Corporate media will likely spin what happens and why. I’ve heard from pro-override individuals who have let me know after hearing me out that they see the issue differently, support the stand I’m taking for the students and teachers, and want the legislature to go back to the drawing board.
No Is a No to The Same Ol’ Same Ol’
First, the backdrop. I voted to concur with the changes in SB 140 (which included the $680 based student allocation – the BSA – increase and a few minor reforms) because I believe it was a beginning and small step in the right direction.
Due to the fact, however, that Alaska schools rank nationally at the very bottom of the barrel academically, 49th and 50th in various subjects and on various grade levels, I made it explicitly clear on the Senate floor that the bill was inadequate in addressing the poor student outcomes we’ve shamefully allowed to repeat year after year and are constitutionally mandated to address and remedy (based on the Moore vs. State of Alaska, 2007).
I stated then that if the governor chose to play hardball to add other important reforms targeting academic improvements to an education package that includes the BSA increase, that I’d play on his team, that I would uphold his override.
If you are one that believes the legislature should override the veto of SB 140, please know that we’d be neglecting our constitutional duty if we did, not to mention we would be absolute fools not to take what’s been handed to the legislature on a silver platter (the ardent outcry for a BSA increase) and use it as a golden opportunity to address and remedy the problem of frightfully low student proficiency rates.
Before I continue, please know that I recognize we have pockets of excellence in the state and a number of amazing teachers and schools. When I refer to “low student proficiency”, I am speaking about the state overall and am not saying all teachers and schools are failing. Please know too that I highly regard teachers and know it isn’t an easy profession. Thank you, teachers, for what you do.
What Corporate Media and NEA Won’t Tell You
I also know, based on the talking points the NEA, other pro-BSA-increase groups, and corporate media have promoted, that Alaskans are missing important information. I hope I can provide some of that to you here. Read on!
As you likely are aware, SB 140 underwent arduous negotiations between the House and the Senate with Governor Dunleavy, a former teacher and superintendent, making known his priorities which were specifically designed to improve student outcomes. The bill that was on his desk that he subsequently vetoed, however, left out the most important of those reform priorities and watered down others.
Some legislators seemed to be taken aback by the governor’s strong stance and follow-through that he would veto SB 140 if items to improve student outcomes weren’t moved through the legislative process. They are unaccustomed to this type of Wally Hickel/Jay Hammond strong move.
We all need to recognize though that the governor had the full constitutional authority to veto the bill. Like the aforementioned governors, he has leverage and he chose to use it. He indicated he wanted further reforms and would not veto the bill if those reforms moved through the process.
With the good chance that there could be the votes present to uphold his veto, after his announcement, I urged those legislators who primarily just wanted the $680 BSA increase to get on board to pass the reforms to prevent losing the BSA increase altogether.
A “Wally Hickel” Move Should Have Been Taken Seriously
Getting the work done before the veto deadline made the most sense: to add the important reforms to the other good things in the bill (to slightly expand public charter school and public correspondence options for students and the reasonable provision to boost funds for pupil transportation) and the BSA increase (to help districts deal with the recent impacts of inflation across the board and decade-after-decade rising healthcare costs).
One of the items that needs to be fixed in the bill relates to the “read by 9” concept that I worked on closely over several years with former Sen. Tom Begich to pass in the form of the Alaska Reads Act in 2022. Schools need funding support to implement this policy, but SB 140 missed the mark because of how that funding assistance was structured. By awarding $500 for each child who is reading deficient, the bill incentivizes districts to keep students deficient well into the school year until after the October student count and funds distribution. The funding instead should be a set amount per K-3 student. We need to fix that – and we had time before the veto deadline.
A provision added to allow intensive needs students who choose public correspondence schooling to receive additional funding would have been sensible to add before the deadline. A provision to allow transportation vouchers for low-income students attending charter schools that don’t provide bussing is a sensible addition. We had the time to add these provisions.
Alaska Could Learn from Washington, D.C. Charter Schools
With the recent Harvard study showing our charter schools are the best in the nation, we should do all we can to support student access to public charter schools. Right now, there are thousands of children on waiting lists to get into our relatively few charter schools in Alaska.
For those worried that public charter schools will wreak havoc on our neighborhood schools, that’s poppycock. We only have 30 and it’s been 30 years since charter schools have been authorized.
Only 4 other states have policies as restrictive as ours as far as authorization of charter schools. We need to change that. Nearly half the children (48%) in the large metropolis of Washington, D.C. attend charter schools and no matter their income level, the children in our nation’s capital are outperforming our students in Alaska. Note that Washington, D.C. is 76% Democrat and NEA did not convince their policymakers to resist charter schools as the organization has been attempting to do in Alaska.
Don’t Be Misled by Inaccurate NEA Talking Points
We need to do what’s best for our kids; NEA is flat wrong to discourage public charter schools. They’ve promoted the misconception that public charter schools take dollars from neighborhood schools. This is incorrect. Fixed costs (heat, electricity, etc.) are 40% of costs while variable costs are 60%. Reducing variable costs for neighborhood schools is a net gain to their bottom line when a charter school is formed.
NEA has also wrongly promoted that allowing an entity other than the local school district to authorize a charter school is taking away local control. An authorizing agent authorizes the initial formation of the public charter school; it doesn’t control it; it doesn’t manage it; it doesn’t set its policy. It authorizes its initial formation. Period. The parents who come together to form the public charter school control it. Public charter schools actually have local control at its best.
We had time to add a provision for more entities, such as the University of Alaska or the state or local governments, to authorize charter schools.
The Reformers Are the True Champions of Teachers
One item not included in SB 140 that is, in my mind, a major key to helping lift our children out of the academic deficiency hole: teacher retention incentives.
Growing a school budget is not correlated with academic improvement; supporting teachers specifically is. Valuing and supporting our teachers, ensuring they get a larger piece of the pie and stay in our communities, is fundamental to student success.
I believe the incentives (cash bonuses) should be spread out over a 6-10 year period rather than the shorter time frame in the governor’s proposal. Once a person is in a community for that many years, they likely will have put down roots. That consistency for students is important.
I recall a rural legislator telling me the teacher turnover in his district was 120-130%. When I asked how it could be higher than 100%, he said that there are teachers who only stay a very short while, a month or two – that they don’t even make it through one school year; imagine how that impacts the children!
We had time, too, to add this provision, but NEA fought vehemently (and ultra-strangely) against teachers receiving this incentive bonus and unfortunately it appears too many legislators listened to NEA to the detriment of teachers.
A Little Bit of Surprising Data to Open Your Eyes
Data often makes our eyes gloss over, but I request you stay alert for a minute and ponder a few interesting points in the context of this conversation. This data should actually make your eyes open up wider!
- Anchorage recently passed a workable budget for next school year based on a $110 BSA increase that didn’t involve layoffs or any drastic program changes.
- Based on NEA data, funding (all sources, inside and outside the formula) per student in Alaska between 2003 and 2022 rose 98%; during that same time period, inflation rose 56% and student proficiency rates dropped .8 of a school year.
- Rutgers University and the University of Miami released research earlier this year showing Alaska as among the top two states for adequacy of funding for public education and top for equitable distribution of those funds (i.e., for low-income students, rural areas, etc.).
- As already stated: Alaska’s student proficiency rates rank 49th or 50th in the nation in various subjects and at various grade levels year after year.
The $680 BSA increase is one thing, but if we don’t also pass provisions proven to specifically help students and teachers, we are missing the mark and hurting our kids, dissing our teachers, and crippling our state’s future.
How Things Have Gone Down
I have urged my colleagues in many conversations to work over the past few weeks to avoid the veto altogether by coming to consensus on items known to improve student outcomes before the veto deadline: including increased teacher compensation through retention incentives, alternate routes to public charter school authorization, and improved routing of funds specific to improve K-3 reading proficiency.
Those championing these reforms have been willing to negotiate in a bipartisan fashion and adjust the initially proposed items; I was one of them and made numerous alternative proposals; the governor stated he was willing to negotiate; members of the House majority indicated the same willingness.
Those opposed to the reforms ultimately were not willing to budge. In fact, some of them who have been insisting on a BSA increase all along, more recently behind closed doors admitted they hoped for an implosion of SB 140 and no BSA increase at all this year – think about that – in hopes that the uproar would spur seat changes in the November election and a partisan shift of power.
Just Stop the Power Game
This is pathetic to me: sacrificing our kids and teachers to gain political power. I say that even as a member of the Senate Minority that is currently marginalized in the power arena. Using children as pawns for partisan advancement and control is utterly shameful and wrong.
I am no fool though and understand that it is difficult to remove politics from the work occurring in the Capitol building but I pleaded with my colleagues to do so in this case for the sake of our children and teachers; I pleaded with those who had spoken out against the reforms and were primarily focused on just the BSA increase.
I urged them to set aside the 2024 November election and to come together for the sake of our students and teachers. I emphasized to them that this would ensure the districts WOULD get a BSA increase this year AND we would put in place reforms specifically designed to improve student outcomes and reward teachers. This is the win-win desperately needed by students and teachers and would be an overall win-win for Alaska and the prospects of a bright future.
So here we are today. The reforms did not get through the process. The bill has been vetoed.
We Have Another Chance
If the veto is upheld, legislators will go back to the drawing board and pass a package that includes both the BSA increase and important reforms that will help improve student outcomes and better compensate teachers for sticking with their game-changing profession.
If the veto is overridden, although more dollars will be pumped into the failing system, our teachers and kids will not benefit like they would directly from the needed reforms – and that missed opportunity will indeed be sad and unfortunate for each and every child, for each and every teacher, and for our state overall.
I will support the veto so we can go back to the drawing board to craft an education bill with the important fixes and additions specifically focused on improving student improvements and helping teachers as well as boosting the BSA.
