There are two things in play at the moment for Sitka’s schools, funding-wise: A major bill (HB 69) crafted by Sitka Rep. Rebecca Himschoot has already advanced to the full House for debate, without any public hearings or testimony in the House Finance Committee.
Tactically, it’s unclear what it means for the future of the bill, which would catch-up school funding with inflation over the next three years, because Republicans in the House argue there’s no money to pay for it, without reducing Permanent Fund dividends, or raising taxes somewhere.
The bill will probably squeak through the House, which is controlled by a coalition of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents like Himschoot, and then head to the Senate, which is also controlled by a bipartisan coalition, where the numbers will be tweaked to deliver – if not by the full amount proposed by Himschoot – at least by an amount comparable to or more than the $680 per-pupil increase that the governor approved last year. That leaves only Governor Dunleavy and his veto pen as the last barrier to some increase in education funding, and the new bipartisan makeup of the Legislature makes a repeat of last year’s override debacle less likely.
So the Sitka School Board is feeling confident that some additional money is coming their way, and members are optimistic that they’re not facing drastic staff cuts like last year.
The second element in the funding picture for Sitka’s schools is that the district’s reserves – or “fund balance” – could top $2 million dollars at the end of this school year, and that money could be rolled over to support next year’s budget.
Superintendent Deidre Jenson explained that the city’s takeover of school maintenance has changed the way the district looks at savings.
“Usually the fund balance is saved for large emergency things like maintenance, and we don’t have those maintenance expenses, so that’s something to consider,” said Jenson. “The other large expenditure that usually happens could be lawsuits, or, we don’t usually go ‘Oh, now we have an emergency’ to hire extra staff, or ‘Oh, we need to buy more supplies.’ There might be equipment, but we don’t have a large amount of equipment. It’s, you know, maybe a $6,000 copier. So I guess the question is, what would you like to spend down?”
As a practical matter, board member Tom Williams thought it was premature to decide now how much of the district’s savings account to spend next year.
“Because we don’t know what your budget is going to look like, it’s really difficult to suggest what you want to do with the reserves,” said Williams. “If your budgeting process shows that we’re $2 million in the hole and you want to keep the current level of service, we pretty much understand that there’s going to be a significant amount of the reserve dedicated to maintaining that level of service.”
Other board members, however, saw the $2 million in reserves as an opportunity to save staff positions. Board president Phil Burdick wanted to start framing the conversation around “FTE’s” – or full-time equivalents. For the moment, no one on the board suggested taking reserves below $1 million, but member Paul Rioux did ask how many positions were equivalent to what might be available in reserves (depending on possible legislative funding, and possible “timber receipts” from the federal government). At roughly $110,000 per teacher (salary plus benefits), Superintendent Jenson answered “nine.”
The board also briefly discussed the prospect of school closures or consolidation next year. Even without funding relief from the Legislature, the district would not have seen significant savings by closing schools, since the city both owns and now maintains them. The administration also pointed out some increased costs, such as relocating the district office, that would offset savings.
The Sitka School Board informally dismissed the idea, with member Steve Morse adding, “I say let’s hold onto our schools.”
Note: This story was corrected on February 24, 2025, to reflect the correct makeup of the Alaska Senate majority: a bipartisan coalition, rather than all-Republican.
Additionally, KCAW aired the following clarification:
“In the original version of this story, Raven News reported that under one particular revenue scenario, District superintendent Deidre Jenson told the school board that the money equated to nine FTE’s – or nine full-time equivalent teaching positions. This information was correctly reported by Raven News. However, in a follow-up call with KCAW, Superintendent Jenson stressed that these were positions that could be saved, rather than brought back. Raven News regrets that its coverage may have created the impression that the school district was poised to restore jobs after last year’s dramatic cutbacks.
In a detail not included in the original news report, Superintendent Jenson said additional savings involving curriculum could also possibly spare another four positions. Again, these are existing jobs that would be preserved, rather than new positions.
In both cases, the superintendent emphasized that the district budget is still in deficit, pending action from the legislature, and is hoping to minimize staff cuts next year.”
