Anchorage School District outlines deep FY26 cuts as state funding lags; board hears hours of public testimony

Anchorage — Anchorage School District leadership on Wednesday presented a draft FY26 budget that assumes no new state funding and would require deep cuts across instruction and student services, prompting more than an hour of public testimony and repeated pleas to the Legislature to raise the base student allocation.

Superintendent Dr. Bridal told the board the draft is a ‘‘contingency’’ plan that reflects the district’s legal duty to submit a balanced budget in March while the state appropriation remains uncertain. ‘‘This budget...does not reflect our aspirations as a school district,’’ she said, urging community advocacy for a long‑term fix to the state funding formula.

The district’s chief financial officer, Andy Ratliff, laid out the numbers for the board and public. He said the district is planning for roughly a $43,000,000 drop in revenue from the state compared with the current year, driven by lower enrollment and the absence of one‑time operating grants. The draft budget uses more fund balance than last year and shows a combination of inflationary pressure and lost state funding that leaves the district with hard choices about staff and programs.

Why this matters: Anchorage officials must legally deliver a balanced FY26 budget to the municipality in early March so the city can set tax requests. That calendar forces the district to prepare a budget before the Legislature finishes its appropriation work in late spring; if the Legislature later provides additional money, the district can restore items but cannot guarantee rehiring of people whose jobs were cut.

Key details from the presentation and budget proposal

- Revenue and enrollment: The district reported an enrollment decline of a little over 1,000 students this year and projected a further modest drop next year. That shrinkage is one of the drivers of the roughly $43 million projected reduction in operating revenue.

- Cuts and reallocations: Ratliff identified a combination of enrollment‑driven reductions and targeted program cuts. The draft increases the pupil‑teacher ratio (PTR) by 4 across the district (a measure the district said would reduce roughly 195 teaching positions and carry an estimated $25 million cost…