JUNEAU -- School buildings may join school programs in facing budget cuts under legislation being considered in Juneau this week.
But some school advocates are joining budget cutters in saying that current budget deficits mean cuts make sense.
Sen. Anna MacKinnon, R-Anchorage, co-chair of the powerful Senate Finance Committee, says the state needs to hold off on paying for new school construction, at least for the next several years.
Senate Bill 64, introduced by her committee, would halt new entries in a state program that reimburses local governments for up to 70 percent of the cost when they issue bonds to build or renovate schools.
MacKinnon said that will help preserve Alaska's dwindling savings, into which the state will have to dip to cover an expected deficit of $3.5 billion this year.
"It's a small thing, but it's a step to try to protect and reduce and control the government dollars that we have," she said.
The idea, she said, is "to make sure those reserves last as long as possible."
The school debt reimbursement program is the state's major school construction program, paying 60 percent of some bond debt and 70 percent for others, used in communities that have tax bases that give them the ability to issue and repay bonds.
In rural districts without tax bases, the state funds the full cost of school construction but has faced complaints and lawsuits saying it isn't adequately funding construction there.
In the House of Representatives, Rep. Mark Neuman, R-Big Lake, has introduced a companion measure through the Finance Committee. He said the state spends $220 million a year on debt reimbursement.
Lawmakers want to "get that debt service down," he said.
Under the bills, already incurred debt would continue to be reimbursed at existing rates.
It would take effect May 1, meaning that the projects in an upcoming Anchorage School District bond election, if passed, would continue to be reimbursed at the current rate.
Anchorage School District Assistant Superintendent Mike Abbott said the district is not currently supporting or opposing the bill, but said that its passage could have significant effects.
"One of the most important school construction programs in the state would go away for a period of many years, during which it might be difficult to make the necessary investments in Anchorage schools," he said.
Whether or not the Anchorage School Board and the Assembly would continue to send bond measures to voters would have to be decided later. And voters might not approve them if the state isn't picking up a major share of the cost, he acknowledged.
For the last four years, Anchorage voters have approved school bond issues but in 2009 rejected one as the nation was facing a recession. "There was a lot of gloomy economic news out there," he said.
The next year, the voters weren't asked to approve bonds.
"The economy was in kind of a bad place, and the superintendent and the school board decided they wanted to take a break for a year," Abbott said.
It is hard to say which schools across the state might be affected by the moratorium, but Abbott said Anchorage School District plans call for a major renewal of Central Middle School for 2016, and there might be other projects as well.
Abbott said he can only speculate what role the state reimbursement plays in voter decisions on bond measures, but it is likely important to their decisions.
"We talk a lot about debt reimbursement on the assumption that people care about it," he said.
Anchorage Sen. Bill Wielechowski, a Democrat, said both property tax bills and quality schools are important to his constituents, but that he may well support MacKinnon's bill.
"It's tough financial times," he said. "If we've got to go for a couple of years without new construction or major renovations and we can push things off, I'm OK with that," he said.
After Senate Bill 64's five-year moratorium, the reimbursement program would resume but at slightly lower rates, ranging from 40 to 60 percent depending on the type of construction.
Wielechowski said he wasn't sure how long schools could go without major renovations before the impact is felt.
"There's only so long you can delay major maintenance before things get really expensive," he said.
"You can delay fixing your roof for some period of time, but at some point it's going to crash in and it's going to cause a heck of a lot more damage than if you'd maintained it," Wielechowski said.
Senate Bill 64 is scheduled to be heard by the Senate Education Committee on Thursday.