House Education Committee opens hearing on bill to increase funding for English learners; members seek amendments

Representative Jim Jonas opened the hearing on House Bill 1494, telling the committee the bill addresses funding for English learners (also referred to in testimony as multilingual learners). Jonas said he introduced the bill after requests from Dakota TESOL and educators across the state and described growing multilingual student populations in districts such as West Fargo, Bismarck and Dickinson.

Nut Graf: Teachers, district coordinators and advocacy groups testified in support of HB1494, urging increased and updated funding to reflect current English‑learner needs. They recommended amendments to expand funding to higher proficiency levels and to revisit a three‑year cap on funding at a proficiency level that can leave long‑term learners unfunded. DPI staff provided current counts and explained how annual assessments determine funding eligibility.

What testimony and data the committee heard

- Sponsor and context: Representative Jim Jonas (sponsor) described student populations and asked the committee to consider increased weighting to support EL services across K–12.

- Educators' recommendations: Marie Rasmussen (past president, Dakota TESOL) and Lisa Simmons (English Learner Department Coordinator, Bismarck Public Schools) urged that funding cover all proficiency levels used by the state assessment (WIDA) and recommended removing or revising a three‑year cap that prevents continued funding for some students. Simmons proposed either including level 4 in funding or removing the cap; she said some EL specialists carry caseloads exceeding 50 students.

- DPI data and mechanics: Adam Tesher, school finance officer at DPI, explained funding is calculated from prior‑year counts drawn from STARS, which depend on annual assessment dates and required documentation. Tesher reported funded counts drawn from the previous year: approximately 571 students at proficiency level 1, about 750 at level 2, and roughly 1,500 at level 3. He said about 135 students were excluded from funding because of the three‑year cap at level 3. For reference, he reported roughly 1,021 students in level 4 and about 186 in level 5; levels 4 and 5 currently do not generate additional weighting in the funding formula.

- Implementation and testing schedule: Tesher noted the annual assessment window (typically February–April) is used to set funding for the following year; a student’s assessment result during that window determines the funding level used that cycle.

Committee action and next steps

Representative Hager moved a do‑pass recommendation on HB1494 with a second from Representative Conmee. Members then discussed proposed amendments — including expanding funding to level 4 (and possibly level 5) and addressing the three‑year cap — and both the motion maker and committee agreed further work was needed. Representative Hager withdrew the motion to allow time for amendment drafting; the chair instructed that, because the bill has a fiscal note, the committee will need to resolve changes by the legislative fiscal deadline to avoid missing deadlines.

Ending: The committee closed the hearing on HB1494 with no committee recommendation recorded; members asked DPI for additional counts and indicated they will consider amendments to funding levels and the three‑year cap.