Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
ACE fund board and administration clash over using marijuana‑tax funds for ASD pre‑K; fund balance draws scrutiny
Loading...
Summary
The ACE fund’s FY26 budget includes program increases and shifts while board representatives said they were disappointed the mayor’s office proposed using marijuana‑tax resources to cover $2 million in Anchorage School District pre‑K funding.
Assembly and ACE Fund representatives discussed the FY26 ACE fund (alcohol and marijuana tax) allocations and whether to use marijuana‑tax fund balance to support Anchorage School District pre‑K classrooms.
Staff overviewed the FY26 ACE fund roll: the board’s prior budget omitted a $2 million allocation for Anchorage School District (ASD) pre‑K that the mayor’s office proposed to fund from the marijuana‑tax side of the ACE fund. The board chair and executive director told the assembly they prepared an alternative budget that preserved more program spending and did not include the ASD allocation; they said they later shared it with the board but had not taken a formal vote after the mayor’s budget released.
Tax collection and personnel assumptions were refined between the original proposal and current FY26 numbers. Staff said the marijuana tax collection estimate was reduced from a previously shown $800,000 figure to about $300,000 in the 2026 budget because earlier figures had assumed two years of collection or one‑time enforcement costs; current personnel and collection responsibilities were refined to reflect one year of collection costs and actual position counts.
Budget line changes include a $500,000 increase for early‑educator childcare subsidies, a $750,000 reduction in pilot project funding, $400,000 in worker‑retention bonuses and startup funds for in‑home providers. Staff noted the fund used an initial 2024 balance because the fund was only created in 2023 and first program spending began in 2025; as a result, the fund balance is not large—projected marijuana‑tax fund balance in the packet was roughly $19,000 after current assumptions.
Board representatives expressed disappointment at using ACE fund resources to substitute for the ASD pre‑K funding and emphasized their original intent for the fund to be additive to existing services. Assembly members voiced competing perspectives: some urged flexibility to invest meaningfully in childcare and early learning given constrained revenues; others flagged the long‑term sustainability risks if recurring services are funded from one‑time balances.
What happens next: the assembly will consider ACE fund allocations alongside the overall municipal budget; the ACE Fund Board meets monthly and may revisit its recommendations, but staff cautioned that the municipality must reconcile short‑term priorities with the fund’s recurring revenue profile.
