Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House approves $5.2 million package to aid 'highly impacted' schools
Summary
The Utah House passed HB 172 to direct about $5.2 million to roughly 50–60 "highly impacted" schools, using a weighted formula to target extra staff and services; supporters said it is a proactive investment, while critics warned about local control and formula fairness.
Get email alerts on the Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Utah House of Representatives voted to approve House Bill 172 on Feb. 14, 1995, a $5.2 million initiative intended to provide additional resources to schools the bill’s sponsor described as "highly impacted." The measure passed 60–13 and will direct funding to roughly 50–60 schools identified by a five-factor formula that includes mobility, poverty, limited English proficiency and related criteria.
Sponsor Representative Shirley B. Jensen said the program is designed to give educators in the hardest-hit schools the capacity to provide targeted assistance. "The purpose of House Bill 172 ... is to have appropriation for additional resources at highly impacted schools to provide individual assistance for students," Jensen said, framing the measure as a way to help teachers, paraprofessionals and mentors support struggling students.
Supporters described the bill as a focused, front‑end investment intended to reduce classroom size and provide direct services such as certified teachers, paraprofessionals and targeted grants for local ownership. "We're gonna go into these highly impacted areas and reach down and pull these kids up and give them a helping hand," Jensen said in floor remarks.
Floor debate focused on how schools will be identified and how the funds interact with existing state and district programs. Representative concerns included whether the measure improperly diverts uniform school fund dollars and whether local school boards should be addressing the problems. One member argued that funding decisions are ultimately a district management responsibility and cautioned against reallocating universal funding to targeted schools without careful oversight.
Representatives who supported the bill said it complements other state allocations such as class‑size reduction funds and gang‑intervention grants and that the HB 172 formula is intended to identify only the most severely affected schools. The sponsor said the program targets K–8 schools (and is inclusive of secondary schools that meet the criteria) and estimated base allocations of about $30,000 per school plus impact allocations depending on severity.
Opponents urged caution about the formula's indicators — for example, high mobility can reflect military transfers rather than persistent poverty — and asked for assurances the money would get to the schools most in need. The sponsor and other backers said the formula is rigorous and that eligibility will be determined through the weighted criteria.
The House adopted the bill and forwarded it to the Senate; next steps include Senate consideration and subsequent administrative steps to identify qualifying schools and disburse funds.
