Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Bonding Capacity topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmaker introduces measure to raise school bonding capacity from 5% to 8%
Summary
Representative Ben Furman introduced RS 32,112 to increase school bonding capacity from 5% to 8%; committee moved to introduce the resolu tion and the motion carried on a voice vote. Sponsor said the change does not itself increase property taxes and any district bond would still go to a public vote.
Get email alerts on the School Bonding Capacity topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative Ben Furman, R‑District 30, told the House Education Committee he was introducing RS 32,112 to raise the statutory school bonding capacity from 5% to 8%.
"This is on the surface very simple. We are simply changing 1 thing on line 32 on the first page, and that is the school bonding capacity. And we're increasing that from 5% to 8%. And that's it," Representative Furman said when he presented the draft RS.
The bill sponsor told the committee the proposal would change only the stated capacity and would not alter bonding procedures or interest rates. "This will not increase property taxes. It won't increase financing rates, rates on bonds. It won't mess with any of that," Furman said.
Committee members asked follow-up questions about local control. Representative Sauter asked whether a district bond would still go before voters; Furman replied yes. Representative Harris asked whether the change could lead to higher financing rates or higher property taxes; Furman repeated that the bill "in itself won't raise property taxes."
Representative Sauter moved to introduce RS 32,112; the motion was put to a voice vote. The chair called for aye votes and the motion was approved on that voice vote. The committee recorded the motion as carried and moved on with the agenda.
Why it matters: The change would increase the statutory bonding capacity available to school districts if and when they choose to issue bonds. Furman emphasized the RS only adjusts the capacity number and does not change the voting process or bond financing terms; any district that pursues a bond would still do so under existing election procedures.
No formal fiscal analysis or specific district requests were presented during the introduction, and committee members did not take additional action beyond introducing the RS. The sponsor stood for questions and indicated he would answer committee inquiries as needed.
