Committee clears bill letting private postsecondary schools keep up to 10% deposit

Representative White presented House Bill 97 to the House Education Committee on a technical fix to postsecondary registration rules passed in 2023. The bill would permit private postsecondary institutions to retain a deposit not to exceed 10% of the tuition for the first term, in addition to reasonable application fees, if a student rescinds enrollment during the statutory cooling‑off period.

Why it matters: The change aims to preserve consumer protections that let students rescind contracts while also allowing schools — especially small or specialized programs — to recoup modest costs for holding a seat and preparing for an incoming student.

The presenter said HB 97 corrects an unintended interpretation of the 2023 overhaul of private postsecondary regulation (SB 180). "The statute restricts the amount of money an institution may retain" after a rescission to only application fees, Representative White said; the bill would allow a deposit up to 10% of first‑term tuition so institutions can rely on a student’s commitment. Katie Haas, director of the Division of Consumer Protection at the Utah Department of Commerce, told the committee the revision is intended to balance student consumer protections and schools’ operational needs: "We're trying to strike that balance here," she said.

Chancellor Jeremy Wells of Roseman University of Health Sciences described the practical effect for competitive professional programs. "One of our programs is dental; we receive 3,000 applicants for a class of 140 students every year," Wells said. He explained Roseman uses a standard $1,000 seat deposit and that, for professional programs, total program costs can be very high: "Tuition for dental school ... total program costs are around $300,000," he said, noting the deposit is intended to secure a seat rather than replace tuition refunds based on attendance rules.

Committee members asked clarifying questions about the cooling‑off window, whether deposits are already in use, and how the deposit is defined. Representative Peck asked whether the three‑day window was enough for students weighing multiple offers; Haas explained that the statute uses the latest triggering event (date of signing, date of payment, or first day of access/attendance) so students have the opportunity to rescind if they discover a program is fraudulent or not as advertised. Representative DeFe asked whether schools currently require deposits; presenters confirmed many do and treat the deposit as distinct from application fees but limited to no greater than 10% of that term’s cost under the bill’s language.

Representative Val Peterson moved the committee to favorably recommend HB 97. The committee approved the bill by voice vote; the transcript reports the bill passed unanimously.

Votes at a glance: The committee passed HB 97 with a favorable recommendation; transcript reports the measure passed unanimously (exact roll‑call not specified).