On Saturday afternoon, after Alaska lawmakers voted to override Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s veto of $50.6 million in public school funding, the leaders of the House and Senate’s majority caucuses gathered in the Senate President’s office and cheered.
For the 10 members of the House and Senate minority caucuses who were crucial to that override, there was no cheering and no post-vote news conference.
They quietly packed up and left the Capitol later that weekend without fanfare.
But without them, there would have been no override.
In Alaska, it takes votes from at least 45 of 60 state lawmakers to override a governor’s veto of an appropriations issue, the highest threshold in the country. That means almost any veto override — even in years when one party dominates the House, Senate or both — requires the approval of at least some lawmakers in a minority caucus.
This year, that approval wasn’t easy to get. Both the House minority and Senate minority caucuses are made up of Republicans who are conservative enough to be unwilling to join Democrats, independents and more moderate Republicans in the House and Senate majority caucuses.
Public polling ahead of the vote showed only 35% of registered Republicans supported an override, compared to 65% of independents and 91% of Democrats. On social media, Republican campaign groups vowed to challenge any Republican who voted in favor of the override.
But for 10 minority lawmakers, the views of their individual districts, stretching from the Kenai Peninsula to Fairbanks, mattered more than aligning with Gov. Dunleavy.
In the Senate, Mike Cronk of Tok, James Kaufman of Anchorage and Robert Yundt of Wasilla voted to override alongside members of the Senate’s bipartisan majority.
Among members of the House minority, yes votes came from Jeremy Bynum of Ketchikan, Julie Coulombe of Anchorage, Bill Elam of Nikiski, David Nelson of Anchorage, Justin Ruffridge of Soldotna, Dan Saddler of Eagle River and Will Stapp of Fairbanks.
In post-vote interviews, nine of the 10 minority lawmakers offered varying reasons for their vote. (The 10th, Rep. David Nelson, R-Anchorage, did not return calls and texts seeking comment.)
For many of the minority lawmakers who voted yes on this year’s override, it was the culmination of years of negotiations, they said.
Last year, legislators voted to increase the base student allocation, core of the state’s per-pupil funding formula, but Gov. Mike Dunleavy vetoed that bill and lawmakers sustained that veto when members of the minority flipped their prior support.
Instead of a permanent fix, legislators voted to approve a one-time funding bonus equivalent to a $680 BSA increase.
This year was different. Lawmakers approved a permanent $700 BSA increase, plus some policies preferred by Republicans. Dunleavy partially vetoed funding for that increase, but last week’s override canceled that decision, leaving schools with a small year-over-year funding increase.
That small bump to the budget meant it was palatable to lawmakers who had opposed larger increases. In addition, this year’s bill increasing the BSA included policy changes, including an adjustable cap on class sizes and an optional ban on students’ cellphones. That offered additional enticements for reluctant Republicans.
Several of the members of the minority who voted to override on Saturday said that while they didn’t support a funding increase, it was worth it in order to unlock policy changes that they support, particularly because there didn’t appear to be enough votes to take up changes that Dunleavy had proposed.
Rep. Jeremy Bynum, R-Ketchikan, House District 1
Ahead of Saturday’s vote, Bynum said he would vote to override because if lawmakers failed to override the governor, the decision to raise the base student allocation means raising the maximum contribution that local governments can provide to their districts.
If legislators didn’t restore the funding, local governments would simply increase their local contribution, he said, putting more of the cost of public schools on local taxpayers, rather than sharing the cost across the state.
Rep. Julie Colombe, R-Anchorage, House District 11
“I don’t want one-time funding anymore. The problem is, the way it’s been put out is that this was just some random $200 BSA veto. It wasn’t. It was connected to 19 sections of policy in HB 57 that, to me, was significant,” she said, referring to education policy items that were also vetoed by the governor and overridden earlier in the year.
“I didn’t override SB 140 because I wasn’t really a part of putting that together. It was like a half-page bill. It didn’t have much policy at all. So I didn’t go all the way with that one. I sustained two vetoes because it was, to me, just funding. But HB 57 has a lot of policy, and that’s what I want, and that’s what I’ve always told my constituents is what I need — is funding and policy, and I need both, and I need it meaningful.
For me and my district, class sizes are a big problem. And so when I got the class cap in there directing districts to have to have their own class cap policy. They have to tell parents how many kids are in the seats, not a (pupil to teacher ratio) class size. That was really significant for me. And so if I’m pushing for that, that’s going to take some more money. And I just didn’t see why would I cut the funding when I’m trying to get my class sizes down?”
Sen. Mike Cronk, R-Tok, Senate District R
“I represent nine different school districts. Fairbanks is my urban school district, and we were asking for accountability. And you look at what Fairbanks has done — they’ve done the work, hard work. They’ve closed seven schools, outsourced their custodians, cut their admin in half. And, I mean, what more do you ask? We all want better outcomes, and I believe we can get there, but you can’t just starve them to death while they make the right moves to downsize and expect them to be successful,” he said.
The school districts in Cronk’s Senate district include homeschool correspondence programs that cover a majority of the homeschooled students in the state, and he has two boarding schools in his district.
“Costs have gone up. It’s hard to keep those things going. Yes, they’re remote — Nenana’s on a road, but Galena is not — but those schools are invaluable for our kids that decide to go to a boarding school,” he said.
“Was it fun to vote against our governor? No, and it wouldn’t have been fun if he was a Democrat governor or she was a Democrat. It wouldn’t be fun either way. But I have to do it. I feel it is right. I’ve seen the school districts do the work. I’ve seen good things they’re doing. And I want to make sure people know that I am not one of those people that come out there and say, ‘Wow, we rank 51st out of 53 (states, districts and territories), our kids are dumb.’ We produce some really awesome kids in our schools. Our schools are doing good things. We do need to do things better. But, you know, starving them to death doesn’t do that for us.”
Rep. Bill Elam, R-Nikiski, House District 8
Elam declined significant comment but said that he had given his word on voting for House Bill 57, the education funding bill, and wanted to stand by that word. Stability is important to him, he said, including stable funding for schools in his district that will allow districts to budget better in the future.
Sen. James Kaufman, R-Anchorage, Senate District F
“In the end, for me, this was essentially the same money that was in the budget the last time — we had the $680 (BSA) in there. And this was just a little bit more, when you roll it all up. And unlike last year, there was actually some beneficial policy in there. And I just didn’t think we could kick the can down the road, to use that overused phrase. We were at an impasse,” he said.
“I think it’s important for people to remember the much higher dollar figures that were floating around for a time. And what we landed on ended up being much closer to the additional money that was put in last year’s enacted budget. So all those things considered, with the school districts saying that they can’t improve if they don’t have the funding, so let’s stabilize on what we funded them at essentially last year — with these additional tweaks and with the policy that we can get in it — and let’s go for it. Back when I voted for the bill, I said, ‘well, if I vote for the bill, I’ll go all the way with it.’ I have a hard time — if I support something once — with not supporting it, unless there’s new information or new reasons not to do so.”
Rep. Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna, House District 7
“I have historically taken the position of my ‘yeas’ being ‘yeas’ and my ‘nays’ being ‘nays.’ I voted for HB 57 at both opportunities. And I think that it’s the right thing to do from the perspective of the folks on the Kenai,” he said
“I heard from many, many, many (of my constituents) that said, ‘stay on the right track.’ So, you know, I think it’s a difficult thing to do at the end of the day. You don’t ever get into office with the intention of taking those types of votes. But I feel like it was about keeping a commitment, following the budget that we had already passed. And I think we really had to move away from this idea of one-time funding, which I think is really an irresponsible way of funding schools, and get back to stability, I think can help.”
Rep. Dan Saddler, R-Eagle River, District 24
“As I tell my constituents who are happy with me and those who are upset with me, I wanted to get education reform and understood that the price of the compromise to achieve that was some increase in funding. While I did not get anywhere near the reform I wanted, I know the education advocates didn’t get anywhere near the money they wanted,” he said.
“The legislative process is about getting wins where you can and the best deal you can, so I thought that the bill we had was the best we could do given the lineup of the Legislature at this point, and I did not want to flip my position when it became a matter of the degree to which the funding was increased.
“And so it’s my hope that we can continue to get better results through policy reform, but I understand the need for some education funding as well. So in short, this was the best deal we could come up with. So we make the deal, stick with it, and move on and try and do more later.”
Rep. Will Stapp, R-Fairbanks, House District 32
“I think education is important. And I think Alaska’s education system certainly needs reform. But I can speak to my school district in Fairbanks and our school board president and our board in general, they have done the vast majority of things that they have been asked to do.
They’ve been asked to reduce admin. Well, they cut admin by 50%.
They’ve been asked to consolidate schools. They consolidated several schools.
They looked for outsourcing. They let go of the custodians, and now they outsource that to contracting,” he said.
“I fundamentally believe that there’s a balance between funding and reform, and when you ask people to do things, especially when there are hard things — and hard things are often unpopular — you should support people when they do hard things that you ask them to do that were necessary.
I just feel like it would be not supporting my values if I didn’t vote the way I did or articulate the way I did. …”
“Yes, it’s a particularly tough vote, and I’ll explain why. This kind of sounds a little weird, but I’m a lifelong Republican. I’ve been active in Republican politics my entire time in Alaska. I’ve supported campaigns, locally, statewide, legislatively, for the better part of 15 years. And the last thing that I really want to do is contradict my own governor. …
I believe it’s the right thing, and time will tell, but I will say, on a personal level, the last thing I ever thought I would do would be to override a Republican governor. It’s just a weird moment. I mean, you have all these people celebrating. I have not celebrated.”
Sen. Robert Yundt, R-Wasilla, Senate District N
“The point I would like to make is I’ve changed the paradigm. There will be no more one-time money. You will not see Republicans (vote for that). I’ve killed that. I don’t run a business that way. Northrim Bank would put me out of business if I behaved that way one time. Money was different every year, and you didn’t know what you were getting until you got it. That is a failed business model,” he said.
“This is only 0.3% more than there was put into education last year, and we got a ton of great policies for it, and I appreciate everybody working together as a team to get it, to get us there.”