Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Anchorage School District reviews $11.6M budget revision to add teachers and fund ELA curriculum
Summary
At a July 7 special work session, Anchorage School District administrators presented a FY27–28 budget revision allocating about $11.6 million in new state revenue to add roughly 50 classroom teachers, fund a grades 6–10 English language arts curriculum (vendor: Savvas) and restore holdback positions; board members questioned procurement timing, a three‑year vendor contract and whether to fund a $625,000 pilot now or wait for fuller public process.
The Anchorage School District Board on July 7 examined a proposed revision to the FY27–28 operating budget that would apply approximately $11,600,000 in recently approved state revenue to staffing and curriculum needs, administration said. The revision would add about 50.5 teaching full‑time equivalents and provide funding options for a replacement grades 6–10 English language arts (ELA) curriculum that administrators say is needed because the district’s current product is being phased out by the vendor.
"The budget revision reflects approximately $11,600,000 in new revenue that was recently approved by the legislature," CFO Andy Ratliff said, and the proposal "adds more than 50 classroom teachers" to address large class‑size bubbles and scheduling relief across grade levels. Ratliff also listed position corrections (about $70,000 net), an activities funding increase (about $460,000) and an attrition offset account that the district currently estimates at roughly $39,000,000 for FY27.
Administrators and Sean Prince, the district’s senior director of teaching and learning, said the ELA purchase responds to the College Board’s decision to phase out the Springboard curriculum and to a multi‑year adoption timeline. "College Board had announced their decision to sunset Springboard," Prince said, and the district’s review, field tests and public viewings led to a recommendation to adopt a Savvas product forGrades 6–10. The full purchase was estimated in the presentation at about $2,800,000, with an alternative option to fund a $625,000 pilot in FY27 and spread remaining payments into FY28 and FY29.
Procurement staff cautioned the board that the vendor fronted materials for a pilot and that the agreement the district is negotiating is a three‑year contract with year‑one pilot pricing of about $619,000 and year‑two and year‑three payments of approximately $1,080,000 each. "If the board is unable or does not choose to let us budget in the next two fiscal years for the funds ... we would have to pay to return all of the curriculum that they've already sent us," a procurement official said, adding that final return/shipping costs would depend on material condition and freight prices.
Several board members pushed back on timing and public process. Member Blakesley said she felt "a little bit blindsided" by the curriculum line item and noted it differed from what had been communicated publicly around the levy. Member Lessons proposed an amendment for the regular meeting to bifurcate the purchase: fund only a pilot project now (roughly $625,000) and come back in the fall to allocate remaining funds — a move Lessons said would allow the district to evaluate the pilot and, if additional state one‑time revenue arrives under House Bill 263, consider fuller funding later.
Board members also pressed for additional details on Alaska Middle College (AMCS) and its partnership with the University of Alaska Anchorage, with CFO Ratliff saying increased enrollment and tuition per credit hour account for the contract cost increases tied to that program. Administrators agreed to provide enrollment and outcome data for AMCS and related per‑student cost comparisons in the board connect materials before the regular meeting.
Administrators warned the board that the district still faces a longer‑term challenge: roughly a $40,000,000 structural shortfall projected for the next fiscal year, driven by prior use of one‑time funds to balance FY27 and continuing cost pressures such as healthcare, utilities and wages. They also noted additional one‑time revenue beyond the $11.6 million is contingent on projected oil revenue surpluses as determined by the revenue commissioner in late August, so the board must proceed cautiously when committing recurring resources.
The work session did not take any formal votes; the board adjourned the work session at 6:33 p.m. and recessed for 10 minutes before beginning the regular meeting, where members said they would bring amendments and any budget action forward for public consideration.
