There is no wisdom in the state House majority’s decision to put Permanent Fund dividends ahead of the public education budget.
Paying for larger PFDs before schools is not the way to build a better state, to keep families from leaving, to entice new residents and businesses to move here, to educate children. It does nothing to address the fact that more people have left Alaska than moved here in each of the past 10 years.
It’s as if the legislators want a new state motto: “Give me liberty, or give me death, but give me my dividend either way.”
House and Senate committees have been working this session on a much-needed increase in the state’s per-student formula to help fund local school districts. That number has moved up just a tiny one-half of 1% over the past six school years, leaving districts — meaning teachers, staff, students and parents — far short of even covering inflation in educating young Alaskans.
Districts across the state are in distress, looking at closing schools, cutting staff and courses and programs to balance their budgets.
In Wrangell, the school district has run through its federal pandemic aid and this year is at the maximum borough contribution allowed under state law.
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough School District superintendent last week reported that the budget could come up about $400,000 short and job cuts would be needed unless there is an increase in state funding.
The Sitka School District superintendent said that without more state funding for the 2023-2024 budget, the district could lose 15 teaching positions, about one in seven in the district.
The Petersburg School District finance director reported higher heating fuel and utility bills will cost the district an additional $240,000 this year.
Despite the need and despite all the work on legislation to increase the state funding formula in law, the House Republican-led majority last week found a way to transform it into a game of political strategy when the budget was before the full House for amendment.
In order to have enough general fund dollars to pay a big dividend this fall — about $2,700 per person — the majority amended the budget to rely on restricted savings to pay for about a 14% increase in state aid to schools. Even with that increase, the budget would still spend a few hundred million dollars more on the PFD than K-12 education.
But what’s worse is that the additional school money is for one year only. House Republican leadership appears lined up against the idea of approving a permanent increase in the state funding formula, and the budget maneuver makes clear it’s something they are not at all interested in doing.
Still, the budget has to go to the Senate and then a House-Senate conference committee to resolve differences, so the number and the terms of any education increase could change before adjournment next month.
The biggest political maneuver of the House majority last week was structuring the one-time increase for schools to come from state savings, which requires a three-quarters majority of each chamber. Republicans need Democratic votes to reach that threshold in the House. The message to the Democrats is “give us your votes, or school funding dies.”
No such maneuver with the dividend, which would come entirely from the state general fund, requiring no Democratic votes.
Sly politics, putting the Democrats on the spot for schools. Bad politics putting the PFD ahead of schools.
Reader Comments(0)