Dunleavy signals opposition to Alaska correspondence school program legislation

JUNEAU — As legislators in the House and Senate consider dueling proposals to address Alaska’s correspondence programs, Gov. Mike Dunleavy said Wednesday that no legislation would fix what he called a potential “disaster” and “emergency” created by a recent court ruling.

Anchorage Superior Court Judge Adolf Zeman ruled last month that Alaska’s correspondence schools violated the state constitution by diverting state funds to private and religious schools.

Correspondence schools are publicly funded homeschooling programs that allow families to be reimbursed for certain education-related expenses in amounts ranging from $2,700 to $4,500 per student per year, depending on the program. Students work with certified teachers to develop individualized learning programs that they are expected to follow.

Since the court ruling, nonpartisan legislative attorneys have said that correspondence programs can continue operating with a relatively simple fix prohibiting the use of the funds to pay for private and religious schools. That would allow families to continue using the funds for common purposes — including to pay for dance and music lessons and purchase curriculum, among other uses.

But Dunleavy and attorneys at the state Department of Law have interpreted Zeman’s decision much more broadly: They say that not only does the decision mean that correspondence allotments cannot be used to pay for any private service, but the ruling may also mean that brick-and-mortar schools are also barred from using private vendors, including for providing student transportation and other services.

“It’s difficult not to read the decision to say that any private organization is impacted,” Deputy Attorney General Cori Mills said at a Juneau press conference.

Dunleavy on Wednesday met with members of the House and Senate education committees to reiterate this legal interpretation. He did not say he would necessarily veto a bill — if lawmakers could reach agreement before the May 15 end-of-session deadline — but he cast doubt on whether their proposals could address the implications of the court ruling.

“We could be crafting a solution to a problem that we are interpreting that may not exist when the Supreme Court gets their hands on this,” Dunleavy said.

[House and Senate aim to provide certainty for home-school families after judge’s ruling]

The Dunleavy administration has requested that the implementation of the decision be paused until the Alaska Supreme Court hears the case. That could take weeks or months. The plaintiffs in the case — a group of parents and teachers — said they would agree to a pause only until the end of June.

Despite Dunleavy’s expansive interpretation of the court ruling, he criticized a decision by the Anchorage School District to temporarily disallow correspondence students from using their allotments.

The state education department has generally instructed districts to consult with their attorneys on whether to allow correspondence programs to continue operating given the court ruling.

”Anchorage is going to do what Anchorage does. I don’t agree with it. I don’t know why they’re doing it,” said Dunleavy. “What happens if clarification comes out here in a couple of days that changes things?”

Scott Kendall, the attorney representing the plaintiffs, on social media called Dunleavy’s interpretation of the decision “bizarre” and “intentionally misleading.”

Sen. Loki Tobin, an Anchorage Democrat who chairs the Senate Education Committee, said Wednesday that lawmakers must “ensure stability and predictability” for correspondence programs. But she acknowledged the end of the session is fast approaching.

“I think the governor and his deputy attorney general believe that we should take a pause and allow the legal process to continue to progress forward,” said Tobin. “We understood that he has deep reservations about us making any sort of statutory change at this point in time that might affect the case. I recognize and empathize with that interpretation and with that consideration, however, I am in a different branch of government and my responsibility is to communicate to the public that we’re working to solve the issue.”

Tobin said that despite Dunleavy’s interpretation of the decision, she would continue following the advice of the legislative legal division, which has said that lawmakers can allow correspondence programs to continue with simple legislation or by allowing the state education department to enact new regulations.

But lawmakers remain divided on the path forward. In the House, members of the education committee on Wednesday morning were split along party lines in adopting a new version of a bill that would empower the state board of education — whose members are appointed by Dunleavy — to adopt new regulations governing correspondence programs. All committee Republicans supported the new version of the bill, while its Democrats and independent member were opposed.

The measure, called House Bill 400, received early support from superintendent Jason Johnson of the Galena City School District, home to Alaska’s largest correspondence program, where a third of the state’s correspondence students are enrolled.

Johnson called it “a reasonable bill” that “provides a prudent path forward” in a letter sent to families of nearly 7,500 students enrolled at the Galena program, called Interior Distance Education of Alaska, or IDEA.

In the Senate Education Committee, lawmakers have introduced legislation that would — if enacted — set in law strict limitations on how allotments can be used, including a requirement that all money not used in a single year be returned to the state. Families have said that they save the money from year to year to pay for more expensive purchases, and some have already said they oppose the measure and say it will prevent them from spending their allotments as they had planned.

The bill mirrors regulations that were in place before 2014, when the now-invalidated statutes were enacted.

Dunleavy said that while he did not support immediate legislative action, he would consider calling a special legislative session over the summer or fall to address a possible decision from the state Supreme Court.

“Let’s say the Supreme Court comes up with a decision in July, we’re going to want to deal with this as quickly as possible. Something of this magnitude warrants a special session,” he said.

Such a session could allow lawmakers to address other topics related to education, including long-term funding increases long sought by education advocates.

Dunleavy said he would support the one-time school funding included in the current version of the operating budget. That amount — $175 million on top of the usual $1.2 billion education budget — is equivalent to what was approved by lawmakers last year, before Dunleavy vetoed half of it.

Dunleavy vetoed a bipartisan bill earlier this session that would have cemented that funding increase in the permanent formula that determines how much school districts receive, but he indicated on Wednesday that he would support a similar amount in the form of one-time spending.