Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Online topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves first substitute S.B. 178 to preserve statewide online education with market-based reimbursement
Summary
Senators approved a first-substitute version of S.B. 178 that replaces a fixed reimbursement schedule with a market-negotiated fee approach, retains tier caps, preserves the Electronic High School and extends LEA control over contracting; the substitute passed on roll call, 29–0.
The Utah Senate approved a first-substitute revision to S.B. 178, the statewide online education program bill, replacing the original bill with language that moves reimbursement toward a market-negotiated model while preserving statutory fee caps for four tiers of online courses.
Sponsor Senator Stevenson said the substitute lets local education agencies negotiate market-based fees up to the statutory caps and ensures that districts and charter schools remain the gatekeepers when contracting with outside providers. "Utah's online education law is considered the premier number 1 law in the nation," Stevenson said while describing national interest in Utah's approach and confirming the substitute keeps the Electronic High School operating.
Floor questions clarified several points: the substitute ensures students who take an online course while enrolled in release-time seminary are not forced to withdraw, a concern addressed by explicit membership-counting language; alignment to a student’s SEOP or IEP is required so courses are consistent with academic plans; and the open-enrollment decision window was extended from 10 to 20 days after sponsor negotiation with Representative Last.
Senators who had negotiated with the House reported agreement on the substitute language. After summation, the Senate conducted a roll-call vote: first-substitute S.B. 178 received 29 yea votes, 0 nay votes and will be placed on the third-reading calendar for final action.
The substitute focuses on reimbursement mechanics and LEA authority rather than changing core eligibility. Supporters argued the new fee language empowers local authorities to contract for quality and price; senators raising quality concerns were directed to the statutory protections that permit LEAs to limit providers to approved districts and charter arrangements.
