Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Career Technical Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would let career‑tech centers tailor fees to usage; sponsors say it will widen access
Summary
House Bill 1188 would allow area Career and Technical Education (CTE) centers to base member fees partly on utilization or geography instead of only on total high‑school enrollment; backers said the change will help small, distant districts afford participation.
Representative Mike LaFore told the House Education Committee he introduced House Bill 1188 after area CTE centers and the Department of Career and Technical Education unanimously sought more fee flexibility. "This bill will allow the centers to still assess fees based on student population, but gives the center board the ability to assess the remaining fees based on utilization, geography or whatever the local board determines best works for them," LaFore said.
Wade Sick, state director for the Department of Career and Technical Education, testified in support and said the bill maintains a membership fee tied to high‑school enrollment while permitting centers to assess additional fees based on usage. "If a center board prefers to maintain the current funding policy, it can do so," Sick said, describing the measure as optional local flexibility.
Directors of newly opened centers told the committee the change is needed because travel distances and participation rates vary widely. Aaron Anderson, director of the Southwest Area Career and Technical Education Academy in Dickinson, said small rural districts can be priced out under current statute. He gave a concrete example: under present code, the distant Beach High School would face a membership bill of about $82,157 for center participation despite sending only two students daily; Anderson said that fee would make participation prohibitive.
Supporters characterized the bill as a local control tool that preserves a base membership contribution while allowing an "on‑ramp" for partner districts to ramp up costs as utilization increases. The Department and several CTE directors described the language as the product of multiple meetings and consensus among center directors.
No formal opposition testimony was presented in the hearing room. Committee members asked clarifying questions about how local boards would exercise discretion and whether the proposal would alter who ultimately pays (centers receive approximately 40 percent state funds and 60 percent from member schools under current financing). Committee witnesses said any specific fee schedule would be set locally by the center board, which is typically composed of member school board representatives.
The committee took public testimony and did not immediately take a vote.
