Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Impact Aid Local Contributions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DEED defends proposed regulatory clarification on local contributions; superintendents warn of cuts to noninstructional programs
Summary
The Alaska Department of Education and Early Development told the Senate Education Committee it intends to clarify regulations so that federal Impact Aid guidance on the disparity test applies to all revenues used for current expenditures, not only operating‑fund revenues.
The Alaska Department of Education and Early Development (DEED) told the Senate Education Committee on May 14 it is evaluating regulatory changes to how local contributions are treated in the Impact Aid disparity test and said those clarifications are intended to align state regulations with federal requirements.
DEED Commissioner Dina Bishop told the committee the department learned, with technical assistance from the U.S. Department of Education’s Impact Aid staff, that federal regulations require considering “all revenues available for current expenditures, not only those in a district’s operating fund,” and that DEED’s proposed regulatory clarification would reflect that scope. Commissioner Bishop said the department’s goal is “to clarify for Alaska school districts what funds should be included in the disparity test” and to protect the state’s statutory school funding formula and program eligibility.
Frank Hauser, superintendent of the Juneau School District, told senators the proposed regulation would extend beyond the federal disparity test’s scope and “threaten to cut off funding for community programs run by districts and extracurricular activities that are not part of free public education.” Hauser said DEED told a small group of school business officials the draft language before wider outreach and that the Alaska Association of School Business Officials opposed the language.
Lori Weed, DEED school finance manager, said in committee that some revenues previously excluded from the department’s submissions are now being counted and that the department will include additional revenue types that Impact Aid identifies as “current expenditures.” She also said DEED continues to exclude certain allowable differentials—pupil transportation, correspondence program differentials and district cost factors—when those exclusions are permitted by federal guidance.
Committee members pressed DEED on specifics. Senator Kiel asked the fiscal year for the disparity calculation the department cited; DEED staff stated the federal disparity test submitted in FY25 used audited FY24 data. Senators also asked whether the department has sought additional exclusions from the federal Impact Aid program; DEED said it has worked with U.S. Department of Education staff and intends to continue those discussions.
Multiple senators, superintendent Hauser and DEED staff discussed alternatives to the proposed regulation, including raising the Base Student Allocation (BSA) as a way to “float all boats” and reduce the risk of districts exceeding the voluntary local contribution limit that feeds into the disparity calculation. DEED told the committee it plans to present draft regulatory language for public comment (the commissioner said she expects to present it in July) and will request an exemption from the current executive-branch administrative freeze on new regulations.
No regulatory change was adopted in committee; the record shows discussion, questions, and a stated intention by DEED to seek public comment and an executive-branch exemption before proceeding.
