Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Special Education Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee orders study of special education funding; membership amended to balance legislators and school community
Summary
The House Education Committee approved an interim study to review how North Dakota funds special education, and amended membership to provide an even balance between legislators and school‑community representatives.
Representative Richter presented House Bill 15‑47, a proposal directing Legislative Management to establish a committee during the 2025‑26 interim to study how special education is funded in North Dakota and whether alternative funding models would better serve districts and students.
Richter outlined the current approach (a weighting factor applied within the general funding formula) and contrasted it with other methods, including per‑special‑education‑student funding or service‑based funding that pays for specific services (for example, funding positions such as speech pathologists directly). He noted the state’s special‑education weighting factor has increased over time (the transcript cites prior weighting numbers such as 0.088 and 0.095 in enacted formula language) and that special‑education enrollment percentages rose from pre‑COVID levels of about 11–12% to roughly 19% in some districts. He also described the state’s high‑cost reimbursement program for individual students whose cost exceeds four times the state average; the committee record cites a budget line of approximately $24,000,000 to reimburse districts for those high‑cost cases.
Representative Richter and other members discussed options including shared special‑education units, regional cooperatives, and using REAs or multi‑district special‑education consortia. Members raised the committee composition; a member suggested an even split between legislators and school‑community representatives. The committee adopted an amendment changing the committee makeup to include eight community school representatives (four from the House and four from the Senate appointment language was clarified) to achieve balance. Following discussion the committee voted to give the amended bill a due pass and advance it out of committee.
Notes: Witnesses and members emphasized uneven funding across districts, staffing shortages in rural districts, the existence of 32 special‑education units in the state (some single‑district, others multi‑district), and the need for a data‑driven review to determine whether the current funding model or an alternative should be recommended.
