Conference committee trims school-closure language, narrows tuition rules for approved independent and receiving schools

Conference committee members reviewing H.454 circulated a house counterproposal on June 13 that removes a previously contested school-closure section and narrows the bill’s tuition provisions for approved independent and receiving schools.

The counterproposal would require an approved independent school to have at least 25% of its total student enrollment composed of students attending on a publicly funded tuition basis to be eligible for public tuition. The bill would also let a receiving school charge an additional fee for students in grades 9–12 equal to the base tuition multiplied by up to 0.05 (5%) only if three conditions are met: the receiving school has State Board of Education approval to charge the fee under rules the board adopts; each sending district’s electorate approves supplemental district spending sufficient to cover the fee; and the fee is demonstrably necessary for educating the affected students. The supplemental fee requirement appears in proposed subsection b of amended section 8 23 (tuition calculation).

The counterproposal prohibits a receiving school from charging different supplemental fees to different sending districts under subsection c. It also excludes an approved independent school that is functioning as an approved area career and technical center (CTE) from the supplemental-fee process; districts would pay the full tuition charge for students attending such CTE schools under subsection d. A grandfathering provision would allow students already enrolled or accepted for next year to remain under current tuition eligibility rules until they graduate.

Effective dates in the draft tie the tuition provisions to the broader foundation-formula transition: subsections setting the base and weights and the CTE exception would take effect contingently on July 1, 2028, under the same conditions as the foundation formula. The supplemental high-school fee provisions would also be contingent on July 1, 2028, but only if (1) school districts are operational and (2) the 45a report demonstrates secondary students cost more to educate and the Legislature has failed to enact a secondary student weight.

Committee staff emphasized that the supplemental fee would only be available if future studies and legislative choices make it necessary; the language is written as a conditional authority rather than an immediate change to tuition practices. The draft also tasks the State Board with adopting rules by July 1, 2027, to govern approval for charging the fee and requires the board’s rules to demonstrate the fee will be used solely for educating affected students and not to shift costs within the receiving school’s general budget.

The conference draft contains additional detail on administration and enforcement, including a waiver process for complying with class-size minimums and cross-references to other sections of the bill that change tuition calculations under the foundation formula. No formal vote occurred during the June 13 session; the committee continued working through other sections of the bill.