House committee holds second hearing on HB 59 to create five‑school tribal compacting pilot

The Alaska House Bridal Affairs Committee held a second hearing on April 8, 2025, on House Bill 59, a measure to authorize tribally compacted public schools as a pilot program for up to five sites.

Joel Isaac, a consultant with the Alaska Department of Education & Early Development, told the committee the pilot would address three areas negotiated with tribal partners — funding mechanisms, governance and teacher certification — and that the bill creates "a proof of concept" with a two‑year startup window followed by a five‑year pilot. "These tribally compacted public schools would be public schools," Isaac said, describing the compacting model as a government‑to‑government arrangement with mediation processes spelled out in advance.

The bill would place compacted schools on uncodified law that interfaces with Title 14 (Alaska’s public education statutes). Isaac said that design is intended to keep the pilot narrowly focused: it would not require rewriting Title 14 but would require compact agreements to specify operational details, including teacher qualifications, retirement and collective‑bargaining protections.

Why it matters: tribal leaders and education partners told the committee they see compacting as a tool to restore locally designed, culturally relevant instruction and to improve outcomes for Alaska Native students who, tribal witnesses said, have experienced decades of poor results in the conventional system.

Tribal presenters described the pilot’s practical features and limits. Mark Roseberry, director of education for the Inupiaq Community of the Arctic Slope (ICAST), said the schools would develop locally grounded teacher training in partnership with institutions such as the University of Alaska campuses and Ilisavik: "we are creating a system that is, based in research. It is very different than the conventional system," Roseberry said. Misha Jackson, tribal education liaison for the Central Council of the Tlingit & Haida Indian Tribes, emphasized assessment and fidelity: "How do we know this is working?" she asked, urging evaluation approaches that measure student growth within locally defined goals.

Committee members pressed on specifics lawmakers said they needed to see before advancing the bill. Questions focused on teacher retirement and insurance (whether staff would keep prior pension membership or move into different systems), collective bargaining and how the department will verify non‑traditional certification pathways. Isaac said existing certification processes remain in force: tribal compacts must identify what training satisfies state regulatory requirements and the department will verify completion before issuing teacher certificates. He also said the bill preserves existing statutory protections for teachers, such as retirement and bargaining rights.

Several witnesses described implementation challenges. Tribal witnesses said university accreditation rules limit how much a university can modify degree requirements, so tribes expect to combine university coursework with tribal language and culture training and submit those programs to the department for acceptance. Committee members and witnesses also discussed mobility for paraprofessionals and existing employees who may be reluctant to move from PERS to other retirement tiers; witnesses said movement between systems reflects current state practice and would remain an individual employment choice.

On measurement and data, tribal liaisons said compacting would allow smaller, place‑based programs to implement curricula with fidelity and track outcomes that matter locally — for example immersion language proficiency or graduation rates in small cohorts — alongside state and federal assessments. Isaac said compacted schools would still submit the standard annual reports and state/federal assessments required of other districts, but that compacts give tribes room to present additional local metrics.

Who testified: invited oral testimony included tribal education leaders and advocates from multiple regions — the Inupiaq Community of the Arctic Slope (ICAST), the North Slope Borough and village tribal councils, Ketchikan Indian Community, and the Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN). AFN President Ben Lott testified in support, calling compacting a proven model in other federal tribal compacts and urging committed, multi‑year partnership. Richard Porter, a tribal leader from the Matanuska Valley area, and other tribal witnesses stressed elder involvement, language, culture and community integration.

What the bill would do: as presented at the hearing, HB 59 would authorize a narrowly scoped, five‑site pilot for tribally compacted public schools, require negotiated compacts to specify governance, staffing, certification and dispute resolution, and preserve teachers’ existing statutory rights. The pilot includes a two‑year start‑up period for compacting partners to negotiate and meet requirements before receiving operating funds.

Implementation and next steps: witnesses and staff said the compact agreements are negotiated after legislative approval. Multiple presenters urged the committee to consider follow‑up hearings focused on funding mechanics — how state funds interact with tribal and federal funds, how startups will be financed during the two‑year window, and how special education and other statutory duties will be funded and overseen.

No formal vote was recorded at the hearing. Committee members said they planned follow‑up work and additional hearings on logistics and fiscal details.

Ending: supporters framed HB 59 as a targeted tool to let tribal governments operate public schools that reflect local cultures and languages while remaining subject to state verification of statutory standards. Opponents were not recorded at this hearing; lawmakers signaled that further technical review — especially on financing and certification detail — will determine whether the committee advances the bill.