Committee members spent extensive time on the finance and data recommendations in the PEA memo, focusing on whether to include USDB‑designated students in the regular K–12 WPU and special education add‑on and how to avoid unintended funding shortfalls.

Leanne Wood summarized the PEA proposal: amending statute to treat USDB designated students like other LEA enrollments for WPU generation and the special‑ed add‑on, which could provide inflation adjustments and growth‑based funding. Staff noted PEA’s estimate that adding roughly 325 full‑time equivalent students to the WPU could increase WPU costs by about $4 million. But several members warned that WPU receipts would not be sufficient to cover USDB’s unique operational costs, outreach programs and services such as USIMAC.

Board member Cindy Davis and others urged the committee to ask staff for concrete cost estimates comparing current campus operating costs with projected revenues under a WPU model plus special‑ed add‑on. “We need to know the numbers,” Davis said, requesting models on what a weighted WPU specifically for USDB would look like and how much additional appropriation would still be required. Member Booth recommended including language in the committee’s response that calls for a study of a USDB‑specific weighted WPU.

USBE staff and USDB leaders cautioned about timing: changes to data systems and vendor SIS integrations make adding USDB students to the October 2026 census unlikely without IT work; staff recommended moving the timeline to fiscal year 2028 to allow system changes and stakeholder consultation. Assistant Superintendent Darren Nielsen said vendor or SIS updates “sometimes can be more than a year out.”

The committee added recommendations to (a) study a USDB‑specific weighted WPU informed by the total cost to operate campus schools and current enrollment, (b) identify ongoing operational funding sources for programs that fall outside traditional WPU funding (USIMAC, deafblind services, audiology, parent‑infant programming), and (c) move census inclusion work to FY2028 to allow IT and vendor adjustments. Members asked staff to return cost modeling to the full board so lawmakers can see concrete fiscal implications before any statutory changes are adopted.

Next steps: staff will compile cost analyses and produce accessible, parallel format documents for the committee’s response; the committee’s request and studies will go with the drafted response to the full board for review.