Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Education Textbooks topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Educators urge $12 million one‑time appropriation and stronger ongoing funding for textbooks; lawmakers probe supplies vs. textbooks

Utah House of Representatives · January 18, 1990
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

District superintendents, principals and teachers told a committee‑of‑the‑whole the state needs a $12 million one‑time appropriation and additional ongoing funds to restore textbook currency; legislators asked about supply funding, textbook rental fees, central purchasing and the long‑term shift to educational technology.

During a committee‑of‑the‑whole session on Jan. 16, educators from school districts across Utah told the House that textbook currency and consumable supplies remain underfunded and asked the Legislature to act.

State Office and district presenters summarized a multi‑district survey and recommended a $12 million one‑time appropriation to bring most districts to a five‑year textbook replacement cycle. Bruce Griffin (State Office) and other presenters said an additional ongoing appropriation on the order of $4 million would be ideal; analysts and the governor’s budget staff had proposed an initial $2 million ongoing amount in current deliberations.

District leaders gave concrete examples: Weber School District reported average textbook spending of about $18–$19 per pupil historically and noted a recent bump because of one‑time money; some elementary consumables (workbooks) and reading materials create recurring costs. Tooele School District listed per‑pupil costs by grade and described a textbook rental program for grades 7–12 that covers only part of replacement needs. Classroom teachers described buying materials out of pocket to deliver hands‑on instruction, citing instances of $600 a year in personal expenditures by some teachers for science supplies.

Legislators pressed practical questions: whether supplies can be addressed by a supplemental one‑time appropriation (presenters said supplies are recurring and need ongoing funding), the mix of state versus local responsibility for funding, whether local 10% levy authority is being used by districts, and the viability of central purchasing and electronic/textbook‑replacement technology.

Wayne Wells, the legislative auditor, reported on an audit of prior textbook appropriations and found that the districts reviewed used funds primarily for textbooks and supplies as intended; he cautioned that local needs and priorities vary and that educators’ survey estimates were the basis for the $12 million figure.

On technology, presenters said districts are experimenting with software and computers but that a full shift to electronic textbooks likely requires substantial long‑term investment and is not an immediate substitute. The committee agreed to ask appropriations and interim‑study staff to examine supplies and a sustainable funding approach for the next interim period.

Closing: Committee chairs said they would follow up with the Appropriations Committee and study staff to pursue an ongoing solution for textbooks and supplies, and the committee of the whole adjourned.