialists, and related services educators. The continued staffing crisis will impact student outcomes. If a school cannot
047find a certificated educator for their classroom, more and more students will experience uncert uncertified long-term subs as their teachers and outcomes will be challenged. The education profession in Alaska is bleak due to this governor and student outcomes will continue to suffer without immediate intervention. Our communities urged the state legislature to call a special session and override this shameful veto. I ask you in your deliberations to be really mindful of what your educators just went through this spring as you make your decisions tonight. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony, Senator. Um that completes our list of those who have signed up. Uh for I apologize. We have one more um and then we'll open the floor. Um Rosalyn Grady Wish following Miss Grady Wish. We will ask if there's any member of the audience who
048wishes to sign up who wasn't able to do so. Welcome. You have three minutes. Please begin when you're ready. Good evening, Chair Jacobs. Oh, well, I'm Roslin Grady White. Good evening, Chair Jacobs, Dr. Bryant, members of the school board, and the Anchorage community. I am a public educator, uh, public school educator, a parent, and I proudly serve as the education chair for the NAACP Anchorage branch. Before I begin, I want to sincerely thank the school board and the Anchorage School District for the work that you put into building a responsible student centered budget to get us where we are. I recognize the effort you made to prioritize our kids and protect vital programs under intense pressure. Your leadership means a great deal. I wasn't planning on speaking tonight. I was at home doing my children's
049hair, getting my oldest ready for a flight out of state to go explore her schooling options. But when I saw that the governor Dunlevy signed the veto, I stopped and I got my behind here. This morning, the governor vetoed a $50 million increase to the base student allocation, cutting it to a cutting it to 500. This is not level funding. This is a cut and it is an attack on every student, every classroom, every teacher, and every family in Alaska. It disproportionately hurts black, brown, and indigenous students already underserved, underserved, and underfunded. It strips resources from students with disabilities, ELLL learners. It harms public charter schools and correspondent schools who are also part of our public education system. Let us be clear, this is a clear sign of Project 2025. This is part of a
050national agenda to dismantle public education, eliminate equity, and replace it with a system where only the privilege thrive. This governor has made his position known, and he wants to defund public education. Period. But here's what he may not expect. We are not afraid and we will not let him succeed. Let remind us what section that constit Alaska constitution says. The legislator shall by general law establish and maintain a public a system of public schools open to all children of the state. Maintain, not dismantle, not undermine. Maintain. As a mother, I shouldn't have to send my child of the state to pursue her dreams. As a teacher, I should not have to choose which students get the support they need. And as the NAACP Anchorage Education Chair, I'm not staying quiet. The legislature did its job.
051The governor isn't. So, I call on the legislature to override this line item veto. This is a fight for your state's education. Dr. Bryant, you set the tone last week. You spoke truth to power. Let's keep that fire going. The NAACP will not let up. We will organize. We will hold the line. and we will defend public education in Alaska because our children are watching and we refuse to let them down. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Um if there are those who didn't have an opportunity to sign up who would like to testify, I would ask you please come forward now. Um we have room for two two folks here at the front of our dis again. and anyone who wishes to testify before we take a recess. See one taker. Welcome. You
052have three minutes. Please begin when you're ready and um please read your name into the record or state your name into the record uh for our purposes. Thanks. Okay. Can you guys hear me? Yes. Um good evening members of the school board. My name is Rachel Blley. I'm the parent of two young children, one of whom just finished her kindergarten year at Bear Valley Elementary School. I did not have a lot of time to prepare my remarks this evening. Ironically, I was supposed to be presenting to my community council tonight about public education updates. Instead, after hearing the news of the governor's latest veto, I packed up early, leaving behind our community council potluck and my prepared remarks. And like so many other dedicated parents and friends and advocates in this room with me tonight,
053I jumped in my car after getting my kids settled in the nice sunshine and came here to speak directly to you. I want to say thank you. Thank you for your resilience in the face of cruelty and bullying from both the governor and our education commissioner. We see you. We see the leadership that you've shown when our state's highest officials have failed us. And we stand with you. It is outrageous that in Alaska, in Anchorage, parents can no longer simply send our kids to school and enjoy their childhoods, watching them grow, thrive, and learn. Instead, we're forced to become policy analysts, budget watchd dogs, and full-time advocates just to defend the basic foundation of a public education system that our kids deserve. This veto is not just a line on a spreadsheet. It is a
054betrayal of Alaska's children, educators, and future. But we are not giving up, and we know you won't either. Thank you for standing strong, and please keep fighting. I dropped everything, hopped in my car, and drove here lightning fast to say to you in person, we are here with you. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony, Miss Blakeley. U if there is another individual who wishes to testify, please come forward. Thank you for joining us tonight. Please state your name for our record and then you have three minutes. Hi, my name is Ashley Manai. Um, thank you school board for allowing us this opportunity to speak. I'm a parent of three young children, two currently enrolled in ASD public schools, and I'm a public health professional and a proud graduate of this district. I want to
055begin by recognizing and sincerely thanking you, the members of this board, for your tireless advocacy on behalf of our schools. I see how hard you have worked to defend students, staff, and classrooms in the face of chronic underfunding and political obstruction. I know your hands are tied in many ways, and I do not take your burden lightly. We are grateful to you and we are standing with you, but we are now in a moment that dep demands even greater clarity and courage. Governor Dun Levy's line item veto of HB57 is indefensible. It strips $4.2 million from ASD's budget with no warning and no justification after a bipartisan coalition of legislature legislators worked in a good faith in good faith to pass a long overdue BSA increase. This veto isn't just disruptive, it's harmful. It undermines
056every effort this board has made to stabilize our schools and forces impossible decisions back onto local shoulders. And now in parallel, DED is pushing a regulation change that would redefine local contributions in a way that punishes communities for going above and beyond. It threatens to include non-instructional uh it threatens uh it threatens to include non-instructional support like pre-K, afterchool programs, and school meals under the cap. That means fewer resources for students and even more instability for our districts. This is not about fixing equity. It's about dismantling the very systems that still work. It's about punishing success and dragging everyone down to the same inadequate baseline. And so we must be careful, extremely careful about how we respond. If we start cutting the few remaining lifelines our kids have, after school sports, clubs, activities, we aren't
057protecting instructions. We're undermining undermining it. These are the things that help kids stay engaged, stay motivated, and stay in school. Removing them won't improve test scores. will only make it harder for students to succeed. As much as I hate to say it, especially as the daughter of a retired ASD teacher, we as adults need to take the hit before we ask our kids to carry the burden. That may mean tough decisions, but it must never mean sacrificing the programs that keep our children connected, safe, and inspired. This is our duty, not just as parents or professionals, but as adults who have the power to shield the next generation from the consequences of bad governance. We will continue to fight for what our district needs and we will outlast this moment. The Dunley decline era will
058end, but our responsibility to our children will not. Let's make sure that when history looks back, it sees a school board and a community who did everything they could to protect what mattered most. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony, Miss Mania. Is there anyone else who wishes to join us and testify tonight before we take a brief recess and then begin discussion hearing? Seeing none, we'll take a 5m minute recess and resume afterward. Thank you. call ourselves back to order at 7:31 p.m. Thank you everyone. Okay. Um, Dr. Bryant, I want to open conversation, I guess, with a a couple um clarifying questions. Uh, first I remark I want to um thank everyone who took time to come speak to us regarding um this last minute action. um as um it was incredibly consequential
059test testimony and hearing from you while we navigate um this really challenging uh position as a district is much appreciated. I I think I'd like to take a second to echo something that was said earlier that pulling the rug out from students, families, and educators just a few weeks away from the start of a fiscal year um seems especially cruel and um is a stain on any political legacy and that's unfortunate. With that said, I think the good news is the legislature has a chance to make this right, but that may not be until January. Um, with that said, I'm curious if Dr. Brennan if your team has had any chance to analyze for factf finding purposes first the scope of any other vetos issued. You know, we um during our budget deliberations had a
060chance to look at spending increases as it pertained to inflation. um since FY17 and noted that uh the Department of Corrections budget has ballooned significantly um since then. The Department of Public Safety the same. Um is there someone who can speak to what vetos occurred from those two departments? Um Mr. President, I would ask if any staff members can clarify um regarding the two departments reference. Do we have that information? Uh sure. through the president. Just looking at the spreadsheet that was posted along with the vetos, I didn't see anything that was referencing either department of corrections or uh public safety, which has seen large increases over the last decade. To the extent that our budget is a statement of our values, um the statement we're sending is um confusing and disappointing to our children.
061Um with that said, I want to open conversation to the board and not monopolize conversation. Um is there a board member who has a question? And I see member lessons. Thanks. This is um an opportunity for factf finding I think as a first step. I know that we budgeted $560 per pupil as an increase uh during our budget revisions a few weeks ago. We've just been presented with the governor's veto uh outlining uh an aggregate increase of 500, but for us that will require a decrement of $60 per pupil. Can the administration clarify what the scale of cuts that ASD is going to need to um consider under this scenario? Great question, member lessons. I'm going to ask my chief financial officer to fact check me, but if I understand a $200 per student reduction
062is equivalent to $4.3 million or can you clarify what the reduction what the reduction is? Sure. So, we created or the board created a budget in May, revised version that had a $560 BSA equivalent. So, if that's brought down to $500 BSA equivalent, then that's about um 4.3 million. The $200 BSA would be like the 700 to the 500, which would be a little over 14. Yeah. My apologies. Yeah, I I didn't word that clearly. Uh $4.3 million reduction. Correct. Additional from what we've already cut. Yeah. Right. Exactly. So th this underscores the devastation that we're talking about. So typically this is something that we would do many months in advance um typically around January, February, but because of what the governor chose to do now ASD needs to identify 4.3 million additional reductions. Um
063and this is the same thing that districts statewide will be doing. So for example, I know of some districts that budgeted for the full $700. So now the rug has been yanked from under them. um that's much larger than the amount that ASD is talking about because of our reduction. So this is very complicated, but I guess to answer the the scale to member lesson's question, that would be the amount that we're seeking to reduce beyond what we've already reduced, if that makes sense. It does. I appreciate uh the clarification um from uh Dr. Bryant and from from staff. I wonder if the I've entertained a thought and I don't know if that's the right word but I've had a thought uh we have funds we are ready to go uh in my mind you
064know we can have school uh starting in August but there's if you imagine our funding as a kind of doomsday clock you know I imagine that the funding would run out sometime in I don't know March April uh of 2026 um to me that positions us to potentially move forward with the budget that we have prepared. Um can the administration to speak to the extent to which that is advisable or ill advised essentially in in you know looking to see what action might arise from the legislature when they gave it in January I guess is that caveat. Yeah. So I think you know if we just continually spend the money that we may or may not have that may not be the the track we want to take in the event we don't get that
065money right and then we get into a position where we spent our fund balance down below what um our minimum or the amount we actually have is in that instance we end up liquidating other fund balances for things like our bond rating reserve federal impact aid other projects that we have ongoing maintenance type things or IT or even charter schools. These things we have like funding set aside for currently um at least with that scale at at 4.3 million. It's not quite where we'd have to have months of um cash problems. We would have you know days or a week maybe if if I may. So Mr. President. Okay. So, if we uh should not proceed with business as usual, um what are the options that the administration may have started to consider as a
066means to close a $4.3 million gap? Yeah. and member lessons. I guess to answer that question, I do want to zoom out a little bit. Um because I I just want to applaud how visionary the board was when it developed the budget for the $560 that we developed together, right? And I really want the public to understand this. Um that we took a calculated effort to assume a $560 projection. $560 is because that's the number the governor himself said that he was comfortable with um through his own separate BSA bill. So that number actually came directly from the man that just vetoed below that number. Um so we truly are in a crisis situation. But I I think what really infuriates me is the fact that because the ASD board projected revenue and invested every
067cent of those dollars towards student outcomes and the classroom, those are the very things that would need to be yanked away from those same kids. And I think the most damning thing from this entire situation is the governor actually knew that information. In fact, the entire legislature knew that the ASD board invested every single cent of the proposed BSA increase in House Bill 57. And that's why we overrode his veto with the vote to spare. That's why this was so overwhelmingly popular because it was aligned with great policies in addition to a permanent BSA increase. So, we're all flabbergasted and blindsided and we're trying to figure out what to cut in lifetime. So, I can only imagine for a district that is now cutting the equivalent of $700 per student from their budget. Again, for
068them that could amount to very severe, very drastic reductions. For ASD, my commitment is to try to keep as many jobs as I can. I'm going to look at every single contract that we put on that list that that we can cut in order to save a job. So, just one example, and I don't mean to put anybody on blast because it's the board that gets to make the final decision, but I see something that we purchase, for example, is a dome to host our sports because we really value sports and activities for our students. How can I, in good conscience, spend $200,000 on a contract for the dome when I could save a teacher that now the governor is asking me to cut from my budget 15 days before the new fiscal year? That's
069my line of thinking. And it's only to get more dark from here. were only within the first 2 hours of my processing this news from the state. And can you imagine for those in rural Alaska that even has access to less information and less resources than I do and a smaller microphone, this is outrageous. Thank you, member lessons, and thank you, Dr. Bryant, for your comments. Um, and appreciate you acknowledging that the the board really um was intentional in targeting funding um projected new revenue toward classroom instruction. um as that was one of the uh primary um catalysts for uh the failure of a BSA bill um a year ago was a fear of the funding not going to the classroom. And so I think it's fair to say that at this point it's clear
070that um the challenge exists not about where appropriations are spent uh but the fact that there's a lack of um political courage to implement a fiscal plan to allow those appropriations to be made in the first place. Um with that said, we'll go to member Bellamy and then member Hollow. I'm good. Uh member Lessons uh asked all my questions so far. Excellent. Thank you, member Hullman. Uh, and not a question per se, but I I do want to say to the public once again, uh, two things. One, in choosing the the number we did to increase our budget. It was meant to be conservative and cautious because everything that was being discussed in the legislature was significantly higher. Uh it goes to the value of predictability in education. Teachers knowing what resources they'll have through
071the year as they start the year and plan. Um we we thought we were making changes and staying under what we might have to look at um with the idea that even if there was a veto, we might be calling a special meeting in order to fill the gap between what we had budgeted at up to a number that the governor had vetoed down to. The idea that it would be less than uh as a net on the BSA didn't seem reasonable just as recently as a month ago. Uh but it has come there now. Um and then the the other thing uh that I do hope everyone internalizes because it will be an argument in public. If none of the the funds had been vetoed, our ability, our purchasing power for the coming year
072would have been a little under what it is for this year, what the state funded at already because the governor indicated it was just too expensive of a of I can't remember if he used the word increase, but it wasn't an increase from the combined funding of the BSA and outside the BSA funding. last year it would have been a slight increase in the dollar amount but not enough to account for inflation. So even with the full 700 we would have come up a little short from what we're doing this year. Um it means that at a $500 increase on the BSA there's a significant shortfall. So we we try to be very cautious. uh we we try to predict and and plan for things that we can deliver on. Uh but this really does
073come as as just an unexpected shock and uh I don't envy the continued work the administration has to do to come up with yet a different plan for how we start the school year. Thank you. Thank you, Member Hall and member Higgins. The floor is yours. Thank you. Um, first of all, I appreciate the opening comments from the superintendent regarding the, you know, the the issue out there. You go to the person, the group that has control of this issue about the 700 under front of the Supreme Court, you know, we got three branches, but unless we bring it in front of that branch, they can't take any action. They can't do anything. And that's one of our issues right there. Will we utilize all three branches to be able to uh comply with the
074constitution and raise that issue that super the superintendent is right that there's an obligation here funding the 700 that's not something that that is disputed that there was $700 has been approved and he can't cut that but he can just underfund it. So that's a that's an issue I think from a legislative standpoint. I I think the history here just for a couple of comments here uh dates back because over 10 years ago we did a picassodum study at that time it was all focused on classroom sizes and u in the lower 48 uh the pasodum studies been used to establish was adequate funding and from K through third grade is 1 to 15 above that 1 to 25 as you heard in the testimony tonight we've got um kindergarten as high as 30 so
075we have one classroom that should be two right now. That would be two full classrooms. And what is the what does the the governor wanted to do? The governor wanted to say let's keep cutting until we improve classroom sizes. So let's keep increasing class sizes and see if we can improve academic outcomes when everybody says that's directly related to academic growth. So that's frustrating as anything. uh I'll I'll mention right now about 10 years ago I met with the governor along with who uh who at that time was a super was a senator and uh two students and before we could talk he raised his hand and said before you begin has the anchor school district plans to cut $100 million and I said no but if we did we're going to probably have to
076take down some walls to to increase um the capacity for each classroom and he said that's okay I believe in private school and the home school and I think what we've seen right now is just that he's been successful while cuts have been that much. So the other question is adequate funding establishing that not just the 700 but what's adequate funding because we can't continue and sit on the sidelines without fighting this back year after year and not looking out for the interests of kids. These kids are at risk and academically to be successful that's a big issue. Superintendent last year has focused on the issue of taking control of charter schools. He believes he made it clear uh private school funding and religious schools in violation of the constitution. So underfunding the 700 and
077the other issues he's there is everything is anti- kids for public education. It's really frustrating to me. I hope that we can somehow figure out a way to address all these issues. We got three branches of government. I think we need to use them. Uh we need to go ahead and address it because it's not going to be addressed otherwise. The legislator's responsibility ultimately is determined how you going to get the revenue, but that doesn't excuse the obligation to meet the constitution and the adequate funding for public education falls on the state and that should not be that disputed and it's even the even the governor in this case said, "Well, we just don't have money for the for the adequate funding." And so he's he's not even arguing that 700 isn't a good number
078or reasonable. He's just saying, "We don't have the money. I don't want to pay it." Uh so I think we have an obligation here to let the third branch of government be engaged in this. I think we need to go forward with a budget that does the least damage to all of our kids given the restraints that we've got and I don't want to see us um over cutting where it's going to hurt kids right now and it becomes irreversible. Uh and so whatever plan could be done there, I look to the superintendent. I appreciate um his frustration. Uh I know he wants to improve academic outcomes and this is undermining everything he could hope to do and for the board who wants the same thing. So um I I hope we have that discussion
079on the legal options and then try to maintain what we can in the budget so that we don't hurt kids right now while we go forward legally. Uh thank you member Higgins. Just a quick clarification for Superintendent Bryant. Does the administration need direction from the board to seriously consider taking legal action at this point or is that a recommendation that will come from admin when the time is right? I'd like to come to the board with a recommendation given that there are many external players that are involved and interested in litigation and in fact there may even be more players now would also like to fund this litigation. We need to come together as a community to make sure that our kids get every cent of that $700 that our legislature appropriated for them. That's
080a promise. Thank you, Dr. Bryant. The other um comment I'll jump in the queue to make before we go to Member Bellamy and then member lessons is that um the you know seeing that um oil prices looks like they rose I think $8 a barrel potentially. Um seeing in national news it just comes at an odd time. Um, the lack of a sustainable long-term fiscal plan being used to to justify a cut to public education, which is a constitutional mandate, is um disingenuous and in no way negates um that mandate that exists. Um and unfortunately the the lack of leadership um coming from Juno has put us in a place where today um our state chose the permanent fund dividend over its and that has to stop. Um member Bellamy then we'll go to member
081lessons. Uh thank you Mr. Chair. Um, this is outrageous. Uh, and I think we all agree that it's outrageous. I I think I want to I need to know what happens if we do nothing right now. I mean, if we leave our budget, I mean, I know we don't want to spend money that we don't have. We did it last year. We spent $100 or whatever amount above. So, what what happens if we do nothing and we leave the budget as it is right now and and and work toward a a a veto, a veto override or a lawsuit or whatever it is while we decide what we do. I mean, I just don't want us to I So, first of all, that's my first question. What happens if we do nothing through the president?
082I have a feeling that the answer is very dark. member Bellamy. But u Mr. Atliff, would you like to confirm what would happen if we took no action? Um for this year with our current funding, if we took no action, again, that's a $4.3 million deficit that we're going to have to find somewhere else, right? Um so ultimately, if we end up being overspent by that 4.3 million, it would come out of our fund balance somewhere. Um I don't believe we have we may have almost that much as a cushion for the 1% we have left of spendable resources but um you know things can change if we have an emergency of some sort that money can go away really quickly. Member Bellamy, do you have another question for the team or uh actually I
083I I guess I'm just Yeah, because I'm trying to understand. So what does it cost? And I'm not suggesting we do this. What does it c cost to increase the PTR by one? What does that cost? Uh, a little over 7 million, I believe. Yeah. 7 million. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Any other questions? Member Bellamy? I'm good. Thank you. Okay. Um, we will go to member lessons. Um, I have a question and a comment. I'm going to begin with the comment because it builds off of the um, remarks about uh, does the administration need a recommendation from the board about legal action? And one of the things that I'm most pleased about in House Bill 57 is the creation of a joint legislative education task force. The last time I believe we had one was around
084about 2007 and they issued their recommendations in the fall of 2007 uh just a couple of months after the Moore decision uh was uh the verdict of the Moore decision came out that July and the joint legislative task force uh in 2007 uh implemented uh some uh changes really on the heels of that um legal case. So I think that there is uh potential alignment of timing should a case proceed uh with the expectation that the new House Bill 57 task force is supposed to prepare a report for January 2027 I believe. Um that's my comment and reflection. My question is that um the word uh at the tip of my tongue is unprecedented. Other people have probably used this word right now or today, but the governor's action is really unprecedented in the history
085of the modern uh foundation formula dating back 25 years or so. Uh we haven't seen a governor appropriate less uh for education than what is in statute. So my question is really how does that action set our district up for preparing the FY27 budget? What will we base that budget on? Will we base it on statute or will we base it on a $500 level because that's what the governor feels is appropriate. That's a great question, member lessons, and one that will probably keep me up very late tonight and for many nights after. And I'm being completely serious with you. I think my key takeaway is that we need to ensure that we never have leaders that will ever do this to Alaskan children again. Because the problem with doing what the governor did is
086that now there's no confidence about what's even in law for the base student allocation. Districts will never know if money is one-time or permanent because even if the legislature were to approve a $1,000 BSA, can we trust a governor to fund the thousand dollars that's in the law? Can we trust the governor to follow Alaska statute? I wish I could tell you the answer, but I'm only two and a half hours in to the most devastating news that I've heard since I've started this job in Alaska. So, I'm still processing, too. But that that's my initial take member lessons. That's a very dark reality if schoolboard members cannot trust the leader of their state to commit what the law says our kids need. And the law says it's $700 extra dollars. Followup. Member lessons. I'd
087like to make a motion if that's appropriate at this time. The floor is yours. Member lessons. I move to direct district administration to compile a list prior to the board's second meeting in December of potential budget reductions to implement should the Alaska legislature fail to override the FY26 operating budget line item veto of the base student allocation on or before January 22nd, 2026. And I believe that um Miss Sullivan has the text of that already. Is there a second while we make sure that's up on the screen? Second. Perfect. Seconded by member Higgins, made by member Lessons. All right. Um, Member Lessons, can you speak to your motion? Uh, thank you. I appreciate the questions that other board members have asked, the information that the administration has been uh able to share thus far. It
088feels uh very it would feel very premature to me this evening to take action and increase PTR, cut opportunities for students while believing that we can begin the school year offering as much in the way of protection and opportunity to all of our students um to uh pursue mastery of the state standards. Um, this motion would allow the district administration to gather time, public input, and um have a better sense of the lay of the land than the board taking action two two and a half hours into um news of the the governor's veto. The second meeting in December is when the board traditionally passes the pro-forma budget. We have talked in our finance committee meeting that um that's going to be an information only item at this point, but we're going to be passing
089a separate memo at that time. But really the timeline, we've talked about this elsewhere, right? We have to pass our budget at the end of February to hand it off to the municipality. In order to pass it in February, the administration needs to focus on budget preparation in January. And in order to prepare the budget in January, they need to have direction from the board in December. And so if the administration can prepare a list of potential budget reductions really anytime throughout the fall, but no later than that second meeting in December, I think that would position the board to make um an educated um analysis of our students needs and our fiscal situation and um would allow a really strong public process in in the leadup to that conversation. Thank you, member lessons. Um,
090Dr. Bryant. Yeah. Um, I just want to make sure that our staff is tracking the language of this and I would like for them to chime in if there's anything that needs to be clarified about the board's intent. Mr. Ratliff, um, I think the language is fairly clear. I', you know, I' I'd anticipate having this much, much sooner because we want to get these things in front of us, have something to discuss, um, rather than, you know, we get into December, January, that's a really busy time for us, too. So, the more public engagement we can get on this, the better. So, I think you can anticipate seeing um, reductions or ideas for that quite a bit sooner. Thanks. And then member lessons, any follow-up comments? Yeah, thank you. And then the other component uh
091another rationale for this is that it really empowers our legislative partners with the information they will need to potentially engage with an override vote. Thank you. I'll jump in the queue to state that I um support and was was happy to partner with member lessons on this and so um thank you for collaborating. I um I think this language provides clear instruction to administration um and allows us to leverage what we believe will be a favorable vote based on previous legislative action on the additional revenue that is um statutoily obligated to or should be should have been statutoily obligated to the Anchorage School District. Um it's my understanding at this point that there likely won't be a special session until January. Um which aligns with the uh January 22nd uh timeline of 2026. I believe
092the the second half of the 34th legislature gabbles in on 120 of 26. And so, um, this would allow administration to, um, leverage that, you know, a hopeful additional revenue, uh, from leaders who are not afraid to support our students, um, after they take that second override vote. Um, with that said, the only question I guess I have for administration is, is there enough meat left on the bone, so to speak, to reduce uh the $4 million that we anticipate needing, should the legislature choose to fail to override for any reason? I think the most uh common terms of have we trimmed the fat, have we dug into muscle, districts across the state have amputated limbs to try to make this budget work. So every single recommendation we put forth will be harmful, devastating to
093someone. I wish I could say that there were a painless path forward, but unfortunately I I don't see how that's possible. Okay. Again, I'll reiterate I support and thank you member lessons for making the motion. Um member Bellamy, sorry. Yeah, I sorry I was unmuted. Anyway, um this is kind of where I where I was going with my question. What if we do nothing? Uh but this gives us more time. Uh it gives it it um keeps it gives our families a little confidence that we are all is not lost uh in terms of um getting the the year started and and trying to make the best of out of all of this mess. So anyway, I I will support the motion. Uh I think it's a reasonable it still represents a risk, but it's
094a reasonable way for us to move forward and and and and uh get some time uh to to look at a lot of things, including uh a legal path forward. So um I will support it. Thank you. Thank you, Member Bellamy. And the QA will go to Member Higgins. Yeah, I I appreciate the motion. I I think in meeting with um in the discussions here in the board as well as community councils, one of the comments I made is, you know, the good news is we might get 700. Well, I was wrong. Uh and the bad news was even with 700 next year, putting together a budget until we get money for the state, we're going to be looking at worse than it was this year because we won't have the budget reserves that we're
095spending. That's going to be out. That's a lot of money. And so we're going to be uh having to deal with the inflationary factors and adjustments without any additional knowledge of what's going to be funded. Now, as the superintendent pointed out, even if they did approve it, it doesn't mean that the governor isn't going to try to veto it. And so that means it double uh yam, it's going to be awful trying to come out with a budget uh with this. So I like the the motion here. This looks at assuming the 500 doesn't change, but just so the public understands, even if it was 700, we still got a problem next year unless they approve additional funding because it was less than, you know, people fought for the thousand. So, we're going to be
096in that kind of crisis. I hope one of the things we'll look at right now is what can we do for the 4 million. I have not been supportive of closing any schools. But if there is a school that makes sense right now and we can put it on a fast track that doesn't adversely impact the kids and may have some benefits of how we switch things around, I think we need we probably need to put it on the table. Is there a way to do a fasttrack this year uh to get it done because this is a funding crisis that I don't want to cut uh librarians. I don't want to cut nurses. I don't want to cut sports. And if we can find some other way to make up the the four million
097fought that way, um I'm gonna be for the first time probably supportive. Thank you, member Higgins. Um I think it can be considered germaine to the underlying motion. So I'll jump in with a clarifying question for administration. Uh, our board chose to remove two campuses from the recommended list by administration during our last right sizing window and we've committed to revisiting um right sizing this fall. There are campuses um in Eagle River in South Anchorage that um were candidates u that were recommended by administration. There are others that um could be looked at across our municipality and I'm not interested in naming specific programs at this point, but um would administration view school closures as a financially viable solution at this point or do we recommend waiting until fall? Any information there would be helpful?
098You know, Mr. President, I have been working so hard for years to avoid emergency school closures. And I'm afraid to say that this is something that rural districts have already done, have already considered, and frankly, it's probably going to happen this fall, if not in ASD somewhere else, because that's how devastating this slap in the face to public trust is to every school building in the state of Alaska, every schoolboard member, every superintendent. I've tried to avoid it. I wish I could tell you that that was off the table. Nothing can be off the table when you pull the rug from underneath a community 15 days before the beginning of the fiscal year. So, we vetted quite a few schools. I want the community to understand that an emergency closure would mean um saving close
099to a million dollars in perpetuity per building because we wouldn't need to have those fixed staff in those buildings forever. So that's why some districts may choose to just close a building on the spot because at least they could save a million dollars. You know, for ASD, um we're looking at $4.3 million. So could I make the choice to emergency close five schools to close that gap and to build capacity? I could. And honestly, I think it's something that at least needs to be discussed both privately and in public with the entire community. And when we have that conversation, the first thing I'm going to say is we're having this conversation because of the DIY tax to public education, which was this unacceptable, possibly unlawful veto to that's appropriated in law by the Alaska State
100Legislature. Thank you, Dr. Bryce. And um if there are other board members who are interested in making a motion tonight to leverage um a potential emergency closure um you know again I'll remind the board we chose to close less schools than was encouraged by administration and the legislature um and I believe the executive branch have both referenced the need for us to close more buildings and so um doing so uh may uh be looked upon favorably um not in our community certainly and I don't I think among members of this board um in totality, but is something that would generate potentially fewer vetos in the future, which again are heartbreaking, unfortunate, and um everything else that's been said thus far. I have member Donley in the queue, then we'll move on. Thank you, Mr. President.
101Um, one of my concerns with delaying a decision on budget reductions until December is you lose time. Money is time. And there are potential reductions that if we don't put them in place at the beginning of the school year would be very difficult to put in place in the middle of the school year. And also we'd lose two, three and a half months of school time. the the reduction that occurs during that time. We're waiting for December to make a decision. So that is very problematic, I think. Um so I think it's worth our time tonight since there was no notice that we would be doing a motion like this. Uh so nobody had time to prepare for any answer to um allow members to ask some questions of the administration to probe potential budget
102reductions we could consider um now or at least begin talking about them. And along those lines, I'd like to ask a few questions to the administration in potential development of a of a substitute motion. So my first question was um about the middle school model. The middle school model allows for an additional planning period in our middle schools. Um my memory of the cost of that is about 3.4 million. Um is that accurate? I believe so. Is in the 3 to four million ballpark. Okay. And how many years has the middle school model been in place in this district? So um the current model with collaboration time um included uh goes back um precoid to for about seven years now in implementation. Prior to that there was a long history of what we called teen
103time which was a similar model um although somewhat different focus um for for many years before that. So it's been a totality of over 20 years. Well, yeah, but the actual cost uh occurred at the time the school board adopted it back then that there was about a 3 million or 2 million cost, but then the expansion of middle schools to include sixth grade increase the cost now. So, there was a cost when it went into place. So, it's the cost is about $3 million. I'm thinking 3.4 million. And it's something that didn't exist in this district really, the middle school model per se, until about seven years ago. So that's something that if we eliminated it would not be something that's been around for decades and decades and decades. Um my next question is
104about um the cost of assistant principles. Dr. Member Donley, I'm going to let Dr. Brian address your first question before we move on to your next question. Yeah, member Donley, I really appreciate your perspective, but I'm afraid what you've brought up is exactly why I think it makes sense to take more time before we discuss this on the fly. And I want to give a specific example why because the public may not understand what exactly the middle school model is, but I'd like to clarify that the middle school model is extra teachers for the middle school. So, what you're suggesting is to reduce the number of teachers in every middle school, and that may not even be possible because of statutory obligations with tenure teachers and whatnot. So that wouldn't be something I would encourage
105the board to discuss um at the dis last minute when we're frustrated when we're panic we when we don't know what's going on. This is why the administrative team and experts and lawyers need to review this situation very carefully. So that's why I actually strongly agree with the original direction which is to take a little time and figure out what are viable paths to not unintentionally amputate a limb that we can't legally cut. Thank you Dr. Bryant. Um and then I'll just reclaim my time, please. This we that's not a Robert Schules term, member Donley, but I'll just note just briefly for um members that we want to keep discussion germanine to the motion in front of us. I think it's very germanine to the motion what I'm asking here. There's a motion here to
106delay action on budget reductions until December. We had no opportunity to consider this before we walked into this room tonight and a exploration of alternatives to this motion is completely appropriate. Uh, member Donley, I don't disagree with that. I just think we need to stick to the discussion on this motion and then should should we choose to um amend, you're welcome to do that, discuss at that time at this point. Well, that's what I'm doing. I'm trying to get the information necessary to propose an amendment in the form of a substitute motion. Okay, then please go ahead with your targeted questions that you need to make an amendment. Thank you. So in the original budget the board adopted, there were reductions in the numbers of assistant principles, but when the board made the decision to
107restore based on what the board rationally assumed would be the additional funding coming from the legislature, were there some assistant principles put back into the budget based on the 560? And how many were they? And how much did that cost? There were five that were restored based on the amendment in May at a cost of about 841,000. Member Donnie, you do have another question. Yes. But I would point out that once again, we'd just be going back to a decision we had previously made by making that reduction. and that reduction and the cost of the middle school model would more than close the gap that's created that we're dealing with right here is 4.3 million. Um the other question I had is how many years have we had the existing office of what there's a
108long name that's hard to remember of equity um and it's been in place for maybe four years right um now how many years has the office it's it started as the office of equity and compliance but then it got another name and then it's got another name now so how many years has that been in place with our Perfect. U member Donley, I I could only speculate how long the position has existed in various forms, probably at least six years. Um there was recently a title change to diversity equity instead of equity. So there were some non-s substantive changes, but uh that happened about three years ago and prior to that it was called equity and compliance. Prior to that it was called equity and equal opportunity. All sorts of different iterations. So it seems
109to be something long-standing. So, it's something that the district didn't have six, seven years ago. If you're going to ask a follow-up question, the proper procedures to ask through the chair. I thank you for your questions. We're going to go to member lessons, then member Higgins. Um, I think actually it's a really helpful segue. I'm hoping the administration can clarify um the different obligations that it currently has to certificated versus classified employees with respect to our budget revisions. My understanding is that we essentially have contracts with certificated teachers and we have guaranteed them positions for for next year. But I could be wrong, but maybe the same doesn't hold true for classified staff. Could you clarify where we are with the distinctions between each of those? Yeah. To member lessons, um we have passed the
110Alaska statutory deadline for um layoffs of certificated staff. Those folks have positions for next year. may have continuing contracts with the districts and we have not notified them to the contrary. And so short of laying laying someone off or non-retaining them prior to the deadlines, um we really have those folks on contract through FY26 for classified staff. Um each it depends on the the particular bargaining unit. So, for example, in our ACE contract, we have a u 90day notification window um that we could exercise if we needed to lay off staff. For totem, it's 20 days. Uh for exempt, it's um a little bit more fluid, but we have a commitment to a 30-day notification. Um so, there are, you know, it varies by bargaining unit. um once we get to the classified side. Member
111lessons, you have a followup. Um not at this time. Member Higgins. A couple of points. I guess for middle school, I believe that goes back sometime between 92 and 95 when it actually first started because there was another Pat Higgins on the school board at that time. So I remember that from my wife and she was very proud of that because all the studies show dropout rates and graduation rates go up and that was a very critical issue. So uh I believe that's when that model was adopted and uh pretty confident of that. As far as DEI you know we have a program as non-affirmative action is dealing with we've got we're the most diverse school system in the country. Okay. And we have I remember going to one of the meetings this was 10
112years ago with the M community and they had a representative there connecting and getting them engaged in school. We want outcomes. We need these communities engaged in the school. So we have representatives that have been doing things like that. Um I talked about this last night at the community council but I also advised that they go to the monk community be careful when you eat the food. It killed me. It's so hot. But it was great. Uh but it was it's it's a fantastic connection with the with the communities. You get the parents engaged, your academics go up. So uh a very positive. In response to uh Representative um uh Dave Donley's comment, might I suggest that if we change the motion to say of additional potential budget reductions, because we've done budget reductions already,
113we've got uh activities going on that's cutting stuff. this year we're going to we're going to have to cut you know additional that we may cut before then. So if we changed it to say I move to direct district administration to compile list prior to the board's second meeting in December of additional potential budget reductions to implement should the last legislative fail to override FY26. that would recognize that we may cut reductions even before then uh because of the amount of money we've got and we may choose to do it early and I agree with um um um Dave Donley's comments that doing it early is cheaper than doing it last minute. You get it multiplies it. Uh but that gives us a little bit more flexibility and somehow or another it it it's not
114misleading. It's additional potential budget uh reductions is what I would propose. Member Higgins, if you're making a motion, please state it into our record. Okay. I move that the motion be mod be um uh modified to insert the word um additional in front of potential budget reductions in the second line. Is there a second? All seconded. It's accurate. Made by member Higgins, seconded by member Donley. Is there discussion on adding the word additional to the original underlying motion? Member Higgins, do you have any additional? Yeah, I I just want to say I don't think it changes at all the intent of this. It still has to come out that time. It just addresses the fact that we're not asking the administration to hold back on changes they think are necessary. That's not the intent. I
115don't believe it is. And um uh to me this would just be um maintaining everything that member lessons is trying to do and I agree with that and it addresses the issue that we're not trying to hold back changes if we need to do it early if we have that opportunity. Not seeing any other discussion. Uh Miss Sullivan, can you please call the RO? Member Lessons. Yes. Member Wilson. Yes. Member Higgins, yes. Member Hullerman, yes. Member Bellamy, yes. Member Donley, yes. President Jacobs, yes. Amendment passes unanimously, seven to zero. We're back to the underlying motion. Is there additional discussion before we move to a vote? Member Donley. Thank you. Um to the point uh that the um superintendent raised about the middle school model requiring additional teachers. Yes, it does. And that's where the cost
116comes from of over $3 million a year to provide for the extra planning period. The teachers are needed to replace the planning period time uh with uh needed instruction. And uh member Higgins, I understand you you weren't here that you you were in between years, I believe, when we adopted the middle school model formally, but there was a cost that came with it. And that cost about that time was in the $2 million range, but subsequently it's increased due to the sixth graders going to middle school. And that's one of the reasons it's up to $3 million now. But um I'm think that we can find non-classroom related, you know, um reductions that total $4.3 million and resolve this. Um we see that if we didn't replace the five assistant principles, that's $481,000. If we
117were to go away from the middle school model, that's $3.4 million. Um that adds up to about 4.2 two just short of the dollar amount we need probably within the ballpark for what budgeting at this point. Um and um I believe that would be a rational way to go at this time that wouldn't impact classrooms um and would resolve this. So, with that in mind, I'd move a substitute motion for the main motion um that would say that the board um suggests to the administration to come back to us with a proposal to um eliminate the middle school model uh for a savings of $3.4 million and to go ahead with the original proposal of the reduction in five assistant principles. Member Donley. Um we're going to take a minute so you can write that
118out and um take a two-minute recess for you to do that work. You want me to ask another question on that? You really believe we've hired every middle After a little bit more conversation and explanation, I'm going to move a substitute motion that states the board requests the administration to prepare a budget amendment to discontinue the middle school model extra planning period and reduce assistant principles by five with the goal of reducing the budget to comply with the $500 BSA increase. And so is there a second to the motion? I don't need it because I didn't actually move it. I don't need a second, but when I move it, I will need one. So my argument is that I think there's a lot of flexibility in the current I was going to ask the question
119of how many of our middle school positions have already been filled by contracts, but I I I really believe there must be some that haven't been. So there's some flexibility there what hasn't been already hired and are agreed to there. And then additionally um while elementary teachers I mean the middle school teachers should be qualified to teach elementary. So we could shift some of them down to elementary schools if we had to. So I believe the personnel problem can be addressed through some some administrative action in moving teachers around. Clearly we've got a lot of vacant teacher positions right now that we could utilize for that flexibility. Um, and this is a way we could comply with the $500 BSA. And if more money appeared later, then we could reconsider these reductions and and the
120board could vote to reinstate uh this funding for the middle school model and and the assistant principles. But this would get us through this right now and this money would begin being saved immediately in the next school year where by waiting till December to address these issues, we're losing the opportunity for those savings during that beginning half of the year and then there won't be as many options we'll have available to us as a board to address the budget problem if there is no additional money coming in. So with that explanation, I would move the substitute motion that I previously stated. Member Donley, since you're actually going to move the motion, can you please read it into our record? I move a substitute motion to the main motion that the board requests the administration to
121prepare a budget amendment to discontinue the middle school model extra planning period and reduce assistant principles by five with the goal of reducing the budget to comply with a $500 BSA increase. Is there a second to the motion? For purposes of discussion, I'll second the motion. Is there any additional discussion on the motion? Member Higgins. I um I will not be supporting the motion. I want to see the options that are out there before we make a decision. Uh we move the sixth graders from elementary into middle school and we knew that that would be a challenge for those kids because the uh studies show that academic scores actually go down. graduation rates can drop uh as a result. So I had concerns about that and at the end of this year some pretty soon
122when we get numbers I've got plans to go ahead and let's look at the analysis of how we're doing. The one thing the administration said they did to try to recognize that problem and that it was going to be difficult is they kept the middle school model uh which the board support. So, I don't I I'm not opposed to putting everything on the on the table uh put it all. In fact, I asked about the school closure doing it early because that just I'm saying can that be on the table too. I'm not advocating for it. But I would like to see the analysis that says what will hurt the kids least. So that academically before we make any sort of decisions. I don't want to make an emotional decision. I don't want to make
123a decision without a careful review of all the options. I don't want the the administration to come in and say these are the 10 that we want you to do. I want the administration to come in and say these are 25 we could do. These are the 10 we recommend. And the board get then gets engaged in the discussion and we talk about what's going to what's the best for kids. We got because there are other ways to do things. There's always other ways to do things and I want to make sure that we're focused on kids and not a predetermined selection of what's going to happen. Um, these principles do a lot more, assistant principles do a lot more than just uh extra bodies. I understand that. And some of the schools, they're actually
124teaching classes a lot. I've visited a lot of schools and with the shortage of staff, they're really all over the place u because of the difficulties we've got. We've got some schools just don't have the backup where we can't what do we do and we can't get the staffing. So, I'm I'm gonna oppose this. I I strongly recommend that we not try to pre-seelelect what the budget cut should be without working with the administration. Talk about all the options we've got that that that are viable and then make the decision of what's reasonable so that we're not doing stuff that might hurt kids unnecessarily. simply reacting to this awful decision of of the of the governor. Thank you. Thank you, member Higgins. Member Holland. Um I'm not exactly sure what the change we're talking about
125from seven years ago, but I've joined the staff at Golden View Middle School in 1999 and it was a middle school. Uh the other thing is that while a lot of people do focus on that second planning time, the key part of something being a middle school is the fact that the students are organized in smaller learning communities. The four core classes together. Um in an ideal time, you'd be talking about 100 kids. In Anchorage, I don't think we've ever talked about less than about 120 or 30. And we may be talking about something closer to 150 or 160 these days, but you would have to disorganize that in order to start the school year as essentially a high school for six, seven, eight. Um students would have their subjects and be randomly mixed from
126one class to the next. And then if you decided to redo that, you would reconfigure the schedule, I suspect, for every single student in those grades across the district. It would be a massive disruption. About the only thing we could do that would be worse would be to assign them to different buildings. Um the the key part is the small learning communities and the impact it has on sixth and seventh graders who are really young and everybody seems young to me now but sixth and seventh graders are really young. Um they're really frightened of middle school. bigger building, bigger classes, bigger kids that they're all around coming out of elementary and and we realized at Golden View that pretty quickly when they were talking to other people about where they went to school, they identified
127with their team. They were on the neon team. They were on Cosmos. They were they didn't necessarily say Golden View School because the students that needed that sort of reinforcement and safety identified with 120 kids and the four teachers that they were a part of and yeah they were in this bigger building and they got out and uh during electives they they intermingled in a high school way. So there was that transition for students to develop what I would say is the emotional fortitude to act in the larger world. uh even though a a certain percentage of them are not ready for that when they show up at our middle schools. Now, I I don't think you can disassemble it and reassemble it. Uh for one thing, it actually does take teachers trained in collaborating
128with each other. A lot of secondary teachers don't come by that naturally. Um and the key success from it is students identifying with their smaller learning community. and you can't just start that up in January and have it work. So, while I I think some of the things that member Donnelly said um about rearranging staff and whatnot could work that that that you could achieve that and it would mean just not bringing staff on board to replace a lot of people that are gone. um the idea that you could switch back to it is is just not possible. At the very least, you'd have to wait a whole year. Um, and then for I'll also say that the teaching in a middle school comes with a significant number of added responsibilities. And among the most
129remarkable things the district's ever done is actually provide contract time to the teachers to fulfill those responsibilities. That's just not something we normally do in education. We just think up more responsibilities without changing the contract time. And we know that somehow people are going to pull through and do that. So I I once you start something like that, if you then back away from it for a while and then you come forward with it again, no one will ever believe you again. They will never believe the board when they say, "Okay, we're ready. We're going to do it again." Um it and unfortunately I'm I'm sure that's how people that are in Ignite feel now because I think we cut them or we talk seriously about cutting them every year. I wouldn't choose it as
130a way forward in my profession because I like to be in charge of that to some degree and it would just pass that complete lack of control down the line. So I I would hope that we would drop the discussion of doing that. I I'm not going to support the motion. Uh, I think it could technically work for a while, but it it would really mean the end of it for all time or for a very long time in the Anchorage School District. I think there's a lot of value there and it 20some years ago, 20 years ago, we were actually contemplating trying to push that model up into high schools because we have high school kids that are frightened to death of high school. and the idea that we could have some smaller communities
131where they can feel very grounded um was seen as valuable, but it again it it does come with a price tag. Uh I I think we could possibly save that money, but it would do a lot more damage than we would save in the course of the year. I would urge a no vote. There any other discussion on this item? Member Donley, the floor is yours. Thank you. I appreciate those uh remarks and comments from I mean somebody who's been in the field and actually had experience with this. Thank you, Member Hullerman. And I I appreciate that. I mean, none of these choices we're making today are are we all I think have acknowledged these are all difficult and bad choices. We're cutting things that we don't want to cut. Um, but my biggest fear
132is without identifying some things like like this like an ex the extra planning period, we're going to be once again back to increasing the pupil teacher ratio, which I think is the number one thing that parents have told us in surveys that they care about. They they want to keep that as low as possible. So, that's my priority here. Thank you. Go to member Bellamy. Yes, thank you. uh member um Hollowman has pretty much covered I'm not going to repeat everything that he said but uh he his is a voice of experience. We have had some iteration of middle school in this district for over 20 years and I am really proud to have been part of that transition for this district. You know, I I I I would just hate I will not be
133supporting the the motion because uh I I I really don't want us to be identifying programs before the administration has had an opportunity to look holistically at the entire system. Um and and to to to um I mean middle school comes up every single time we look to cut money. One of the reasons I voted wholeheartedly in support of moving sixth grade to middle school is because of that structure and because I knew that it it it worked for seventh and eighth graders and I really felt it would work and I do believe to this day that it is the best structure for our sixth, seventh and eighth graders. And I will not dismantle that. Uh not to save not one dime. I will not. Um, so I will be voting against this uh um
134so that we can get back to the motion and I would really hope the board would not use this moment to to to go after those things that you've always wanted to get rid of. Just let's just move forward with with with uh with with trying to hold on to what we have until we can do better and get more information and see what the administration comes back with. in terms of uh uh uh balancing our budget. Thank you. Thank you, Member Bellamy. Seeing no other board members in the queue, Miss Sullivan, the vote, please. Member Higgins. Your mic has to be on the record. No. Member Bellamy. Are we voting on member Donley's? Uh what? Uh member Bellamy, this is on the motion to substitute. Oh, no. No. Member Lessons. No. Member Hullman? No.
135Member Don? Yes. Member Wilson? No. President Jacobs? No. That motion fails by vote of 1 69. We're on the underlying motion. Is there additional discussion before we vote? hearing and seeing none. Miss Sullivan the vote please. Member Bellamy. Yes. Member Higgins. Yes. Member Hollowman. Yes. Member Donley? No. Member Lessons? Yes. Member Wilson? Yes. President Hullman. President Jacob. Yes. Motion passes by a vote of 68 to1. We're back on the um general topic of FY26 operating budget adjustment veto response. Um we've passed one motion providing direction to administration. I see member lessons. Yeah, Mr. President, I'd like to make um a second individual motion at this time and I believe Miss Sullivan has the text of it already ahead. You could read it into record, please. I move to authorize the ASD superintendent to implement a
136hiring freeze on selected positions that the administration identifies as a result of Governor Dunley's veto of the FY26based student allocation. Second made by member lessons, seconded by member Hollowman. Um, member lessons, do you have discussion before we open it up to members for comment? Yeah, I think this really builds on the brief conversation that we've well, it's been a long conversation, but the the part of the conversation about staffing and what we're statutoily allowed to do at this point, what we are prohibited from doing at this point. uh we have a number of um arrangements with different bargaining units and the administration has a much better perspective on vacancies and uh the capacity to sort of push pause and I do believe it would um really capitalize on some of the hopes that member Donley
137was expressing that we can take immediate action uh to uh reap some savings uh by um by by moving this motion. So, should there be a hiring freeze that's enacted, I imagine that savings would begin acrewing uh effective July 1st essentially, and we would be building um building up towards that $4.3 million delta um at least partially through through a hiring freeze that the administration would be best positioned to implement at this time or at least identify. Thank you, member lessons. I'll jump in the queue just briefly um to say that again I appreciate the partnership and collaboration in drafting this language. Um I support the amendment and I think it provides both the flexibility as well as the direction um as well as the um the scope of understanding for the community. Point of
138order. This is this is a main motion I believe. Correct if I said amendment. I apologize member Dley. Thank you for the point. Um it's well taken. So I um support the main motion to provide additional direction to district administration. The um the language effectively provides clear direction to administration as well as flexibility to implement a plan that uh will reduce costs in light of the um damaging actions taken by the executive branch today. Um, I think it's as far as we can go into specific solutions without making a decision that would be um considered haphazard or without sufficient um information at this time. With that said, I see member Higgins. Uh, thank you. My reservation on this one is the is the motion that the superintendent cannot implement a hiring freeze without authorization. I
139I kind of view that as part of the administration of what the superintendent is doing. I would like to get a report of what he's freezing. that's fine. But I I just question whether or not uh if the superintendent chooses not to fill some positions within the budget for any reason and and does that occasionally and there could be all kind of operational issues or changes that take place or he sees an opportunity to save money in some place or cut back that he has that authority. And so I I just I question whether or not and for clarification whether the superintendent has the right to do a hiring freeze on any position without the board approving it in advance. And so I I want I do want the superintendent to provide a report to
140the board on any hiring freezes that he may decide to do or give us regular reports on hiring freezes that he's decided to do uh as a result of gun's u veto. But I just for point of clarification, is that a requirement that the super can't do it without our authorization? So, um I I'll say as as one of the drafters of the language, um I conferred with administration to answer your question, Member Higgins, the um the language provides that direction and authority from the board to the superintendent. Um Dr. Bryant, if you would like to address how you'll effectuate this motion, should it pass, you're welcome to do so. Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. President, and thank you, Member Higgins. I completely agree with what you shared. I and just so the public is aware,
141I do have the authority to do all of this, but really what this is is just a commitment to the public that we are in an emergency and as the board's full-time employee, I will ensure that we implement the will of the board and try to take action that's as least damaging to students as possible. Um, so again, I do have this authority. In some ways, this may be symbolic, but I fully support the amendment because this is exactly what I'll be doing whether this passes or not. Um, which is to ensure that we can get out of this crisis. Thank you, Dr. Bryant. Not seeing any other member Bellamy, the floor is yours. Thank you. I just have a Are we talking instructional positions or non-instructional positions? Uh, member Bellamy, just as is one
142of the drafters of the language. I think that's the purview of the superintendent. Dr. Bryant, if you have any knowledge that you'd like to commit to today a few hours in, you're welcome to do so, but under no obligation. Yeah, sure thing, Mr. President. And I think that member Donley will appreciate this. really I want to review all of the different options and I really want to pursue the paths that are least damaging to students and and maybe that would include a vacant middle school position. But the point of this motion is to just make sure that the public understands that I am on a full-time mission to figure out how we're going to get out of this emergency. So again, that that's why I support the the freeze. It may include instructional poss rather
143it may include certificated positions. It may not. I need to consult with legal. I need to consult with HR. I need to consult with educators. I need to make sure this is vetted because frankly um the commissioner and the governor have shown a lot of recklessness and cruelty honestly in my opinion and I refuse to mirror those behaviors. Member Higgins. Yeah, I just want to add that I appreciate the response from the superintendent. I'm going to support the motion because it's sending a message that the the superintendent taking action in regards to freezing is something that the board supports given the the crisis that's been created by the governor. So I I will support this motion. Seeing no other discussion on the main motion number two, Miss Sullivan, the vote, please. Member Bellamy. Yes. Member
144Donley. Yes. Member Higgins. Yes. Member Hollowman. Yes. Member Lessons. Yes. Member Wilson. Yes. President Jacobs. Yes. That motion is adopted by a vote of seven yay, zero nays. Okay. We're um still on the uh FY26 operating adjustment veto response. We provided two directives to district administration. Is there other discussion before we move on to our second agenda item? Okay. In closing, I'll just um appreciate member Higgins, please. Just one comment. Um do we anticipate that the board needs to meet again sometime because of implementation of some changes? are not um you know or obviously legal is one question but the other one is uh some sort of cuts that the board needs to be informed of it and to approve for you to have the authority to do what you need to do um before
145before our regular next scheduled meeting. Um thank you member Higgins. Dr. Bryant, do you have feedback on that? uh through the president. Uh member, it's possible. Um but what I appreciate is the board's given me some time to to see what the options are and it is possible that our legal team and experts might advise me to ask the board to do an action sooner than expected. But I will remind the board that we have passed amended budgets in the past in August. So it's not unprecedented for us to come back in the fall and do this. But I do want to um ensure that you understand my commitment to making sure that we take action as quickly as possible. And if we need to ask the board to reconvene to authorize emergency action, I'll
146be the first to let President Jacobs know. All right. Seeing no other discussion, no other members interest in addressing this topic, I want to again thank the community for coming out on such short notice and I apologize on behalf of other leaders um specifically in the executive branch for um demonstrating just how poorly government can be run. With that said, we'll move on to our second agenda item, which is C2, the state board of education regul regulation joint resolution. The purpose of this um item is to follow up on our recent joint meeting with the Anchorage Assembly, in which case there were um three members of the assembly and three members of the school board uh interested in providing feedback uh to the state board during their public comment period um regarding the emergency regulations
147which were um set aside for the time being and then opened up for public comment. Um, with that said, there is a resolution which I believe has been passed out to members and is attached to our agenda. Um, if there is interest from the board, we can adopt that tonight. Uh, the timeline is that that needs to be given to the assembly uh for their consideration and potential adoption uh by next Thursday. Um, and so if we don't choose to adopt this uh the resolution tonight uh as amended or as is written, we unfortunately will have to gather together again and utilize staff resources to do so. And so um in order to give folks a proper summer break, I'm encouraging the board to consider taking action tonight. Um the only other thing that I'll
148state for the importance of this item is that um with the vetos tonight um effectively taking $4 million away from Anchorage area students, the importance of the $15 million that would be negatively impacted by um the haphazard and likely unlawful emergency regulations that were drafted um and then discussed recently by the state board through the deed commissioner um have become significantly important. And so I would urge the board to consider taking action. Um and I know member lessons um took a point on drafting a resolution. So if you have questions uh please consider addressing them to her. I will um hand the floor to member lessons at this time. Mr. President, I'd like to make a a motion to adopt the document and then I'll be happy to speak about the document. Second. Um okay.
149Member lessons seconded. Uh, member Lessons made the motion to adopt the resolution, seconded by member Higgins. Member Lessons, the floor is yours. Thank you so much. So, as you shared, uh, this is a follow-up product that came out of the joint meeting between the board and the assembly on June 6th. I want to begin by extending my sincere gratitude to our assembly partners and, uh, really to the ASD finance staff, um, Mr. Ratliff, uh, Miss Parrot in particular, uh, who were eagle-eyed and just deeply knowledgeable. So, sincere gratitude for your collaboration. And of course to, um, President B, President Jacobs and Vice President Bellamy for their collaboration as well. I wanted to walk the community through this. It's about a four-page document. Um, in essence, uh, I I'll just read the first, uh, paragraph. This
150is a joint resolution of the Anchorage Municipal Assembly and the Anchorage School Board expressing opposition to the Commissioner of Education's June 2nd, 2025 request that the State Board of Education approve proposed emergency regulation amendments to 4 A09 regarding the financing of public schools and the required local contribution at its June 4th, 2025 meeting as unlawful, inadequately noticed, and unjustified. as well as opposition to the state board of education's determination to consider the commissioner's request at the end of a 30-day public comment period. The structure of this resolution begins by looking at statute and the foundation formula. It identifies that a bureau or municipality under uh AS14.17.410C 410 C provide an additional local contribution to a district in excess of its required local contribution subject to a cap. Moving down, it really highlights the strong support
151that the Anchorage School District has received from our community. It identifies a couple of areas in particular. Uh our transportation fund. We receive funds for early childhood education and prevention grants to expand preschool opportunities and early learning services for our students and their families. Um, we also, and this is critical, the district benefits from a variety of municipal services, the fair market value of which does not go against the statutory cap, including but not limited to street maintenance leading to schools, bus passes, guest instructors, emergency operations coordination, school resource officers, and student and school student use of municipal facilities or equipment. In addition, the district has historically received funds classified as local revenues not subject to the cap, including but not limited to interest earnings, school fundraisers, food sales, activities fees, jury duty pay, keycard
152rebates, local donations, PTA donations, and local grants received by charter schools for which we really have no idea how much any of that costs and how much the district benefits from, but they could be subject to um uh recision is the words that's coming to mind. Maybe that's not the correct term, but subject to the change in regulations. So, this identifies that um the current definitions in statute um and in regulations really support local contributions as we have received them. It then identifies over time what DED is proposing to do. uh beginning um Wednesday, May 14th, at the Senate Education Committee hearing where the Commissioner of Education essentially said that the department was going to request an exemption from the governor's recent freeze on all new regulations so as to enable the state board of
153education to receive public comment on a new regulation about local contributions with the effective date of July 1st, at the July 25th State Board of Education meeting. So essentially on May 14th, the Commissioner of Education said they're interested in new regulations that would go into effect for FY27. Less than 3 weeks later, and this is identified in the document, um there were emergency regulations that were uh brought forth for the state board of education's consideration. Um, our superintendent, and this is itemized here, advised the state board that their approval of the emergency regulations would have immediately put $15 million at minimum at risk in ASD. Uh, our lawyer um advised the board of education that it would be unlawful. Um, however, the rationale that was used for putting the emergency regulations into place really don't
154don't it doesn't match. So, the US Department of Education sent a letter to the state in the middle of May on May 16th stating that the state failed something called the disparity test. It was not related to the contributions that we have been talking about. Instead, the Department of Education stated that the state failed the disparity test for the first time because the state improperly excluded transfers between each LEA's general fund and its special revenue fund for transportation and improperly included transfers from the transportation fund to the general fund as revenue. So the Department of Education, as far as I understand it, was not saying that what Anchorage or any of these other bureaus or municipalities has been doing is what caused the failure of the disparity test. Nevertheless, that was the rationale that was
155provided by the commission commissioner to the state board of education. So, the state board of education took all of that into account along with a significant amount of public testimony and this is detailed here in this document and ultimately decided to uh open up a period of public comment for 30 days about the new regulations but did not reject the commissioner's findings or recommendation outright. So, because the Anchorage School Board and the Anchorage Assembly uh really value local control, um this joint resolution posits that these two bodies jointly express strong opposition to the Commissioner of Education and Early Development's request that the state board amend its regulations via emergency or regular processes. And it resolves that these two bodies urge the governor, legislature, and state board of education to really reject any policy or regulator
156regulatory change that reduces local authority or limits local investment in public schools and communities. and also further resolves that the school district and assembly express support for the commissioner of education to challenge Alaska's recent failure of the federal impact aid disparity test prior to the expiration of a 60-day period that we are now a few weeks into. Thank you again to um our finance uh folks for making sure that we are as correct as possible in this four-page document. Thank you, member lessons. And I'll second the um appreciation for Dr. Bryant and our finance team um which make life easier for us as we draft um financial related uh motions. Um member Bellamy, the floor is yours. Yeah, thank you. I just want to say um uh thank uh everybody uh including our assembly the
157three assembly people who were who worked with uh in this little work group to get this done. Um I think we we we had a process where everybody got to give the input on the pieces that were most important for them and good for the whole. So I will be voting yes to move this on. Uh, and I consider I urge I urge the board to give it an uh um to approve it uh unanimously. Our other discussion on this item. Member D. Thank you, Mr. President. I I'm going to support this, but I wanted to go back and explain a little more. Um so the state has a statute that has a formula in it that provides transportation funding to school districts. Now the the um statute was based on a study done over
15815 years ago. And so there's these percentages established or dollar amounts established in statute. Then occasionally the state will modify those those dollar amounts, but they've always done it across the board. So there's been no modification from the original study. So what happened here is the money the state was giving some districts was more than they actually needed for transportation. So they took that extra transportation money and turned it into general fund money and used it for their general fund operating classroom operations. And that's what the federal department of administration identified as what went wrong. Well, if you think about this, that's primmaaccia evidence that the existing formula is broken because our school district puts at least another $4 million a year into the cost of our transportation budget. 12. Yeah. Okay. So we put
159So the formula is so broken that Anchorage has to pay another $12 million to balance our transportation budget while at the same time providing some school districts more money than they need that they took and trade changed into using it for their classrooms and that's what caused this whole problem. So it's I think it's primmaacia evidence that the state statute is is broken. It needs a new study to establish what the appropriate level of transportation funding for districts are and not based on something from 15 years ago. Further discussion on this agenda item hearing and seeing none. Miss Sullivan the vote please. Member Donley. Yes. Member Bellamy. Yes. Member Hullman. Yes. Member Higgins. Yes. Member Wilson, yes. Member Lessons, yes. President Jacobs, yes. The SBOE regulation joint resolution is adopted 7 to zero. That completes
160our action items for tonight and our agenda as a whole. We will be adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Thank you.