Senate Bill 277 has drawn widespread attention from Alaskans, generating debate that appears largely split along political lines with conservatives opposing the bill and liberals supporting it. However, according to leaders in the Alaska Senate Majority, the bill has been specifically designed to draw support from both sides of the aisle in order to prevent a governor’s veto. SB 277 contains several amendments and additions to existing education law. Determining what is good and what is bad in the bill requires critical examination.
Sections 1: Districts can charge charter schools up to 8% (changed from 4%) for administrative costs
Section 1 of SB 277 enables districts to retain “administrative costs” from charter school budgets. These costs can be determined either by the indirect cost rate cap or “the specified administrative costs, whichever is less.” The bill doubles the indirect cost rate cap from 4% to 8%. However, existing law requires districts to provide charter schools with “a report itemizing the administrative costs retained by the local school board under this section.” This ensures districts cannot automatically charge 8% without an itemized bill. If administrative costs are less than 8%, the district can only retain that amount.
Section 4 applies the same to correspondence schools.
Although proponents of the bill say that this provision will help districts continue to provide necessary administrative services, opponents argue that it unduly burdens charter and correspondence schools.
According to an email from Galena City Superintendent Jason Johnson to IDEA families: SB 277 will cause “most Alaskan statewide correspondence programs [to] sink and Alaskan families will suffer the loss of Alaska’s current robust school choice options.”
Section 2: Homeschoolers can keep materials
Section 2 of SB 277 allows students who were enrolled in a correspondence study program to keep “textbooks, equipment, and other curriculum materials provided to the student through the program, including materials purchased through an annual student allotment,” if and when the student ceases to be enrolled in the program.
Section 3: Increased funding for student transportation
SB 277 also addresses student transportation, allocating minor increases to the “per student amount” of state-provided funding for “operating the student transportation system.” The per student amount is calculated based on the district’s ADM (average daily membership).
Increases are as follows:
| School District | New Per Student Amount ($) | Difference ($) |
| Alaska Gateway | 2,694 | 165 |
| Aleutians East | 402 | 25 |
| Anchorage | 564 | 35 |
| Annette Island | 236 | 15 |
| Bering Strait | 63 | 4 |
| Bristol Bay | 3,459 | 212 |
| Chatham | 364 | 23 |
| Copper River | 2,054 | 126 |
| Cordova | 435 | 27 |
| Craig | 548 | 34 |
| Delta/Greely | 2,144 | 131 |
| Denali | 2,340 | 143 |
| Dillingham | 1,577 | 97 |
| Fairbanks | 1,057 | 65 |
| Galena | 330 | 21 |
| Haines | 811 | 50 |
| Hoonah | 387 | 24 |
| Iditarod | 274 | 17 |
| Juneau | 781 | 48 |
| Kake | 352 | 22 |
| Kashunamiut | 7 | 1 |
| Kenai Peninsula | 1,185 | 73 |
| Ketchikan | 941 | 108 |
| Klawock | 757 | 47 |
| Kodiak Island | 1,035 | 64 |
| Kuspuk | 846 | 52 |
| Lake and Peninsula | 497 | 31 |
| Lower Kuskokwim | 359 | 22 |
| Lower Yukon | 2 | 1 |
| Matanuska-Susitna | 1,178 | 72 |
| Nenana | 761 | 47 |
| Nome | 805 | 50 |
| North Slope | 1,450 | 89 |
| Northwest Arctic | 32 | 2 |
| Pelican | 94 | 6 |
| Petersburg | 485 | 30 |
| Saint Mary’s | 250 | 16 |
| Sitka | 554 | 34 |
| Skagway | 47 | 3 |
| Southeast Island | 1,496 | 92 |
| Southwest Region | 774 | 48 |
| Unalaska | 840 | 52 |
| Valdez | 953 | 59 |
| Wrangell | 907 | 56 |
| Yakutat | 963 | 59 |
| Yukon Flats | 342 | 21 |
| Yukon/Koyukuk | 388 | 24 |
| Yupiit | 3 | 1 |
Section 4: Correspondence schools charged up to 8% for administrative fees
As previously stated, Section 4 echoes Section 1, applying the 8% indirect cost rate cap for administrative fees to correspondence schools. The bill clarifies that the cost rate cap is only for the administrative services fee and not for “educational services.” There is no cap for fees related to educational services, defined as “boarding and tuition arrangements, pupil or teacher exchanges, special education services, or curriculum development.”
Galena City Superintendent Johnson pointed out in his email to IDEA families that the absence of a cap for educational services leaves correspondence schools unprotected by districts who wish to charge correspondence programs up to 100% of State funding.
Section 5: Increased funding for correspondence programs [with caveat]
Section 5 of SB 277 seems to provide for greater funding for correspondence schools. Instead of funding being calculated as 90% of the ADM of a correspondence school, it will be calculated using the ADM. Taken on its own, this provision would benefit Alaskan homeschoolers. According to Senator Rob Yundt (R-Wasilla), this increased funding has long been sought after and constitutes part of his reason for supporting the bill.
However, taken in context of the whole bill, specifically in the context of Section 7 (see below), this provision is as hollow as a drum.
Section 6: Increased Base Student Allocation
Section 6 increases the Base Student Allocation (BSA) from $6,660 to $6,786.54. This increase plus the increased transportation funding provided in Section 3 and grant funding for the Alaska Reads Act provided in Section 17 adds about $100 million to the State’s $1.3 billion education budget.
Section 7: Students in correspondence schools count toward local district’s ADM
Section 7 has sparked most of the debate regarding SB 277. This section mandates that students enrolled in a correspondence program offered by a district other than the district the students reside in are to be counted in their local district’s ADM, not their school’s ADM. These students will be counted toward the ADM of the school with the lowest ADM in the district where they reside.
This new subsection of AS 14.17.500 could crush correspondence schools by removing funding and diverting that funding to local districts instead. In this case, funding would not follow the student but would be locked into the district where the student lives. For correspondence schools with student bodies largely made of students from outside the program district, this means almost certain bankruptcy.
Conservatives who oppose the bill zero in on Section 7, claiming that the bill undermines parental rights and school choice.
Barbara Haney, founder of Alaskans Against Common Core, stated in an article by Alaska Watchman: “This is not education reform – it’s an attack on parental rights and another step toward the centralized control we have fought for over a decade.”
Sections 8-16: Updating language from “regional” to “institutional” and adding “regional resource center”
Sections 8-16 of SB 277 updates the bill’s language to allow teachers with accreditation from an institutional [used to be “regional”] or national accrediting association to be eligible for a teaching certificate. Plus, it adds the phrase “or regional resource center” to a variety of places in Alaska statute related to teacher reemployment after retirement.
Section 17: Guaranteeing the Alaska Reads Act
Section 17 removes the phrase “subject to appropriation” from the Alaska Reads Act, which provides a reading proficiency incentive grant of “not less than $450 for each student in kindergarten through grade six who, at the end of the school year, performs at grade-level reading proficiency…”
The removal of the phrase “subject to appropriation” guarantees the incentive grant will automatically renew each year, rather than needing to be approved by legislative action each year.
This section, which strives to incentivize better learning outcomes in Alaska public education, draws bipartisan support.
Section 18: Studying education funding options
Section 18 directs the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee to conduct a study to “evaluate the current education funding provisions and either recommend changes to the current funding provisions or recommend alternative methods of education funding.” The study must be completed by January 1, 2027.
So, Is SB 277 Good or Bad for Alaskan Families?
After a close look at the provisions in SB 277, it is clear that Democrats are attempting to cushion a fatal blow to many correspondence schools with minimal provisions that would be good if we could ignore Section 7. Section 5’s allowing of students to keep materials from correspondence schools means little if a student’s correspondence school closes due to lack of funding. With alternatives closing down, his parents would be forced to enroll him in his local public school. After all, he would have already been counted in his local district’s ADM.
Rather than real attendance increasing student count numbers which then increase funding, the bill would ensure district’s student counts increase, which would then cause an increase in student enrollment.
Increased funding for transportation, increased BSA, and guaranteed Alaska Reads Act incentive grants could all be wonderful for Alaskans, but are they worth the cost of Section 7’s strange new counting rule?
Alaska should not fund public schools based on a student’s residency but based on the number of students actually attending the schools. Why are fewer and fewer students enrolling in Alaska public schools? Because our public education system is not producing the results parents want. SB 277 flips the structure on its head, ignores parents’ concerns, and rewards schools that lack results.
