Utah education officials outline midyear school funding updates, project MSP shortfall offset by $45 million appropriation

State education officials told the Utah Legislature’s education subcommittee on an interim briefing that midyear adjustments to enrollment and property-tax data have produced a projected shortfall in the Minimum School Program (MSP) that ranges from roughly $6 million to $39.6 million before a December appropriation of $45 million.

The presentation laid out how the weighted pupil unit (WPU) history, student headcounts and final property-tax collections feed the MSP calculations and why the subcommittee asked the State Board of Education to present additional midyear-cost detail during the 2025 session. Sam Urie, school finance director at the Utah State Board of Education, said the board expects final tax-year collections in April and that, with the $45 million already appropriated by the executive appropriations process, USB believes any negative MSP balances will be covered when final numbers are posted.

Urging caution about headline percentages, Ben Lishman, a staff member referenced repeatedly in the briefing, noted historical context for WPU changes: “There’s that 9.3% in 2012, but that was due to program realignment. Some programs were discontinued and the legislature increased the WPU value with the funds that were previously used for those programs. So it wasn't … a realignment of purpose of funds,” Lishman said, explaining that year’s increase reflected a shift in how funds were used rather than an across‑the‑board inflationary increase in WPU rates.

Officials described the mechanics lawmakers should expect as the session proceeds. Urie said the schedule begins with October legislative estimates that combine projected enrollments and preliminary property-tax projections, followed by a midyear update (the subcommittee’s recent November update), and a final update after tax collections are finalized in April. “In October we do those enrollment projections and we also project the tax year for the following year property tax collection estimates,” Urie said. He added that LEAs are paid on a 1/12th basis during the year and then adjusted when actuals arrive.

Key figures and drivers highlighted during the briefing include: - The state’s base WPU was shown in the presentation as 4,674 (presentation text as delivered). Officials noted each 1% WPU increase equates to about $43,600,000. - The MSP projection before the December appropriation ranged between about negative $6,000,000 and negative $39,600,000, with the range driven largely by incomplete property-tax collection data. Officials said the Tax Commission’s updated taxable-value estimate rose from about $490,000,000,000 to about $515,000,000,000, reducing the projected shortfall range. - District hold‑harmless costs were estimated at roughly $35,000,000 for the year because some districts are held to prior‑year counts plus growth despite enrollment changes. - Charter school local replacement was higher than projected because charter October 1 headcount was about 2,000 students above projections.

The presenters also discussed staffing and class-size questions raised by members. Urie said educator FTE counts increased in some areas — notably where full‑day kindergarten expanded — and that professional‑staff and educator salary adjustments are calculated using educator assignment data and a statutory schedule for the professional staff cost formula. “To be within $11,000,000 on a $2,700,000,000 line item is really pretty close,” Urie said, referring to the statewide grades 1–12 funding total including local revenue.

Representative Jason E. Thompson (R) pressed the panel on the policy tension he hears from schools: overcrowding and budget constraints paired with rising FTE counts. “Are we better off to go look at that formula and say, hey, let’s create a formula that doesn't cause a conflict for policymakers?” Thompson asked, urging additional policy review. Committee leaders echoed that sentiment and agreed to spend more time on the topic at a future meeting and on the upcoming Friday agenda.

Committee direction and next steps recorded in the meeting included a request that the State Board of Education present more detailed midyear‑cost data during the session and a plan to follow up on property‑tax interactions at the next subcommittee meeting. Staff said they will bring more granular data correlating FTE changes and class‑size impacts.

No formal bill votes or ordinance actions were taken during this briefing; the subcommittee concluded with a non‑debatable motion to adjourn.

The discussion highlighted tensions between enrollment declines, local staffing decisions, statutory formulas that adjust funding by educator credentials and experience, and the timing of property‑tax data. Members requested additional staff work and presentations to help reconcile those tensions before policy decisions later in the session.