House panel votes 10-7 to move school board elections to legislative primary

Representative Banning presented House Bill 1151 to the committee, saying the measure would move school board elections to the legislative primary, shift all school board members to four-year terms and place the contests on a separate colored ballot.

"This election will be on a separate ballot. Not only will it be on a separate ballot, it will be on a separate colored ballot," Representative Banning said, adding that a voter would be asked whether they intended to vote in the school board election and then handed that ballot.

Supporters said the change would increase turnout and reduce the number of separate trips voters make to the polls. "I have faith in our voters," Banning said multiple times, arguing that consolidating ballots would raise participation and that school board voters are taxpayers with a stake in local education decisions.

Opponents raised questions about whether moving nonpartisan school races into high-turnout elections would dilute local focus, raise campaign costs, and invite broader partisan influence. Representative Bennett pressed whether the change would increase candidates' reliance on outside money; Representative Strom and others said voters who turn out for bigger elections may know less about local school issues.

Committee members also questioned operational and timing issues. Representative Munson asked how November swearing-in would align with district staffing and superintendent evaluations; Banning said boards receive regular training and that some entities would flex dates to accommodate the cycle. Questions about poll logistics surfaced: Banning said the plan includes $265,000 for training and $230,000 for additional poll workers and told members there would be 1,152 split precincts that would require extra ballot handling.

Lawmakers pressed cost and accounting details. Vice Chair Hayes and others asked about savings to districts; Banning said election boards report a cost of about $1,100,000 for school elections but that schools themselves reported $16,889,000 and that the discrepancy was under review, and that the committee did not yet know why the figures diverged.

Representative Fugate questioned the sponsor's comment that "knocking doors" is the cheapest route to victory, quoting campaign finance entries and loans to the sponsor's committee across multiple dates and raising the role of money in higher-profile elections. Fugate noted loans and spending numbers and asked how that square with the sponsor's campaigning assertions.

Representative Wooley and others sought clarity on whether partisan labels would appear on ballots; Banning said party affiliation would not be shown. Members also discussed whether mail ballots or weekend voting would better address turnout than moving elections to the general cycle; Banning said Saturday voting had not been pursued and reiterated the bill's intent to increase turnout via consolidation.

After debate, the committee opened the vote. The clerk announced a 10-7 tally and the committee "reported the bill out due pass." The record shows a committee vote of 10 yes, 7 no.

The committee record contains extensive questioning on implementation details that remain unresolved in committee, including split-precinct logistics, the discrepancy between district-reported election costs and the election board's figures, and potential effects on candidate costs and voter information.

The committee reported House Bill 1151 out as due pass by voice/recorded tally 10-7.