Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Education topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

House approves new school capital‑outlay formula to equalize funds and let districts keep local levy

Utah House of Representatives · February 26, 1996
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

The House advanced Senate Bill 46 on Feb. 26, 1996, a substitute that rewrites school capital‑outlay funding into a formula based on need, effort and ability, and lets districts retain a previously redistributed 0.0001 levy; sponsors said a fiscal note (~$26.36M) is covered in the Education Sub‑Appropriations budget.

The Utah House passed Senate Bill 46 on Feb. 26, 1996, a package intended to simplify and equalize school capital outlay funding across districts.

Sponsor summary and intent: The bill creates a three‑part formula — need (student counts and growth), effort (local tax levies and debt proportion) and ability (assessed valuation per average daily membership) — to distribute capital‑outlay funds. A prominent change allows school districts to retain revenue from a 0.0001 local levy that had previously been redistributed under older “Robin Hood” arrangements; proponents said this will help fast‑growing districts such as Washington, Iron and Park City better fund capital needs.

Fiscal impact and timing: The sponsor referenced an amended fiscal note showing $26,358,000 in costs; members said that amount is included in the Education Sub‑Appropriations Committee’s budget, reducing the immediate funding obstacle. The bill includes emergency provisions and an effective date that was discussed during floor remarks.

Support and floor debate: Representatives on the Education Standing Committee praised the extensive work and outreach that produced the substitute, calling it a long‑sought equalization effort. Several representatives urged support, stressing fairness for lower‑resourced districts and the bill’s potential to stabilize capital funding.

Outcome and next steps: The bill was read on the floor, debated, and recorded as passed; the House proceeded to finalize its third reading and signatures. Sponsors said implementation details and funding allocations will follow through the usual appropriation and administrative processes.

Quote from the floor: "This bill gives greater equalization… it's much easier to understand than it has been in the past," a sponsor said in floor remarks.

Provenance: Discussion and passage recorded beginning at SEG 354 through SEG 487 on the Feb. 26 floor transcript.