The Ways & Means Committee voted to approve draft 3.1 of the yield bill, moving the measure out of committee on a 9-2 vote.

The motion — described during the meeting as reflecting “column E” of the education fund outlook — would use a one-time general fund transfer of $77,200,000 and the full FY2026 education fund surplus of $41,000,000 to uniformly buy down the average statewide education property tax bill. Committee staff said the modeling in column E produces an estimated 1.1% average change in the statewide education property tax bill.

Julia(Juliet) Richter, who presented the education fund outlook materials to the committee, summarized the column E model: “What we see here in column E is that 1 time general fund transfer of 77,200,000.0 that's being used to uniformly buy down the average property tax bill.” She also noted the FY2026 modeling uses an assumed statewide grand-list growth of about 14% and that the yield model is a snapshot as of March 10–11 and may be updated as budgets and grants are finalized.

Members discussed the limits of the modeling and how local factors affect individual taxpayers. Committee staff explained that the 1.1% figure is an average statewide change in the tax bill and that local reappraisals, variations in common level of appraisal (CLA) and districts’ local per-pupil spending mean some communities or households could see larger increases or decreases than the statewide average.

Several members voiced reservations about using the full $77.2 million transfer, saying spending reserves now could reduce the state’s capacity to respond to potential federal funding cuts or other budget shocks. One member described preferring to use surpluses for permanent reductions in costs rather than one-time buy-downs; other members said they supported the transfer now but expressed hope it would spur broader education funding reforms later in the session.

Representative Kimball moved the motion to approve drafting clause 25-0974, draft 3.1 of the yield bill, reflecting column E of the education fund outlook. No official second was recorded in the transcript. The committee clerk called the roll; the motion passed with nine yes votes and two no votes. The committee chair said the bill will be reexamined as it moves to Senate Finance, where staff expect to provide updated modeling and budget information.

Votes at a glance: draft 3.1 (drafting clause 25-0974) — approved by committee; tally: 9 yes, 2 no.

The committee concluded the meeting by outlining work to continue next week on four sections of education funding policy — foundation formula work, tax-credit system changes, property appraisal consistency, and property classification changes — and asked members to review materials and testimony before reconvening.