House Education Committee Advances Bill to Boost Residential School Funding

The House Education Committee heard initial testimony Thursday on House Bill 380, which would provide the first funding increase for Alaska's residential school programs since 2015. The legislation would increase monthly stipends paid to the state's nine residential schools by applying inflation adjustments calculated from 2015 to present using the Consumer Price Index for Anchorage. The increases would range from $319 per student in Region 1 to $461 per student in Region 5, bringing total monthly amounts to between $1,549 and $2,237 depending on location, according to committee materials. Public Testifier Conrad Woodhead told lawmakers that current state funding covers only about half of actual costs. 'The average cost to house and feed a student is $25,700, while the state stipend is $12,900,' Woodhead testified on behalf of the Alaska Residential Schools Coalition. Public Testifier Patrick Manning said residential schools provide workforce development through career and technical education programs often unavailable in remote communities. 'The goal is to maintain existing programs so they can continue to serve students effectively,' Manning said. The programs serve approximately 545 students across five regions, with facilities like the Kusilkvak Career Academy and Northwestern Alaska Career and Technical Center providing specialized training in welding, construction, and health fields. Some committee members raised questions about the state's ability to fund the additional $2.286 million annual cost amid competing budget priorities. Others expressed concerns about ensuring proper oversight of the increased funding to guarantee it reaches students directly rather than administrative costs. The bill addresses findings from the Education Funding Task Force that identified the funding gap in residential school operations. The task force documented how inflation has eroded the purchasing power of stipends that have remained unchanged for nearly a decade. Supporters argue the increase is necessary to maintain current service levels, while the additional cost will require legislative approval during budget deliberations. Representative Jamie Allard noted the committee will take up the bill again at a future hearing for further consideration and potential advancement.