Representative Bynum and business manager outline uncertain state education funding after governor’s veto

District business manager Daniel Schuler and Alaska Representative (House District) Bynum briefed the school board on June 25 about recent state legislative activity affecting school finance, including a governor’s line‑item veto that reduced education funding intended for the base student allocation (BSA).

What board staff reported

Daniel Schuler told the board that Governor Dunleavy used a line‑item veto on the FY26 education appropriation, reducing the BSA increase that the legislature had passed. Schuler said the veto effectively reduced the increase the legislature approved, and that the district had built its FY26 budget with prudence by not counting certain amounts inside the budget cap; at the time of the meeting the district’s projected operations surplus after the veto adjustment was roughly $665,000, though he said two budget amendments would likely be required after OASIS student counts are finalized in the fall and winter.

What Representative Bynum told the board

Representative Bynum described the legislative sequence: several bills attempted to raise the BSA (including SB 69 and a house omnibus that became HB 57). The legislature passed a bill that included a $700 BSA increase; the governor vetoed parts of the appropriation. Bynum said the vetoed appropriation created uncertainty because the statute still lists a BSA number (the transcript cites $6,660) but the governor struck the appropriation amounts that would have funded that figure and replaced them with a lower fixed amount in the appropriation language. DEED (the state Department of Education and Early Development) had not yet published a methodology for prorating the altered appropriation among districts at the time of the meeting, Bynum said, leaving municipalities and districts unsure how their final aid will be calculated for FY26.

Representative Bynum also noted that the Legislature later conducted a veto‑override vote for parts of the education package (reported as having strong support earlier), and that the timing of any additional legislative action to restore funding (via an override or special session) remained uncertain; leadership suggested an override would not be acted on before the January session unless a special session were called.

Other legislative items

Bynum updated the board on other items the transcript records: HB 75 (signed into law) modified PFD eligibility language for Maritime Academy students and clarified some allowable-absence issues for college students; Secure Rural Schools (SRS) reauthorization remained under federal consideration and could materially affect districts in Southeast Alaska if it is enacted; and a federal moratorium on bond debt reimbursement is set to expire July 1, 2025.

Why it matters

The district’s operating projections and local-cap calculations depend on final state aid figures. With DEED yet to announce its methodology for allocating the reduced appropriation and with potential legislative action still possible, local budget planning was described as contingent on state decisions. Schuler urged prudence in messaging and budget adjustments, noting the district had deliberately not included an expected outside‑cap portion in some calculations to retain flexibility.

Ending

Representative Bynum asked that district officials and community members continue to engage with legislative staff and that he would share updates once DEED released distribution details. The board said it expects to receive updated figures once DEED provides its methodology and pledged to use conservative assumptions until allocations are finalized.