(citation omitted). 13 . Kenai Peninsula Borough held that the state was not liable for a money judgment because the school district was not acting as an agent of the state. 532 P.2d at 1027. This decision was based upon the school furnishing transportation to students — as it was required by, and funded by, the state to do. Id. at 1021. The Alaska Supreme Court noted that "although the borough was required by state law to maintain and operate a system of public schools, the parties did not contend[ ] that the borough [school district] is an agent of the state in exercising the function of public education.” Id. at 1025. The Alaska Supreme Court has yet to address whether a school district is an agent of the state for Eleventh Amendment immunity purposes. See Duke, 127 F.3d at 978(<HOLDING>). 14 . The district court stated that “[i]t is
holding that new mexico did not waive eleventh amendment immunity by engaging in activities and entering contracts subject to federal regulation holding that local school boards were not entitled to eleventh amendment immunity even though entitled to sovereign immunity in the same degree as the state itself from tort suits holding that the new mexico school district and their governing boards are not arms of the state entitled to eleventh amendment immunity holding that school boards in alabama counties were not arms or alter egos of the state for purposes of eleventh amendment immunity holding california school district a state agency for purposes of the eleventh amendment